Foster, Robertson etc
-
@ploughboy said in Foster must go:
foster to stay to be joined by gatland and schmidt
Schmidt and Gatland like water and oil.
-
@pakman said in Foster must go:
@ploughboy said in Foster must go:
foster to stay to be joined by gatland and schmidt
Schmidt and Gatland like water and oil.
Both focus on defence, prefer to play to set patterns (which some argue the ABs need right now). It might work 😁
-
@Billy-Tell said in Foster must go:
I’d accept keeping the bledisloe and not losing to wales or Scotland on end of year tour. Oh and going 2-0 vs Argentina. Can’t expect a guy to come in at short notice and not potentially lose to SA in SA.
Not good enough. We'd be treading water or going backwards compared to Foster with no guarantee things are really on the up.
Enough mediocrity - put success measures in place and have an action plan if they aren't met.
-
@chimoaus said in Foster must go:
Anybody wonder if Foster doubts himself or does he really believe he is capable of turning things around?
Must be very hard to coach effectively if you think everyone thinks you are an idiot.
I imagine he must be low on self confidence and it must be a very hard headspace to be in which surely does not help things.
When things go wrong people start pointing fingers and you wonder what the locker room chat is among players, coaches etc re Foster.
On a personal level, you'd have to have a heart of stone not to feel for the guy. He's had a load of stuff hit him which is out of his control and I don't doubt he's doing his best.
But he's paid to do a job and if he can't do it then he should consider his position. At the very least you'd hope NZR are giving him the support he needs no matter what he and they decide to do.
-
@Victor-Meldrew said in Foster must go:
@Billy-Tell said in Foster must go:
I’d accept keeping the bledisloe and not losing to wales or Scotland on end of year tour. Oh and going 2-0 vs Argentina. Can’t expect a guy to come in at short notice and not potentially lose to SA in SA.
Not good enough. We'd be treading water or going backwards compared to Foster with no guarantee things are really on the up.
Enough mediocrity - put success measures in place and have an action plan if they aren't met.
Do t think so. I have only hope and not expectation when the ABs play these days.
-
The Blues wound up in this situation. So have the Warriors.
What doesn't work :
-- pretending it was not a problem and nothing needed fixing.
-- staying with poor coaches, hoping they'd get better.
-- picking nice guys to coach with mana rather than those with winning records because the other guys were kind of prickly and irritating and were going to ruffle some feathers.
-- endless rants about "lack of development" and how the whole organisation was dysfunctional and needed a hard reboot.. This was a Fern speciality. Still is, apparently. (The Waikato RU is as dysfunctional as any on the planet. They can still have winning seasons.)
-- spending money on players.
What did work :
-- trying new things until one stuck.
-- a good coach.
It turns out that that pretty much everything hung on the coaching. Everything else was fine when he was good.
Rennie showed that Foster was the problem at the Chiefs, although in his case it was also the useless WRU -- but cronyism with Foster was part of that.
My predictions:
-- doing nothing will be a disaster.
-- eventually the problems will be sorted by the right coach.
-- nothing else matters. Back room chair organising will not fix poor coaching.
-
@Chester-Draws said in Foster must go:
What did work :
-- trying new things until one stuck.
-- a good coach.
It turns out that that pretty much everything hung on the coaching. Everything else was fine when he was good.
-- nothing else matters. Back room chair organising will not fix poor coaching.Agree, very few teams have won trophies with a poor coach.
-
@Chester-Draws I respectfully disagree.
Good coaches in poor environments will struggle. Bad coaches in good environments will look better than they are.
The Blues renaissance came with a new board. Everything good flowed from there; a good coach, better player selection and retention, a competent back room staff, stakeholders/owners that weren't at war with each other. The coach can't fix those issues.
It's like a good 10 in a bad team. They'll be dragged down.
-
@Chester-Draws said in Foster must go:
Rennie showed that Foster was the problem at the Chiefs, although in his case it was also the useless WRU -- but cronyism with Foster was part of that.
Especially this. Though somehow ten years on he's now coaching the All Blacks...
-
@Chester-Draws said in Foster must go:
It turns out that that pretty much everything hung on the coaching. Everything else was fine when he was good.
Sorry, but I think that's way too simplistic and assumes quality of cattle, player development, quality of opposition, the quality of the people choosing and supporting the coach and the processes around managing the game have no impact on the results.
Sure, a good coach is essential and can get the best out of what he's been given, but he can't fix the structural issues in his union.
-
@nzzp said in Foster must go:
@Victor-Meldrew progress for the new coach won't just be winning, but clarity around selections, game plans and direction. There may be short term losses, but there has to be hope for the future.
He has clarity and has managed to sell that 'vision' to his employers about three times now.
Trouble is that it either doesn't work, the players can't apply it and/or it simply isn't right for the situation we face against structured low error teams.
The public also can see zero evidence of positive change and the few public statements about what needs to change seem at odds to what is happening.
'We need more power in the forwards', OK now I'm going to bench or leave out our most powerful hooker -
Given that it is only 3 weeks until we go to SA what is the practical solution here if Foster goes?
A transition to Schmidt whereby he can make gradual changes to the systems in place?
It's either Schmidt commits to the RWC or he acts as a caretaker bringing in new systems and players in consultation with Razor, who then takes over for EOYT after getting his house in order.
One of the next problems then is assistants (who I truly believe are Fosters biggest mistake). Razor has his great team but can they move across to the ABs without derailing the Saders own succession plans? Is Schmidt initially saddled with the same muppets Foster put in place?
Our scrum is OK if not dominant (and dominant scrums mean little against these big teams - the refs still let them get the ball out while moving backwards). Therefore maybe Feek can stay.
The option of Schmidt and Razor working together worries me that it could be another Grizz/Hart -
When the current coaching group got Covid and Schmidt took the coaching reigns, that led to the only win.
Perhaps an interim change is enough to get through the Rugby Championship, and the board doesn't need to rush to get a long term replacement (or maybe Schmidt is the guy, who knows).
-
@Crucial well McLeod should be on the block, regardless, our defence has been woeful for years now.
The disconnect is there for all to see, we don't move as one, staggered, passive and slow, that try posted in the game thread highlighted how poor we were when we twist thier scrum away from the zone they are attacking, its slow ball and yet they still go that way and still make it over the gain line with a simple passing move.
When you watch the Irish line come up quickly, together, structured.
-
Tbh I don't think a massive amount is required to get them back on track. The players are there and when they have nothing to lose, start playing direct and let rip you can see the other teams start getting sqeaky bum time. But that's usually after an inept, bumbling and headless first 40 that's already put them 20 odd points behind. Tactically the ABs have been a mess since even 2016. It's simply arrogance and hubris that can't be papered over by individual brilliance anymore. Same thing with teams tiring. They simply don't hit wall like they used to. If anything we hit the wall after the necessary early 2nd half fightback required to arrest a 20 point deficit. I see all the major teams at least looking like they have a plan and at least playing with some kind of depth and enterprise. I don't know wtf the ABs are doing and I'm not sure the players do either. Just get in someone, anyone who is prepared to fůcking evolve and acknowledge it isn't farking 2015 anymore.
-
@Victor-Meldrew said in Foster must go:
@nzzp said in Foster must go:
@Victor-Meldrew progress for the new coach won't just be winning, but clarity around selections, game plans and direction. There may be short term losses, but there has to be hope for the future.
You raise a really good point though, the issue is deeper than just the coach. But the coach has appeared to be a significant part of the issue.
My point is if/when we dump Foster we have to expect much more than just visibility of new game plan and getting more information at pressers on selection thinking.
Sure, I'll give a loss or two if that means progress, but I'd want some pretty rapid progress after 2-3 games if I were NZR and have some contingency plans on re-appointment in place if it doesn't happen. Hope is all well and good, but let's not have another Foster-like fiasco.
I don’t think that will be an expectation nor should it be.
If (and I still think it is a massive if) a new coach and assistants are installed then NZR will have to say there is a massive problem to justify such a step. Massive problems aren’t turned around in 2-3 games.
From a playing perspective it will take time for philosophy buy in and the changes to manifest. From a PR perspective we will be in that similar position to the post Connolly and MacKenzie Wallabies of managing expectations and sending out messages of what’s working in camp etc.
-
I saw a brief interview with RTS pre game and when asked how he found things he talked about having huge amounts of study to do with systems etc but then added that Fozzie said 'we don't want robots out there, the systems are just a framework'.
It's a simplification off one newcomers comment but I have to wonder if that is part of the issue here. Either give clear direction and plans whereby players get to express themselves only at 'pull the trigger' moments or don't bother. They seem not to understand when to stick to the plan at the moment.
A good case was on the weekend, we got a small roll on making Ireland defend, got down in their 22 and to me it was time to keep heaping on pressure until a crack appeared but instead we went for what was presumably a phase one glory move off the lineout,. Execution was out and we let the foot off the gas.
Were was the ruthlessness? Players don't seem to understand the need to keep applying pressure in an organised way. Even a very good defence will show cracks after 10 plus phases as long as those phases draw them out of structure. Then you can show off your instinctive brilliance. -
Are we (under Foster) still doing the passive defence and trying to score off turnover transitions strategy from the Hansen era? Sounds like it from the Scott McLeod complaints? I've not really been watching.
How we ever got coaching transition at end of 2019 with that proven failed strategy is beyond my comprehension.
The way the team journeyed from 2017 Lions 1st Test to RWC 2019 just absolutely blows my mind. What a waste of what was still the end of a good generation with an absolute wealth of experience. Lost all belief that Hansen was maybe ever a good coach after that failure of vision and implementation. How could they possibly want transition from that steaming pile of outdated crap?
But, this takes me to a general point that would also answer this question by VM (below). I'd want a coach that has a strategy that puts the chance of the result in our own hands, rather than the outcome being dictated by whether the opponents are liable to be keystone-cops somewhere in midfield.
A coach that has a proactive, rather than reactive, vision of how the game should be played. Will put the team in a way better position than a disguisedly failing Hansen team and 100% better position than a Foster team with a similar ethos but zero buy in by the players, fans, journos etc.
For the all consuming RWC cycle focus. Scraping to tight wins, losing some, is actually better prep than thrashing everyone for 4 years with a 90% win record. Occasionally losing, but then comforting ourselves with the fetish of THE BACKLASH. That sort of fetishising gets us a fantastic record in 3rd/4th playoffs.
Need a team and coaching strategy that can attempt to control our own destiny over 3 consecutive matches against near-peer opposition. Get that, and that would be something I would buy into.
The top 8 of world rugby is quite strong these days, and this looks to be a near permanent thing. Gone are the days of hoping our 'bad day' in the RWC playoff run happens to be against a team like a 199/2003 level Scotland or Wales etc.
Need a coaching team that understand consistency of performance. Not excitement on-a-good-day and even more exciting backlashes after it has gone wrong.
@Victor-Meldrew said in Foster must go:
Genuine question. If Foster is replaced - and I think he should be - and the new coach drops more than one game in the TRC and/or loses a game on the EOYT (more than possible the way England, Wales & Scotland are playing at the moment), he will have done no better, or possibly worse, than Foster in 2021.
What do we do then? Do we sack the new coach and look for another to turn things around in time for Sept 2023?
-
@Crucial I think examples like that and last week not taking points on offer while we were still in the game is showing Cane is struggling with things too, whether he isn't buying the game plan or is totally misreading the game situation and this teams limitations...?
-
@Rancid-Schnitzel said in Foster must go:
Tbh I don't think a massive amount is required to get them back on track. The players are there and when they have nothing to lose, start playing direct and let rip you can see the other teams start getting sqeaky bum time. But that's usually after an inept, bumbling and headless first 40 that's already put them 20 odd points behind. Tactically the ABs have been a mess since even 2016. It's simply arrogance and hubris that can't be papered over by individual brilliance anymore. Same thing with teams tiring. They simply don't hit wall like they used to. If anything we hit the wall after the necessary early 2nd half fightback required to arrest a 20 point deficit. I see all the major teams at least looking like they have a plan and at least playing with some kind of depth and enterprise. I don't know wtf the ABs are doing and I'm not sure the players do either. Just get in someone, anyone who is prepared to fůcking evolve and acknowledge it isn't farking 2015 anymore.
100%, while I think those that appointed Foster should be held accountable, I don't think NZR is this completely rotten institution all of a sudden. Yeah they're not perfect, which is what led to Foster's appointment, but a good coach for the ABs will go a very long way to solving our problems here.
Foster's teams all play the same way - no real structure, just helter skelter bullshit that relies more on individual brilliance than a gameplan that breaks the opposition down. This was exactly how his Chiefs played, and is exactly how the ABs are playing now.
If we can install a coach that can work with his assistants implement a coherent gameplan our players performances will improve 10 fold.
Head coach is not an easy job, which is why so many crash and burn in the role, and that's why it's so important that we only ever appointment people that have a strong record of success in the position beforehand. Foster had none of that.
