Foster, Robertson etc
-
@PecoTrain said in Foster must go:
@Kirwan said in Foster must go:
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).
So I wouldn't read too much into Schmidt's involvement in the first test win - if all it took was 2-3 days to turn the AB's around I think the would have seen Foster achieve that, unless the only issue was player respect.
Unless the players are hiding things well I think they do respect Foster and the plan he is is trying to implement. There aren't any signs of toleration or frustration, they seem to be blaming themselves. I very much suspect that in reviews the players are supporting him.
The assistants are another matter though. They have already come out of reviews in a poor light (presumably from the players) which is why additions were made earlier this year. Adding more voices in has probably backfired though.
A possible 'solution' here is for Schmidt to run the gameplan and have a strong say in selection to fit that plan. The assistants are told to do what he says or butt out. Foster is too close to those he has picked to assist and needs to be stronger on realising that they aren't working out.
My guess is that they will survive out the 3N for the sake of 'disruption' but Schmidt may get to pick a new team to assist on a EOYT. -
@Dan54 said in Foster must go:
@MN5 said in Foster must go:
@Dan54 said in Foster must go:
@MN5 said in Foster must go:
@MajorRage said in Foster must go:
@BerniesCorner said in Foster must go:
Over at Stuff
"Mark Reason: The fishheads who are stinking out the All Blacks"
https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby/all-blacks/300640271/mark-reason-the-fishheads-who-are-stinking-out-the-all-blacksAnyone else find this type of journalism totally unacceptable
Agree with every single thing he says.
Why do you think it’s unacceptable?
People on massive salaries get paid it because they have to accept colossal criticism when they fail to meet their kpi’s.
People who think this is unacceptable have been listening to too much Cindy.
Reason is literally saying everything that’s been said on here for ages. The ‘pasifika’ comment is a bit weird but the rest is pretty spot on.
Yep probably hit it on head, Reason is saying what he has read on internet, it's how people without real skills sell stories, find unhappy posts etc and feed the people more of that. I just saw some of that during covid etc, if a journalist wanted to get read they followed what was on net and followed that, it's how some try to stand out in a competitive market. Generally we as readers will see an ex AB say Foster has to go, and if we agree, we think that the man is a genius, if we don't he's an idiot and what does he know. Same in press , a writer who doesn't agree with us is an idiot or NZR stooge etc, and one we agree with is a great writer. It sems to of become even more prevalant since internet became a thing.
Yep, I’m certainly not going so far as to say it was an entertaining well written piece…..but he did at least tell it like it is. I don’t think he deserves to be censored for that
I agree MNS, not sure he needs to be censored, he writes opinion pieces. unfortunately I have opinion too. and mine is he's a click bait so called journalist,of a very low standard, so don't read him anymore, and perhaps think have a slightly less opinion of people who quote him etc. I not saying they wrong, just I find using him to base arguments etc kind of lessens the value of said argument etc.
That’s ridiculous. You agree with somebodies view or you don’t.
-
Reason is the stopped clock of rugby journalism. By default he will be right once every 24 times. However even when he is right, his style is really quite spiteful.
And he is a fluffybunny.
-
@Catogrande said in Foster must go:
Reason is the stopped clock of rugby journalism. By default he will be right once every 24 times. However even when he is right, his style is really quite spiteful.
And he is a fluffybunny.
I agree with a lot of what he says. Far in excess of 1 in 24. More like 3 in 4.
I guess Dan has no respect for me. Oh how will I go on.
-
@MajorRage have you considered you might also be a stopped clock?
-
FWIW I agreed with a lot of the article as well, and you just know Reason has been waiting his whole life to get the chance to stick the boot in like this. The Maori/Pasifica comment was weird though.
-
@MajorRage TBF I think he has been writing pretty much the same shit for the last decade or more, just replace names (drop McCaw/Drop Cane)
However, since about 2018, all his BS has been getting closer and closer to the mark as NZR stumble around arrogantly, refusing to see any of the issues unfolding in front of them.
He is still a spiteful fluffybunny.
-
@MajorRage said in Foster must go:
@Dan54 said in Foster must go:
@MN5 said in Foster must go:
@Dan54 said in Foster must go:
@MN5 said in Foster must go:
@MajorRage said in Foster must go:
@BerniesCorner said in Foster must go:
Over at Stuff
"Mark Reason: The fishheads who are stinking out the All Blacks"
https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby/all-blacks/300640271/mark-reason-the-fishheads-who-are-stinking-out-the-all-blacksAnyone else find this type of journalism totally unacceptable
Agree with every single thing he says.
Why do you think it’s unacceptable?
People on massive salaries get paid it because they have to accept colossal criticism when they fail to meet their kpi’s.
People who think this is unacceptable have been listening to too much Cindy.
Reason is literally saying everything that’s been said on here for ages. The ‘pasifika’ comment is a bit weird but the rest is pretty spot on.
Yep probably hit it on head, Reason is saying what he has read on internet, it's how people without real skills sell stories, find unhappy posts etc and feed the people more of that. I just saw some of that during covid etc, if a journalist wanted to get read they followed what was on net and followed that, it's how some try to stand out in a competitive market. Generally we as readers will see an ex AB say Foster has to go, and if we agree, we think that the man is a genius, if we don't he's an idiot and what does he know. Same in press , a writer who doesn't agree with us is an idiot or NZR stooge etc, and one we agree with is a great writer. It sems to of become even more prevalant since internet became a thing.
Yep, I’m certainly not going so far as to say it was an entertaining well written piece…..but he did at least tell it like it is. I don’t think he deserves to be censored for that
I agree MNS, not sure he needs to be censored, he writes opinion pieces. unfortunately I have opinion too. and mine is he's a click bait so called journalist,of a very low standard, so don't read him anymore, and perhaps think have a slightly less opinion of people who quote him etc. I not saying they wrong, just I find using him to base arguments etc kind of lessens the value of said argument etc.
That’s ridiculous. You agree with somebodies view or you don’t.
Yep, and I don't agree with Mark Reason's, why I don't read him. As I said he does opinion pieces, and I find them click bait ,end of. He seems to have no more knowledge or any closer to any info than any poster on here. Not a probelm mate, if you like that kind of "journalsim" I don't have a problem, I never read his fathers stuff, ro even Stephen Jones for basically same reason.
-
@MajorRage said in Foster must go:
@Catogrande said in Foster must go:
Reason is the stopped clock of rugby journalism. By default he will be right once every 24 times. However even when he is right, his style is really quite spiteful.
And he is a fluffybunny.
I agree with a lot of what he says. Far in excess of 1 in 24. More like 3 in 4.
I guess Dan has no respect for me. Oh how will I go on.
Where did I say that Major, you really making up stuff, I didn't say you couldn't or shouldn't read them, just saying if you quote his write up to back something, I think it lessens the quality of argument.
I didn't think you were the type to twist a pretty innocent statement so much,, but that's ok. -
@Dan54 said in Foster must go:
@MajorRage said in Foster must go:
@Dan54 said in Foster must go:
@MN5 said in Foster must go:
@Dan54 said in Foster must go:
@MN5 said in Foster must go:
@MajorRage said in Foster must go:
@BerniesCorner said in Foster must go:
Over at Stuff
"Mark Reason: The fishheads who are stinking out the All Blacks"
https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby/all-blacks/300640271/mark-reason-the-fishheads-who-are-stinking-out-the-all-blacksAnyone else find this type of journalism totally unacceptable
Agree with every single thing he says.
Why do you think it’s unacceptable?
People on massive salaries get paid it because they have to accept colossal criticism when they fail to meet their kpi’s.
People who think this is unacceptable have been listening to too much Cindy.
Reason is literally saying everything that’s been said on here for ages. The ‘pasifika’ comment is a bit weird but the rest is pretty spot on.
Yep probably hit it on head, Reason is saying what he has read on internet, it's how people without real skills sell stories, find unhappy posts etc and feed the people more of that. I just saw some of that during covid etc, if a journalist wanted to get read they followed what was on net and followed that, it's how some try to stand out in a competitive market. Generally we as readers will see an ex AB say Foster has to go, and if we agree, we think that the man is a genius, if we don't he's an idiot and what does he know. Same in press , a writer who doesn't agree with us is an idiot or NZR stooge etc, and one we agree with is a great writer. It sems to of become even more prevalant since internet became a thing.
Yep, I’m certainly not going so far as to say it was an entertaining well written piece…..but he did at least tell it like it is. I don’t think he deserves to be censored for that
I agree MNS, not sure he needs to be censored, he writes opinion pieces. unfortunately I have opinion too. and mine is he's a click bait so called journalist,of a very low standard, so don't read him anymore, and perhaps think have a slightly less opinion of people who quote him etc. I not saying they wrong, just I find using him to base arguments etc kind of lessens the value of said argument etc.
That’s ridiculous. You agree with somebodies view or you don’t.
Yep, and I don't agree with Mark Reason's, why I don't read him. As I said he does opinion pieces, and I find them click bait ,end of. He seems to have no more knowledge or any closer to any info than any poster on here. Not a probelm mate, if you like that kind of "journalsim" I don't have a problem, I never read his fathers stuff, ro even Stephen Jones for basically same reason.
I like Stephen Jones' articles because he seems so personally offended by so many things and blows them up to the size of countries but really doesn't appear to have a constructive clue. Bombastic negativity. Great stuff!
Reason, on the hand, can make some reasonable points but you know once he thinks he has you on his side he is going to go all spiteful, and I usually go away with a sour taste in my mouth.
-
@Catogrande said in Foster must go:
Reason is the stopped clock of rugby journalism. By default he will be right once every 24 times
or twice unless digital
I caught a bus to RWC Final in 2011 and sat in front of Reason and Deaker.
Imagine the most loud mouthed, out of touch, reactionary, bigoted, smug old fucktards that you can. Then double down. Twice.
This wasn't to an audience or as click bait. This was who they were. I think people give them too much credit as wind up merchants. No matter how outrageous their Mr Angry stuff I reckon it's who they truly are. Oh and they didn't have a clue about the rules of the game - and all poly players are thick!
-
@booboo said in Foster must go:
@kev said in Foster must go:
Dropping some name players, ..., stop selecting projects,
Are these compatible?
Good question. In this series most would agree Codie Taylor should have been in the reserves. An example of a project would have been RTS in the final test. Lucky to make squad - can’t understand why he also got selected on bench for final test when he can only play one position and our defence was always going to be an issue.
-
@dogmeat Very similar to my experience with the Walrus when he and a few other UK scribes were sitting at the table next to us at a pub before the Wales-Fiji game in 2011. We were all watching the NZ-Canada game on the big screen and I could clearly hear their comments.
-
@dogmeat said in Foster must go:
@Catogrande said in Foster must go:
Reason is the stopped clock of rugby journalism. By default he will be right once every 24 times
or twice unless digital
I caught a bus to RWC Final in 2011 and sat in front of Reason and Deaker.
Imagine the most loud mouthed, out of touch, reactionary, bigoted, smug old fucktards that you can. Then double down. Twice.
This wasn't to an audience or as click bait. This was who they were. I think people give them too much credit as wind up merchants. No matter how outrageous their Mr Angry stuff I reckon it's who they truly are. Oh and they didn't have a clue about the rules of the game - and all poly players are thick!
Deaks was sitting behind us at the final. Had his resting bitch face on for most of the game
-
@canefan said in Foster must go:
@dogmeat said in Foster must go:
@Catogrande said in Foster must go:
Reason is the stopped clock of rugby journalism. By default he will be right once every 24 times
or twice unless digital
I caught a bus to RWC Final in 2011 and sat in front of Reason and Deaker.
Imagine the most loud mouthed, out of touch, reactionary, bigoted, smug old fucktards that you can. Then double down. Twice.
This wasn't to an audience or as click bait. This was who they were. I think people give them too much credit as wind up merchants. No matter how outrageous their Mr Angry stuff I reckon it's who they truly are. Oh and they didn't have a clue about the rules of the game - and all poly players are thick!
Deaks was sitting behind us at the final. Had his resting bitch face on for most of the game
Poor Willie Lose chose him as a mentor when getting into broadcasting .
Possibly hindered him more than helped. -
@Dan54 said in Foster must go:
@MajorRage said in Foster must go:
@Catogrande said in Foster must go:
Reason is the stopped clock of rugby journalism. By default he will be right once every 24 times. However even when he is right, his style is really quite spiteful.
And he is a fluffybunny.
I agree with a lot of what he says. Far in excess of 1 in 24. More like 3 in 4.
I guess Dan has no respect for me. Oh how will I go on.
Where did I say that Major, you really making up stuff, I didn't say you couldn't or shouldn't read them, just saying if you quote his write up to back something, I think it lessens the quality of argument.
I didn't think you were the type to twist a pretty innocent statement so much,, but that's ok.It’s a play on words.
Since Trump, the world has been obsessed more on who is saying it as opposed to what is being said.
I dislike it. As a good point is a good point, regardless of who says it. And I’ll happily quote Reason if I agree with him or disagree with him.
-
@MajorRage said in Foster must go:
@Dan54 said in Foster must go:
@MajorRage said in Foster must go:
@Catogrande said in Foster must go:
Reason is the stopped clock of rugby journalism. By default he will be right once every 24 times. However even when he is right, his style is really quite spiteful.
And he is a fluffybunny.
I agree with a lot of what he says. Far in excess of 1 in 24. More like 3 in 4.
I guess Dan has no respect for me. Oh how will I go on.
Where did I say that Major, you really making up stuff, I didn't say you couldn't or shouldn't read them, just saying if you quote his write up to back something, I think it lessens the quality of argument.
I didn't think you were the type to twist a pretty innocent statement so much,, but that's ok.It’s a play on words.
Since Trump, the world has been obsessed more on who is saying it as opposed to what is being said.
I dislike it. As a good point is a good point, regardless of who says it. And I’ll happily quote Reason if I agree with him or disagree with him.
No problem with you reading Reason, as I said I chose not to and he's not someone I personally don't respect enough to think any argument of his would sway my opinion. I don't judge you or did I even indicate this statement made by you because of it. "I guess Dan has no respect for me. Oh how will I go on" is anyway valid,
That's not a play on words, it's completely outside of what I said and you know it.
But I repeat if that make you feel better, that's ok. -
There Will Be Blood: What's really wrong with the All Blacks
Analysis - New Zealand Rugby's backroom staff must face the fire for the All Black's recent sub-par performances and the apparent lack of cohesion within the team, Jamie Wall writes.
