So, what HAS Michael Cheika actually done as a coach?
-
<p>If Cheika is going to swear, he needs to learn to 'cough' or rub his nose or something. Standing up in the glass front coaches box and swearing repeatedly on camera is just not professional. And 'passion' is not an excuse. You can be passionate and still be professional - Cheika has been in the past.</p>
-
<br><br><blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Mokey" data-cid="609970" data-time="1472336259"><p>If Cheika is going to swear, he needs to learn to 'cough' or rub his nose or something.</p></blockquote>
<br>
He risks either losing a lung from coughing that much, or a bleeding nose. -
SBW should be get a twitter ban for that. Petty and childish. That shit taints the entire organization. We'd be going nuts here if an Aus player did something similar.<br><br>
Normally, you could blame it on a few Steinlagers (or craft beers if you're MN5)but SBW doesn't have that excuse. -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="kiwiinmelb" data-cid="609897" data-time="1472323865">
<div>
<p>Im beginning to think he is on a similar level to Deans and McKenzie , who were also reasonably good coaches , and it really doesnt matter who coaches them , </p>
<p> </p>
<p>The Allblacks are better because they are better . </p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>Chieka's really having a (our) 1998 in 2016, at present. He'll be pretty desperate to win the next one at home vs the Boks, because if he doesn't the Pumas will smell blood in the water.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>I guess the main problem is that he's not got one Julian Savea to deal with, but a whole lot of guys who are going to be down on confidence.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Reality is that it is bloody hard for a coach to win consistently if his cattle aren't as good and I'd say since 2005 we've simply had better players. The Aussies have closed the gap at times and picked up wins here and there - but, the only team that's genuinely been better than us during that period was Puppet's South African team of 2009. And our coaches didn't really find an answer to that.</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Chris B." data-cid="609984" data-time="1472340129"><p>
Chieka's really having a (our) 1998 in 2016, at present. He'll be pretty desperate to win the next one at home vs the Boks, because if he doesn't the Pumas will smell blood in the water.<br><br>
I guess the main problem is that he's not got one Julian Savea to deal with, but a whole lot of guys who are going to be down on confidence.<br><br>
Reality is that it is bloody hard for a coach to win consistently if his cattle aren't as good and I'd say since 2005 we've simply had better players. The Aussies have closed the gap at times and picked up wins here and there - but, the only team that's genuinely been better than us during that period was Puppet's South African team of 2009. And our coaches didn't really find an answer to that.</p></blockquote>
<br>
Can't bold because im on mobile but just on the last line. IMO the way that Bok team beat us forced us into a rethink in the back three. Rather than playing Sivi and Rok we started to play the 2x Fullback model with a 'power' winger on the left. That was a big part of us winning in 2011 and since so would say they did come up with a way to answer it. -
<p>Chieka is becoming a bit of stereotype of the sore loser right now, kinda like my 10 year old who thinks its always someone elses fault.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Then there is his conspiracy theories, think he might have an ally on TSF, and not any of our Aussie posters....</p>
<p> </p>
<p><a data-ipb='nomediaparse' href='http://www.nzherald.co.nz/rugby/news/article.cfm?c_id=80&objectid=11701172'>http://www.nzherald.co.nz/rugby/news/article.cfm?c_id=80&objectid=11701172</a></p>
<p> </p>
<p>and the ref doesnt like us</p>
<p> </p>
<p><a data-ipb='nomediaparse' href='http://www.nzherald.co.nz/sport/news/article.cfm?c_id=4&objectid=11701130'>http://www.nzherald.co.nz/sport/news/article.cfm?c_id=4&objectid=11701130</a></p>
<p> </p>
<p>I used to be a huge fan of Moore, but since he became captain he a whiney little bitch and obviously the refs get sick of the way he speaks to them too...maybe Gregan needs to give hm lessons on ref management.</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="pukunui" data-cid="609987" data-time="1472341032">
<div>
<p>Can't bold because im on mobile but just on the last line. IMO the way that Bok team beat us forced us into a rethink in the back three. Rather than playing Sivi and Rok we started to play the 2x Fullback model with a 'power' winger on the left. That was a big part of us winning in 2011 and since so would say they did come up with a way to answer it.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>Yeah - I guess they did eventually. But, a significant part of the answer was finding better cattle to play under the new (ELV) rules.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>It was interesting though that they spent a season being out-coached by Puppet (who seemed to me to be about the least competent Tri-Nations coach of all time) and not finding the answers.</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="NTA" data-cid="609950" data-time="1472333548"><p>Ah... No. SBW's tweet was that of a spoiled child.<br><br>Pichot and the rest of the committee saw a team that ..make a RWC final, through a mixture of attack (e.g. England being crap), defence (e.g. Wales being exhausted), and resolve (choosing the right ref and relying on Scotland making a huge tactical blunder)...</p></blockquote>Fixed.
-
Quibbling about the result is immaterial, he won the TRC and got to the final. It's a much deeper discussion to determine worth outside the bounce of the ball.
-
<p>Cheika can fuck off. He only got out the 1/4 finals because the ref made a mistake in Australia's favour. How would his record look if the right call had been made on that day?</p>
<p>He is a whiny ass clown. Looks more like a poster from a forum than an international coach.</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Crucial" data-cid="609859" data-time="1472298978">
<div>
<p>Maybe his team would play more professionally and he and his team would get more respect from officials of he presented himself more professionally. The 'one of the boys' look of the sloppy suit and unshaven face might go down well among the uncouth ockers but I would think there is some way it contributes to how seriously others take him.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="NTA" data-cid="609863" data-time="1472299320">
<div>
<p>Please tell me you're not serious. </p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Crucial" data-cid="609865" data-time="1472299516">
<div>
<p>I am. I'm not saying it is right but presenting an unprofessional image then moaning about not being treated professionally just seems stupid. FFS the guy is in a well paid important job and appears as a 'face' of the game. I wouldn't turn up at work looking like he does to a press conference and I'm certainly no suit and tie guy.</p>
<p>Image creates impressions on people whether right or wrong.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p><span style="font-family:verdana, sans-serif;"><span style="font-size:10pt;">I dunno – I would have thought Michael Cheika had won wide acclaim for that. I imagine most of the young sprogs around here - Nepia, Rancid Schnitzel, booboo, Rembrandt, nostrildamus and so on <em>(not jegga – I think he probably wears steel caps, operates a D12 Caterpillar, drinks schooners and smokes Rothmans)</em> spend a good deal of time trying ever so hard to appear as sultry and as desirable as David de Lautour, shaving but not shaving, spiking with gel, moisturising and manicuring as is the fashion for all you skinny young <strike>poo..</strike> chappies these days.</span></span></p>
<p> </p>
<p><span style="font-family:verdana, sans-serif;"><span style="font-size:10pt;">The unstructured I'm-a-celebrated-architect-living-on-the-Rue-de-Tug suit look somehow transmogrified into a jacket that is too short, slim cut duds around the waist and hips (to better display your tackle - blokes like me did alright equipped with personality only) trouser legs you cannot get your foot through, for Lord knows what reasons, and silly looking loooong pointy toed shoes to help make pulling your strides on easier, but I digress.</span></span></p>
<p> </p>
<p><span style="font-family:verdana, sans-serif;"><span style="font-size:10pt;">Anyway, yers can all go and gets tuft! Michael Cheika is able to do what needs to be done so long as he is allowed five years to do it (and adequate personal protection to evade the ARU appointed assassins). He has a pedigree of success and he is a tough minded bugger - I have given my reasons here previously. It isn't his fault he has no choice but to saddle up donkeys for the first couple of years.</span></span></p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Mick Gold Coast QLD" data-cid="610016" data-time="1472348048"><p><span style="font-family:verdana;"><span style="font-size:10px;">I dunno – I would have thought Michael Cheika had won wide acclaim for that. I imagine most of the young sprogs around here - Nepia, Rancid Schnitzel, booboo, Rembrandt, nostrildamus and so on <em>(not jegga – I think he probably wears steel caps, operates a D12 Caterpillar, drinks schooners and smokes Rothmans)</em> spend a good deal of time trying ever so hard to appear as sultry and as desirable as David de Lautour, shaving but not shaving, spiking with gel, moisturising and manicuring as is the fashion for all you skinny young <del>poo..</del> chappies these days.</span></span><br><br><span style="font-family:verdana;"><span style="font-size:10px;">The unstructured I'm-a-celebrated-architect-living-on-the-Rue-de-Tug suit look somehow transmogrified into a jacket that is too short, slim cut duds around the waist and hips (to better display your tackle - blokes like me did alright equipped with personality only) trouser legs you cannot get your foot through, for Lord knows what reasons, and silly looking loooong pointy toed shoes to help make pulling your strides on easier, but I digress.</span></span><br><br><span style="font-family:verdana;"><span style="font-size:10px;">Anyway, yers can all go and gets tuft! Michael Cheika is able to do what needs to be done so long as he is allowed five years to do it (and adequate personal protection to evade the ARU appointed assassins). He has a pedigree of success and he is a tough minded bugger - I have given my reasons here previously. It isn't his fault he has no choice but to saddle up donkeys for the first couple of years.</span></span></p></blockquote>
<br>
Don't include me with those metrosexuals Mick. My wardrobe is 90% ruggers and Kmart. The remainder consists of labels my long suffering wife bought me that I never wear because I don't iron. I have however taken a liking to the 7 dollar shirts at the new H&M nearby. European...fancy!<br><br>
I other words, Id agree that Cheika looking like a dishevelled piece of shit shouldn't have any bearing on his ability as coach. Mark Hammett always looked a million dollars and he was crap. -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="jegga" data-cid="610015" data-time="1472347970"><p>Who to believe? Hanson says he never met Poite before the game, Krusty the Koach says he did .</p></blockquote>
Clearly Chieka will have to release the recording of the meeting. -
<p>Worth noting too that super coach cheik was on a final final last super serious warning for abusing officials last year. If the IRB or SANZAAR had any balls he would have been suspended after he broke his first final warning.<br>
When you have a history with refs like he has (and moore has) its a bit rich to go complaining about not getting any respect.</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="pukunui" data-cid="610030" data-time="1472350574">
<div>
<p>Worth noting too that super coach cheik was on a final final last super serious watning for abusing officials last year. If the IRB or SANZAAR had any balls he would have been suspended after he broke his first final warning.<br>
When you have a history with refs like he has (and moore has) its a bit rich to go complaining about not getting any respect.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>I think this was the most interesting thing about his Coach of the Year award. Clearly the selection panel wasn't able to parse the results of a shortened RWC year season correctly (either a Hansen or Jones win would have held up) - but the fact the guy was still either serving a suspended sentence or was on a "final warning" for intimidating and abusing referees while winning the once prestigious award - it is a little weird.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Obviously sportsmanship and referee abuse isn't something Pichot and co give much thought to.</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Mick Gold Coast QLD" data-cid="610016" data-time="1472348048"><p><span style="font-family:verdana, sans-serif;"><span style="font-size:10px;">I dunno – I would have thought Michael Cheika had won wide acclaim for that. I imagine most of the young sprogs around here - Nepia, Rancid Schnitzel, booboo, Rembrandt, nostrildamus and so on <em>(not jegga – I think he probably wears steel caps, operates a D12 Caterpillar, drinks schooners and smokes Rothmans)</em> spend a good deal of time trying ever so hard to appear as sultry and as desirable as David de Lautour, shaving but not shaving, spiking with gel, moisturising and manicuring as is the fashion for all you skinny young <strike>poo..</strike> chappies these days.</span></span><br> <br><span style="font-family:verdana, sans-serif;"><span style="font-size:10px;">The unstructured I'm-a-celebrated-architect-living-on-the-Rue-de-Tug suit look somehow transmogrified into a jacket that is too short, slim cut duds around the waist and hips (to better display your tackle - blokes like me did alright equipped with personality only) trouser legs you cannot get your foot through, for Lord knows what reasons, and silly looking loooong pointy toed shoes to help make pulling your strides on easier, but I digress.</span></span><br> <br><span style="font-family:verdana, sans-serif;"><span style="font-size:10px;">Anyway, yers can all go and gets tuft! Michael Cheika is able to do what needs to be done so long as he is allowed five years to do it (and adequate personal protection to evade the ARU appointed assassins). He has a pedigree of success and he is a tough minded bugger - I have given my reasons here previously. It isn't his fault he has no choice but to saddle up donkeys for the first couple of years.</span></span></p></blockquote><br>Hang on did I say Cheika was a geriatric dishevelled bogan?<br>And when did I get to be a good looking youthful metrosexual? Let alone architect.<br>Where I really protest is Cheika's PEDIGREE OF SUCCESS.<br>Not recently mate.
