Next Wallabies Coach.

[Braveheart81]

I never said anything of the sort.

I said you seem happy with mediocrity because you're frightened that the alternative won't be "entertaining".

You're part of the problem.

I didn't say anything of the sought. I just said that I didn't think Jake White and his style of coaching would suit the players we have.

Let's move on.

 

[Train Without a Station]

i am guessing that the three teams that The Coach "left" (Tahs, Stade Francaise, Reds) all burned after he had gone.
i am not suggesting that The Coach crashed those teams, just that they burned.
let's hope the same fate doesn't await the Wallabies.

Not in relation to how they went without Link. Just the era of Hickey and Foley saying entertaining rugby wasn't winning, rugby and how that all worked out for them. The only thing they lost more of than games was fans.

 

[Braveheart81]

Ball is an excellent lineout forward.
Douglas is more than passable - including calling for the Tahs.

When? It was either Dennis or Hoiles this year.

 

[Train Without a Station]

When? It was either Dennis or Hoiles this year.

Don't forget Skelton!

 

[daz]

I never said anything of the sort.

I said you seem happy with mediocrity because you're frightened that the alternative won't be "entertaining".

You're part of the problem.

Lorenzo, calm down and stop looking for a fight. I've deleted 2 posts from you today and you still won't let it go.

One more and it's a yellow, ok?

 

[Biffo]

When? It was either Dennis or Hoiles this year.

for a large part of one game.
just a small reference.

in any event, how would Horwill or Carter go calling the lineouts?
they'd have to, right after my starting locks broke Simmons.

 

[Train Without a Station]

Simmons has been a better Wallaby than Douglas ever has.

Say what you want about his Super Rugby form, but one was one of our top forwards in 2013, and the other was mediocre in all of his games which is why he wasn't offered a guaranteed top up.

 

[Lorenzo]

Lorenzo, calm down and stop looking for a fight. I've deleted 2 posts from you today and you still won't let it go.

One more and it's a yellow, ok?

Just give me the yellow already.

 

[Muglair]

Obviously some confusion over the meaning of " This is not Larkham's decision, it is that of his employers."
Mostly of course due to taking one sentence out of context.
If we choose to decide that the current system is perfect and must not be touched because of its hugely successful track record then of course it is reasonable to worry about conflicts of interest of dual coaching responsibilities and be mainly concerned with each individual coach's own personal agenda and plan.
I don't think the system works for us and do not think Australian Rugby can financially afford six different organisations marching to their own tune. It definitely doesn't get us results.
In context I am saying where and who Larkham coaches is the decision of his employers. The full post outlines that there is only one real employer and that is the ARU, the body that ultimately guarantees everyone gets paid. Commercially just a dumb stupid structure, the ARU picks up the tab and leaves the business of earning income with five other bodies who are often intent on looking after themselves to the exclusion of others.
I did not speak to Bernie today but on the basis of the press announcements he has made the decision, ultimately in his own interests which are tied in the current system to the Brumbies.
Lorenzo is partly correct in his observations that we are not placing winning first. As is reflected in virtually all of the posts (including his) we are all happy to place all of our eggs in the foibles of a particular individual who is picked from time to time as coach out of a system which seems only capable of throwing up one coach at a time to choose from.

 

[Train Without a Station]

Muglair the problem is the fact that it's either 6 different organisations doing their own thing, or 1 directing them all and nothing in between.

Why are the franchises not working with the Wallabies rather than against them?

 

[daz]

Just give me the yellow already.

Done.

 

[TahDan]

I never said anything of the sort.

I said you seem happy with mediocrity because you're frightened that the alternative won't be "entertaining".

You're part of the problem.

I agree that the focus on style is overblown, but I fundamentally disagree with the notion the Jake White's style is a "winning style" simply because he won a RWC. He's also been coaching at Super Rugby level for the past two seasons along with Cheika, but for all the supposed effectiveness of "Jakeball" his boys were torn to shreds by the Crusaders when it mattered

 

[Biffo]

It helped that the Brumbies had what Jakeball needs in terms of backs - a few guys with big boots, big units who can make gain line, and some wingers with a bit of toe.

that pretty well describes winning rugby the world over.
big blokes boshing it through the 5/8 and centres' channels and feeding toey wingers and little stepping blokes.
supported by technically excellent, workaholic, mobile forwards.
rinse and repeat.

some might prefer to call it Tah Ball

 

[Richo]

Done.

Any chance you could just make it a red and save us all from the overweening arrogance permanently?

 

[mudskipper]

Jake White's a very good coach/director of rugby but just isn't here, he like Link is a walker...

Cheika hasn't applied for this job, it was given to him cos he was the last man standing, NO a great CEO Pulver effort here, he has just gabbed the next dance...'m not sure Cheika has the temperament for the job but certainly knows rugby...

I think assistant coach Bernie and forwards coach Foley is a good choice for the RCW year ahead, 3 AUS provencal coaches taking the Wallabies forward should pull the heads in of the players in...

I'd NOW like to hear ARU CEO Pulver come out to the MEDIA and tell us how is going to set up a management structure that leads the team group away from future troubles... Otherwise what is this CEO really doing, surely he has run out of things to talk about at lunch ????

I wish the coaches all success... Above ALL I wish Pulver would do his job now...

 

[Muglair]

Without specific knowledge TWAS it seems to me that the NZRU operate as one organisation with a HO and five divisions. There is some autonomy there but final control over coach and player movements (and presumably development) rests with the NZRU. There also appears to be some central view of the playing strategies. This would explain why there is always a conga line of new All Blacks who seem to just slip straight into the team without adjustment.

I think it would be unfair to say the five franchises work against the ARU although I do not think any would hesitate if they saw it as being in their own interest to do so. There is no incentive or driver at all to encourage the franchises to actively work with the ARU. The more I think about this it just seems absolutely self evident that the whole system requires review and rethinking.

To digress. In the rest of the economy a ridiculous number of advertised roles are for change managers, transformation managers, change analysts etc. Every other advertised role requires the employee to drive change. This is a product of a realisation that loose undisciplined business models are no longer profitable in a changed environment. What is not realised is that "change" and "transformation" only tweak and remodel what does not work. You need to pull it apart and figure where an organisation's strengths and weaknesses sit and what is now required in the external environment.

A friend of mine refuses to discuss the current rugby situation. His view is that the ARU should admit its broke, appoint a Voluntary Administrator, liquidate and start again. Maybe cynical, maybe legally impractical but the reality is a dramatic restructure in thinking is probably required.

 

[Train Without a Station]

Muglair one example I remember that supports my view is that when To'omua was performing quite well at 12 last year the media asked Larkham about the prospect of switching him and Lilo and his response was something along the lines of "we'll do what's best for us".

Then there was the massive stink from the Waratahs when the ARU doctor pulled Izzy from a game. Poorly communicated from the ARU? Yes. But the objection went beyond the communication.

I think the ARU should have more control over the players. The salary cap is fully funded from the ARU, the ARU top ups come from them. They are essentially covering all the players salaries, yet the provinces want to cause a massive issue when the ARU want to control these players.

 

[Braveheart81]

Without specific knowledge TWAS it seems to me that the NZRU operate as one organisation with a HO and five divisions. There is some autonomy there but final control over coach and player movements (and presumably development) rests with the NZRU. There also appears to be some central view of the playing strategies. This would explain why there is always a conga line of new All Blacks who seem to just slip straight into the team without adjustment.

It is not true that the NRZU decides where players play. They move freely between the teams as players do here. Likewise with their coaches.

If you think all five NZ teams play with the same style and strategies then I suggest you watch more NZ rugby. I think all five NZ franchises are quite varied in their style and ultimately those styles have changed based on players and coaches.

The depth NZ has in their rugby is the biggest reason why players can seemlessly slip into the All Blacks.

You only have to watch ITM Cup to see how many excellent players they have that can't get a Super Rugby contract to see that depth.

Player for player I don't think NZ is really much better than anyone else. It's when you're looking at their 10th or 20th best player in a position that you'll see where their advantage lies.

 

[Biffo]

A friend of mine refuses to discuss the current rugby situation. His view is that the ARU should admit its broke, appoint a Voluntary Administrator, liquidate and start again. Maybe cynical, maybe legally impractical but the reality is a dramatic restructure in thinking is probably required.

i am with your friend.
re-design and reconstruction is the only way i can see to fix "it".

what i think is needed most is a "commission" to run the game.
i think every other major football code in the world is in the hands of professional managers, rather than former players.

memo ARU, on the day that Gough left the building:
it's time

 

[Pfitzy]

Simmons has been a better Wallaby than Douglas ever has.

Say what you want about his Super Rugby form,

Not that I need an invitation


Continuing on my point about Jakeball - for RWC it would seem logical. You're there to win your pool then another three games.

But do we have the forwards in this land to do that? I'm not sure there is time in Wallaby camp to get these guys up to this level - with the varying level of forwards focus in each Super camp, its not like everyone does the same thing.

Compare this to the Poms (in our pool don't forget), who do Jakeball their whole lives. At club level its what they do in order to win games and get noticed, whereas our guys who can scrum a bit and run a lot are worth more than the reverse.

But here we get to the issue with Cheikamania. The first year he had the Tahs, he knew it would take them a long time to get into his way. There were rusty moments in Year 2 as well. The machine didn't start really humming until after the run of losses mid-season, and then it was awesome to behold.

He's going to get these guys in camp for limited time in Europe, the send them back to their provinces (and hopefully have the provinces on board with training etc) before he gets them for a month prior to RWC.

The much-talked-about S&C Program the Tahs used isn't going to have the same time to take effect in the Test environment. So either every province has got to get it or you've got an immediate difference in conditioning, which I think the Tahs showed due to their very low injury list this year was quite important.

So then its natural for Cheika to go with the core of the Tahs squad, with the best bits of the others tacked on.

THEN the claims of NSW bias grow positively cacophonous.

Not that they're ever much quieter