Hansen
-
@Blackheart said in Hansen:
I hate the way people put the boot in to Hansen AFTER he has left....he was a great coach and a great ambassador for NZ rugby and NZ as a nation...Thank you Steve...good luck and hope you get the gig of a lifetime after this RWC.
No one is doubting that Hansen was a great ambassador for NZ Rugby and is a good bloke.
No one is questioning that England were excellent on Saturday.
What some of us have been questioning for some time are the strategic decisions that have been taken by Hansen and NZRU concerning the ABs in the last couple of years, especially leaving him with sub-par Assistant Coaches since Wayne Smith left.
Big difference between that and "putting the boot in" as you call it.
-
Being critical of selections is one thing - filling actual holes is another. Did we have the best 15 players starting? I think we had 14 of the best starting options and the 15th on the bench. If Todd had been fit, I would have started Cane with Todd on the bench and dropped Pat T. I'm not sure it would have made a difference...
Look at the number of props that have been tried over the last 3 years. I count at least 8 players (Franks, Moody, Karl T, Ofa T, Laulala, Moli, Angus T, Faumuina) of which 2 have effectively retired
Look at the number of midfield combos that we have tried? I count at least 5 players (SBW, Crotty, ALB, Goodhue, Laumape)
Look at the number of options we have tried at 6 and they haven't worked out? Kaino (retired), Squires (not an answer), Savea (not his best position IMHO), SB (not his best position...), Frizell, Hemopo (off to Japan), Fafita (not an answer at the moment)Much of the criticism directed at the result of this game ignores what the AB's have done to try and fill gaps, often caused by injuries, in the last few years and whether some of the fringe players could have come into better form in this tournament. It's possible, but how many risks do you take?
Based on performances in yesterdays game, the players I expected more from were Taylor, Whitelock, Retallick, Savea and Read. I'm ignoring backs for now - we lost this game in the forwards. We missed Savea in support at breakdowns (other than that he played well and improved when Cane came on) and the other four an uncharacteristic number of errors compared to their usual games. SB made errors too, but I'm giving him a pass based on coaches playing him out of position and the props did enough.
-
@Winger the only problem with saying 'go overseas' is that there is a huge risk they wont be coming back.
-
Hansen has been great for the All Blacks and will rightly be considered a legend. He has been involved with the ABs since 2004 and we have had huge success in that time.
It is the right time to go. I am not sure if he is as good a coach as he has been previously and has selections and decisionmaking has been uncharacteristic for him.
One thing that I have been saying for a while is that its been a while since the ABs have been at the forefront of the evolution of the game. It seems havent brought any real innovation to the the game in a long time and have been slow to recognise and implement things such as a rush defence and ball carying props (mako did 12 carries to moody's one i believe yesterday).
In hindsight Barrett at the blindside was a mistake, especially as 2 of Englands star players were at 6 and 7 and we have played Cane and Savea throughout the tournament.
Still, our side isnt a patch on previous world cup teams but one thing we havent seen is an Ab side play better than the sum of their parts and play above themselves for quite some time.
-
@PecoTrain said in Hansen:
Look at the number of props that have been tried over the last 3 years. I count at least 8 players (Franks, Moody, Karl T, Ofa T, Laulala, Moli, Angus T, Faumuina) of which 2 have effectively retired
Kane Hames, Wyatt Crockett, Tim Perry and Tyrel Lomax - and that's just from the Mako!
-
@Blackheart said in Hansen:
I hate the way people put the boot in to Hansen AFTER he has left....he was a great coach and a great ambassador for NZ rugby and NZ as a nation...Thank you Steve...good luck and hope you get the gig of a lifetime after this RWC.
Again, people have been critical of selections all year. Longer in some cases.
Of course, they have been - but, that doesn't mean they're right.
All those criticisms are just theories that didn't get tested. The only person's theory that gets tested in reality is Hansen's. And he only gets one shot. Across his career he's been right about 86 percent of the time.
You don't have to look too hard to find someone today who is claiming vindication for "their" player and you're thinking, "you're dreaming mate". But that person will have 5 likes from some other plonkers who are similarly misguided.
You play that game again with the same players and get to change five plays/decisions - e.g. Moúnga tackles Daly, Retallick passes accurately to the support, Whitelock doesn't push Farrell in the face - and you could easily get a different result.
-
Always easy with hindsight, but I think this side clearly lacked some physicality , not just in the forwards , we probably lacked that one or two big brown buggers in the backline that had become a trademark of ours , not so much a selection error , just not there right now.
Even if you go back to the 2015 side , inclusions to this team , Kaino at 6 , nonu at 12 , savea at 11, Vito on the bench would give us a different edge in physicality across the field.
-
@DaGrubster said in Hansen:
@Winger the only problem with saying 'go overseas' is that there is a huge risk they wont be coming back.
Have we had that problem yet? The economic disparity could widen in the next 4-8-12 years and it's possible we one day will but so far we have...
Schmidt turning down a blank cheque for...nothing.
Gatland turning down a Wales extension for the Chiefs.
Rennie (one imagines) would take the ABs job if he is willing to take the Aussie one. Similarly Penny would take a NZ Super job if he would take the Tahs.
Joseph would return by all reports if in the mix and Brown is seemingly a shoo-in to return as an assisstant.
Cotter applied the last time it was open, and may well be in the mix again. -
-
@taniwharugby I would give the new coach only a 2-yr contract and reassess after 2021.
-
@Bovidae
I reckon a 2 year contract with a performance related extension built written in:Better the historic AB win/loss % in that period and you get to stay on, if not, bye
Problem is, we hear so often 3 years is the ideal time for a coach...
-
Of course, they have been - but, that doesn't mean they're right.
Doesn't mean they're wrong either.
Being able to say I told you so is the only thing keeping me from slitting my wrists at the moment.You play that game again with the different players and get to change five plays/decisions - e.g. Cane smashes England players and the ball doesn't reach Daly, Savea has the freedom to run rather than contest rucks on his own, J Barrett doesn't come on and turnover ball when we finally have momentum, and
Ioane makes ground in contact and pops a ball to TJ in space - and you could easily get a different result.FYI - I'm 100% not in the Hansen is shit camp, I'm in the Hansen has been bloody good for a long time but made some errors and got out-coached, and I'm definitely not in the new camp of "England were always going to win", we had the team to win and we didn't.
-
All those criticisms are just theories that didn't get tested. The only person's theory that gets tested in reality is Hansen's. And he only gets one shot. Across his career he's been right about 86 percent of the time.
You don't have to look too hard to find someone today who is claiming vindication for "their" player and you're thinking, "you're dreaming mate". But that person will have 5 likes from some other plonkers who are similarly misguided.
By this standard no AB coach can ever be wrong. Critics teams don't take the field and AB coaches have winning standards across their careers.
Time to close the TSF and redirect everyone to NZRU press releases
There's plenty of people who had valid criticism of Hansen over the last few years. I understand being shitty if people changed their views but for the most part people have been consistent. Including those that defend Hansen to extreme lengths.. I won't call them plonkers though, I am better than that
-
-
It's just a silly standard to apply
eg
Some people said Hart was wrong to pick Cullen at centre
That criticism was just a theory that didn't get tested. The only person's theory that gets tested in reality is Harts. And he only gets one shot. Across his career he's been right about 76 percent of the time.
-
@Duluth Yeah - they can never be 100% right or 100% wrong, because at the end of the day, selections are just about assessing the probability that Player X will play well enough for us to win vs the probability that player Y will.
I don't the selections are the main bone of contention but regardless...
Hansen has never been shy about saying "I told you so" in the media after an unpopular selection or a comeback performance after a loss - so he has kind of made his bed in that regard.
-
@Duluth The Cullen selection probably was a poor one. But, it would have been a poor one regardless of whether we won or lost.
The point I am making on Coastie's post is that just because we lost doesn't suddenly make every criticism right - or Hansen wrong.
In the same way as when we beat Ireland it didn't necessarily make Hansen right about everything and every critic wrong.
