When should Foster go?
-
@taniwharugby I thought Rennie, at least, did apply. He was just far more progressed with RA/Raelene who had been grooming him for a while.
-
@aucklandwarlord said in When should Foster go?:
@Donsteppa - remember when the Mafia had Ian "Ferret" Foster at the top of our "know your enemy" list - circa 2004, for continual disservice to BOP players during chiefs selection?
We were well ahead of our time...
we fucking knew. we fucking told everyone. we have not gone away.
-
@broughie said in When should Foster go?:
@taniwharugby Maybe they should have started the process earlier when Rennie was available. But I assume a lot of these guys saw the writing on the wall and the NZRU tendency to stick with status quo. It’s a bit of an old boys network. Maybe next time they can have an anonymous survey of players who could discuss the merits of potential coaches.
I agree, they had plenty of time and should have started the process a lot earlier if this was to be an truly open position. You could argue and many of us did, that it was left so late it was almost just a organizational validity check to ensure the process was compliant as they had already pre selected their candidate. Razor was just part of the process and probably gave them an out ( and probably even had a better presentation (Im sure the cantabs have seen it at the pub), but not an option they were not willing to take. I can see how the success and emphasis was put on the previous era could have swayed them into thinking keep status quo, but not openly looking for who is the best coach was always going to be a risk.
Still we have him now, he has a chance to learn from what has happened and should be given every chance to do so (although it reminds me the confused 2000's Chiefs) and he has to come up with an action plan on how to fix it, unlike the Chiefs the NZ public wont tolerate failure for long.
-
@taniwharugby said in When should Foster go?:
part of the problem was Rennie didnt apply, Joseph didnt apply, Schmidt didnt apply, Gatland couldnt apply, leaving a 2 horse race with 2 men with zero head coaching experience at International level, but one had been part of a successful (the numbers back this up, even if the on field stuff left alot to be desired) International coaching team...
Not saying I agreed with it, but when you look at it, NZR were down to a coin toss...right now, looks like they went heads when they shoulda gone tails!
i think leaving it up to people to apply was the first wrong step
you advertise a job when you dont know who is out there and what they can do...we're they hoping there was an international coach out there they didn't know about?
cant exactly have a better job interview than looking at what all the coaches out there are currently doing...so pick one you want based on that and go after them, woo them
In reality there are probably only half a dozen guys they would even consider...all well known, was this the kiwi arrogance people talk about?..."no...they must come to us if they want the job...we're the All Backs"
-
I don't know, but am convinced that, the reason the process started so late was, the NZRU thought they would win the World Cup, and therefore the succession planning was seamless, and would go over without any public disagreement.
Of course, this thinking ignored the two years of rugby that came before it, but hey, organisations used to success have blindspots.
the inevitable happens, we get bundled out, and suddenly the process is a thing that has to happen. the problem is, it is too late. the best candidates are already in other jobs. And the picture is painted that the process is a box-ticking exercise.
And so you get what we had here last week. Which is the way he wants it. Well, he gets it
I don't like it, any more than you do
-
@bayimports agree up to the last paragraph :-).
-
@mariner4life said in When should Foster go?:
I don't know, but am convinced that, the reason the process started so late was, the NZRU thought they would win the World Cup, and therefore the succession planning was seamless, and would go over without any public disagreement.
Of course, this thinking ignored the two years of rugby that came before it, but hey, organisations used to success have blindspots.
the inevitable happens, we get bundled out, and suddenly the process is a thing that has to happen. the problem is, it is too late. the best candidates are already in other jobs. And the picture is painted that the process is a box-ticking exercise.
**And so you get what we had here last week. Which is the way he wants it. Well, he gets it
I don't like it, any more than you do**
Tune
-
@bayimports said in When should Foster go?:
the NZ public wont tolerate failure for long.
That was last week.
-
I think that’s exactly it. This bullshit about ‘process’ seems to infect most of the crap decisions (and operations) coming of of NZ rugby (see SR planning).
The simple fact is that there are very few WC coaches who we could have talked to, and there could have been significant discussions with candidates to find who was best without having any official application.
The chances of getting Joseph and Brown (for example) would have been much better if there were behind the scenes discussions, the board decides they are the right people, and then you negotiate. For him to apply means he has to publicly tell his current employer that he wants to leave - these aren’t private applications in the way that regular ppl leave jobs without their employer knowing about it.
-
So Foster wasn't head coach in 2012. But he was part of the team and has not dramatically and of his own initiative changed the team which leads me to believe
he has no new ideas and-
will just let the ABs meander downwards as they have been doing OR
-
he has no ablity to enact the changes he said would happen and no initiative to create new, fresh strategies and turn the ship around. More physicality? More dominant forwards? I point you to the last two games.
The good things we saw (Sotutu, Clarke etc) were because circumstances forced his hand.
-
-
@Kiwiwomble said in When should Foster go?:
i think leaving it up to people to apply was the first wrong step
while most organisations will invite people to apply, usually they must still go through the process, I thnk the days of a shoulder tap, nudge wink are gone, it has to go through the application process, even if it is a foregone conclusion.
I applied for a job many years ago, was a closed application process, I was the only one who applied and interviewed, and you know what, I got the job!
Bit of a pointless exercise, but still had to be done that way due to a change in contract ..transperancy and all that crap
NZR did send invitations/expressions of interest out to a bunch of coaches, problem was, as already mentioned, others were already down another path.
-
It will be clear to me what the level of honesty is within the squad, the coaching group and between the coaching group and leadership group when they announce the team for the next game.
If it's more of the same; talk of "giving players an opportunity to make amends", start coming to terms with losing the Bledisloe and a quarter final exit in France.
-
@taniwharugby im not important enough but my wife got shoulder tapped for a job in aus, its what brought us over, obviously still needed to "interview" but she never applied. and as i say, i just think when there are only a handful of people in the world you would consider and you can see very publicly how theyre doing in their current roles...i feel thats different
-
@Kiwiwomble yeah but thats what I mean, internally they still needed to tick off boxes, I guess its up to them what they deem an application - you want to apply? Yes? 'Interview' is next week.
Especially if other people are able to apply, they need to have a process.
I agree I think they need to look at how they went about it, but by the same token, how soon before Hansen's exit should they start looking at candidates?
I think a whole bunch of things conspired against us getting multiple strong candidates and left us with 2 good but limited options.
-
@Victor-Meldrew said in When should Foster go?:
@Machpants said in When should Foster go?:
Cool, one more game and he's gone
For some reason, I thought we were playing Italy & Wales in late-Winter (NZ).
Probably best you're right. Don't think I could hack the thought of losing to Italy & Wales (for the first time in 70 years..)
It was worse losing to Argentina - that was the first time in over 120years (EVER)
-
@Higgins said in When should Foster go?:
@Victor-Meldrew said in When should Foster go?:
@Machpants said in When should Foster go?:
Cool, one more game and he's gone
For some reason, I thought we were playing Italy & Wales in late-Winter (NZ).
Probably best you're right. Don't think I could hack the thought of losing to Italy & Wales (for the first time in 70 years..)
It was worse losing to Argentina - that was the first time in over 120years (EVER)
and it wasn't even in Buenos Aires FFS, with feral, hostile, booing locals and lasers in our eyes
It was in soulless Western Sydney.
If this had happened in the late-90s/early-2000s there would be calls for them not to come home
-
@mariner4life said in When should Foster go?:
I don't know, but am convinced that, the reason the process started so late was, the NZRU thought they would win the World Cup, and therefore the succession planning was seamless, and would go over without any public disagreement.
Of course, this thinking ignored the two years of rugby that came before it, but hey, organisations used to success have blindspots.
the inevitable happens, we get bundled out, and suddenly the process is a thing that has to happen. the problem is, it is too late. the best candidates are already in other jobs. And the picture is painted that the process is a box-ticking exercise.
And so you get what we had here last week. Which is the way he wants it. Well, he gets it
I don't like it, any more than you do
Fuck off, foster is in no way Cool Hand Luke
-
@Crazy-Horse said in When should Foster go?:
@Bones said in When should Foster go?:
@Crazy-Horse said in When should Foster go?:
Interesting concept that it is ok for some players to make the same mistakes as others simply because they are better players. Not sure I agree with that, but I do get where you are coming from.
It's not simply because they're better players though. It's because they'll do their job and do what's needed to get their team on top. RM had done SFA until then, that was a perfect moment to step up, do the basics and start to get his team looking like winners. And he can't even butter his bread, what he should be able to do with his eyes closed. It's not just a missed touch, I can't imagine that not having an effect on others in the team too.
Yeah problems are definitely bigger than that but when your guy who's supposed to be the master planner is so unreliable, you probably should start there.
Not defending RM for the miss because it was inexcusable. I do wonder how Carter would actually go in this team and with trying to combat the rush defence. It wasn't really anything he had to deal with. And he had pretty good forward pack in front of him.
Neither RM nor BB are bad players. They are not being given the platform to perform. Are there any 10s out there looking like world beaters, especially ones operating behind a disappointing pack?
Hey that Sanchez fella goes alright eh...
I think the forward performance is being overblown, especially when it comes to discussing our tens. There is a whole lot more they can do than take it to the line and throw a dinky pass/dummy.
-
@Bones I think it comes back to what we were doing with the ball.
It seemed all we did was keep running at them to knock us over.
We beat more defenders, ran more metres, passed more times, more off loads, which we did with 45% possession and territory (we also had less penalties against us)
Ruck/maul stats were similar, we both made 90% of our tackles...however, they kicked 26 times to our 16 and only turned the ball over 4 times to our 14.
Almost 10% of our 179 passes went to Caleb (14) I think the expectation was he'd bust a hole and we'd do the business from there, but he didnt....while he made 1 clean break and beat 4 defenders, IIRC they were cleaned up pretty quickly, Argies knew he was a threat and shut him down.
So again, comes back to what we did with the ball when we had it...which was turn it over
