Foster, Robertson etc
-
@Chester-Draws said in Foster:
One win and suddenly the "learnings" have been learned? You guys crack me up!
Who are you guys? Who has said the above?
Foster has learned nothing. We will be back to players out of position, favourites never dropped, a backline relying on individual brilliance etc.
Did he tell you this? Or are you just speculating?
If he capable of more he would have learned it years -- decades -- ago.
If he cared about results he would have shown a lot more humility after his last couple of years with the Chiefs. And then his recent losses. But no, he thinks all is going sweet! He's utterly deluded.
You think Foster doesn't care about the results & he think's all is going sweet? And then you call HIM deluded?
And the results will remain lackluster as long as he remains anything but pure figurehead.
Ae you suggesting it's ok for him to be head coach as long as he has nothing to do with the team?
I'm fucking grumpy today for a number of reasons and the shit on this thread isn't helping. If you've got something new to offer, then cool. But we are what, 3k posts into recycling the same crap over and over again with people inventing arguments / point of view to fight against.
If you've nothing new to add, fuck off to another thread.
-
As John Hart said today - One of Foster's main mistakes was sticking with Mooar and Plumtree even after the players raised concerns about them following the end of year tour. He strikes me as a conservative, stubborn and loyal guy that needs a bomb under him before he will change.
-
As John Hart said today - One of Foster's main mistakes was sticking with Mooar and Plumtree even after the players raised concerns about them following the end of year tour. He strikes me as a conservative, stubborn and loyal guy that needs a bomb under him before he will change.
Perhaps making him feel comfortable up to the RWC isn't the best strategy then. Maybe Fozz needs an atmosphere of constant concern....
-
Or in summary.
Shit attracts flies.
Flowers attract bees.
Or if anyone actually remembers up to Rennie taking over team, you couldn't pick players from wherever you wanted. They had (or a real high percentage) had to come from your own franchise area. The year Rennie tool over it was open slather, hence the likes of Brodie, Aaron Cruden , Scott Waldren , Hika Reid etc coming in from outside area. I think it was about then that teams dropped the Waikato, Wellington etc from the beginning of franchise names? Not on anyway degenerating Rennie (who I like regardless of his results in Aus) or upping Foster etc, just a real convenient fact that seems to be slipped under carpet at times. Chiefs region weren't absolutely
-
Or in summary.
Shit attracts flies.
Flowers attract bees.
Or if anyone actually remembers up to Rennie taking over team, you couldn't pick players from wherever you wanted. They had (or a real high percentage) had to come from your own franchise area. The year Rennie tool over it was open slather, hence the likes of Brodie, Aaron Cruden , Scott Waldren , Hika Reid etc coming in from outside area. I think it was about then that teams dropped the Waikato, Wellington etc from the beginning of franchise names? Not on anyway degenerating Rennie (who I like regardless of his results in Aus) or upping Foster etc, just a real convenient fact that seems to be slipped under carpet at times. Chiefs region weren't absolutely
I understand your point but I think the grumping at the time was more that even within the franchise boundaries the Foster years (for whatever reason) gave precedence to players signed for Waikato. The BOP Mafia in particular were very vocal about it.
Yes Rennie was able to tap into the resources that other franchises had ignored, particularly the Canes with HB but his did so with a plan and that was to select honest workers over flashy stars, give them an opportunity and set them to work. -
this thread says there are loads more posts since I last logged in, but when I scan over them, it doesnt look like any new ones....
-
@taniwharugby said in Foster:
this thread says there are loads more posts since I last logged in, but when I scan over them, it doesnt look like any new ones....
and it's taken 3k posts for you to realise this?
-
@Crucial says the man with 1k of those posts
-
-
@MajorRage said in Foster:
Foster has learned nothing. We will be back to players out of position, favourites never dropped, a backline relying on individual brilliance etc.
Did he tell you this? Or are you just speculating?
You think after two decades, the one win will change who he is and how he works?
Foster has played players out of their natural position for three years now. He has always had locked in favourites. His game plans have always involved very little structure (the players said as much only a couple of weeks ago). There's no need to speculate. It is who he is.
Changes only occur when forced on him.
I suppose he cares about the results, but I also believe he thinks that the bad ones are not his fault. He certainly refuses to take any substantial blame for them. Losses seem to just wash off him.
He's head coach who is willing to take the applause after a good win, and use it to keep his job, but not happy to take the blame after a bad loss.
Foster's record includes multiple times where his teams have been truly dreadful. But he keeps turning up for the next year. He doesn't seem to link his results to his coaching.
-
a plan and that was to select honest workers over flashy stars, give them an opportunity and set them to work.
I don't even think that necessarily true, the over part at least, if he could get a flashy star he would and he'd use them - Cruden, Messam, SBW, Kahui, TKB, TNW etc. But agree he built the team around them with honest workers and Hawkes Bay power
. -
-
It would be very interesting to find out what Plumtree and Mooar think about the whole thing.
Getting thrown under the bus and having your replacements be held up as saviours of your teflon coated ex boss canât be the most enjoyable experience.
Proof is in the pudding surely. Players said they werenât up to it. Head coach said they werenât up to it. Replacements were.
Iâd lay low if I was them and pretend they were victims of a refocus -
@chchfanatic said in Foster:
@Crucial yes your answer is exactly right.
I also heard that on the Wednesday before test everything was in place, severance pays organized, press conferences, and new players all ready to be put into place.
And then we won with a pretty bloody good performance. Screwed all the plans up.
We can just hope that NZRU have told Razor that post RWC you have the keys, 4 years, do your thing. I don't think we'll win the RWC, whoever is coaching, so it may be a good think that Razor gets a new canvass to work on, and 4 seasons to do it.
-
It would be very interesting to find out what Plumtree and Mooar think about the whole thing.
Getting thrown under the bus and having your replacements be held up as saviours of your teflon coated ex boss canât be the most enjoyable experience.
Foster stood by them and kept them for this year when they got reviewed badly in the past 2 seasons.
-
It would be very interesting to find out what Plumtree and Mooar think about the whole thing.
Getting thrown under the bus and having your replacements be held up as saviours of your teflon coated ex boss canât be the most enjoyable experience.
Proof is in the pudding surely. Players said they werenât up to it. Head coach said they werenât up to it. Replacements were.
Iâd lay low if I was them and pretend they were victims of a refocusAccording to the media. And it gets worse over time. Sacked coaches are unable to defend themselves. All they can do is wait too see how the team goes with this new coaching team. If great their reputation is gone
-
It would be very interesting to find out what Plumtree and Mooar think about the whole thing.
Getting thrown under the bus and having your replacements be held up as saviours of your teflon coated ex boss canât be the most enjoyable experience.
Proof is in the pudding surely. Players said they werenât up to it. Head coach said they werenât up to it. Replacements were.
Iâd lay low if I was them and pretend they were victims of a refocusAnd his record says Foster âisnât up to itâ.
But he survived partly by knifing his assistants. ie shifting the blame onto them.I doubt Mooar or Plumtree thought they werenât up to it. It would be interesting to know what their opinions of the situation are. Very unlikely we find out any time soon though. Maybe it will be in a auto biography one day.
-
It would be very interesting to find out what Plumtree and Mooar think about the whole thing.
Getting thrown under the bus and having your replacements be held up as saviours of your teflon coated ex boss canât be the most enjoyable experience.
Proof is in the pudding surely. Players said they werenât up to it. Head coach said they werenât up to it. Replacements were.
Iâd lay low if I was them and pretend they were victims of a refocusAnd his record says Foster âisnât up to itâ.
But he survived partly by knifing his assistants. ie shifting the blame onto them.I doubt Mooar or Plumtree thought they werenât up to it. It would be interesting to know what their opinions of the situation are. Very unlikely we find out any time soon though. Maybe it will be in a auto biography one day.
Obviously the sample size is small but looking at the Boks game there has already been improvements in the forwards (Plumtree's area) and the backs attack (I believe was Mooar's area?) plus this
Stuff understands the player feedback on Plumtree and Mooar had been consistent for a couple of years, without action from the NZ Rugby board. -
Sacked coaches are unable to defend themselves.
Why not?
Mainly because it would put the spotlight on them and they would lose the argument probably.
I'm not exonerating Foster for anything here, just pointing out that these guys contributed to the problems, the players called it out and the head coach supported them as long as he could without losing his own job. Not sure why they are being painted as victims here.
