Foster, Robertson etc
-
@Paekakboyz said in Foster:
Not to say I dismiss what the players are saying, or expect them to only praise and support Fozzie. The right way to express concerns is in private - but we (quite rightly) don't see that stuff aired.
That would come out in the player reviews, which based on what has been made public, have not been critical of Foster unlike some of his (former) assistants.
-
@Billy-Tell said in Foster:
They have 3 options
- fire foster
- confirm foster for RC then another review
- keep foster
I find it hard to get excited about yesterday as I can’t convince myself the corner is turned. More think it’s a false dawn.
There should be a simple message to Ian Foster.
-
Did Robinson not scenario plan the last fortnight?
Win both: Fozzy has to stay and mostly everyone would agree that was fair.
Lose both badly: Fozzy gots to go.
Anything in between (1-1, game drawn, play great but lose 2 thrillers, players sent off):
Do nothing. Wait to see if the ABs avoid disaster vs Pumas and retain Bledisloe.
Robinson is obviously a terrible communicator and has no vision and is completely lacking in self awareness. Not great traits for a CEO.
-
@game_film said in Foster:
Did Robinson not scenario plan the last fortnight?
Win both: Fozzy has to stay and mostly everyone would agree that was fair.
Lose both badly: Fozzy gots to go.
Anything in between (1-1, game drawn, play great but lose 2 thrillers, players sent off):
Do nothing. Wait to see if the ABs avoid disaster vs Pumas and retain Bledisloe.
Robinson is obviously a terrible communicator and has no vision and is completely lacking in self awareness. Not great traits for a CEO.
Plan? Wait what?
-
@Bovidae but would NZR let that dirty laundry out? They seem to try and keep a positive spin aka 'due diligence' (fuck, I really dislike their mealy mouthed corp speak guff) going at every layer. It'd be very easy for them to say things were positive even if there was some pointed criticism of Foster. Again, another situation where the assistant coaches are treated very differently to the big cheese.
-
I don’t think the players views have any significant weight in all this. Unless there is a Brumbies like coup/revolt happening… but this is a national team and no one is bigger than the jersey and all that…
The players are not making the decision. Player reviews are all part of the engagement strategy of the NZRU as an organisation. The way I look at it, the players didn’t have a say in the appointment, so why would their views matter now.
Comments from players do certainly add colour to it all and give journos and us fans plenty to discuss.
-
All I am saying is that the feedback from the player reviews would be known to Robinson, Lendrum and the board so would inform their decision regardless of what the players may be saying publicly.
-
The Breakdown panel are basically ripping Robinson and the rest of the board for their lack of clarity over Foster's future, and their incompetence over club rugby, 7s, the BFs, and Silverlake. I don't disagree with them. Foster may not be the man for the job. But the pressure Robinson has put him under with all of his nothing talk, and 3 reviews within 9 months including 2 in a couple of months, the CEO should have the stones to fire him or back him
-
The Breakdown panel are basically ripping Robinson and the rest of the board for their lack of clarity over Foster's future, and their incompetence over club rugby, 7s, the BFs, and Silverlake. I don't disagree with them. Foster may not be the man for the job. But the pressure Robinson has put him under with all of his nothing talk, and 3 reviews within 9 months including 2 in a couple of months, the CEO should have the stones to fire him or back him
Board decision, not CEO, he can make recommendations, but that's it
-
@Paekakboyz said in Foster:
No further comment till that time. FFS what a waste of time.
edit - Then he throws it to the board.
Robinson confirms that any discussions on Ian Foster's future will include the New Zealand Rugby board. The timing on those discussions is still yet to be determined. “The appointment of the coach is the board's responsibility, management provides insight, we will provide that to them.”Does the board really decide? Is that normal? I thought these sorts of boards are usually advisory?
Or is he deflecting responsibility?
Our Board
Our Board is charged with setting strategy, direction and policy for New Zealand Rugby, and is ultimately responsible for the decisions and actions of NZR Management and Staff.
Our Board is charged with setting strategy, direction and policy for New Zealand Rugby, and is ultimately responsible for the decisions and actions of NZR Management and Staff. Many of the decisions concerning New Zealand's national teams, domestic competitions, financial management and rugby traditions can only be made by a vote of the Board.Oh ok then. Marketing and accounting-they just don't seem replete with coaching//high performance experience?
https://www.nzrugby.co.nz/about-nzr/governance/our-board/ -
Any decision next week other than retention would be extremely poor management. Which is to admit NZRU may do it.
Whatever one thinks about things that performance tells us the changing shed is still on board.
If it were me, I'd ask why it took till second test to click that back to basics was necessary.
And then set target of three wins from four in rest of RC, failing which changes would be made.
That would mean Bledisloe retained, and likely another RC.
Last year's EOYT failures suggest the strategy for touring also needs a rethink, but that can wait.
-
The problem as I see it is that he should have been sacked before the RC started.
To be honest he should have been launched after the EOYT.
and then the real elephant in the room is he should have never got the gig in the first place.
-
The problem as I see it is that he should have been sacked before the RC started.
To be honest he should have been launched after the EOYT.
and then the real elephant in the room is he should have never got the gig in the first place.
Be that as it may, we have to play the cards as they fall.
So long as Joe Schmidt has large involvement in selection and game plan I can live with the status quo.
-
The problem as I see it is that he should have been sacked before the RC started.
Yep, but that ship has sailed and now NZR finds itself in a real mess.
Do they sack him next week and give any new coach a potential changing room problem as the players think they have turned the corner & are obviously behind Foster? Or do they keep him on until the RC or EOYT and then sack him giving any new coach minimal time to prepare for RWC2023?
You'd think NZR have thought this thru but I'm not convinced. Maybe the best way forward is Foster decides or is persuaded to stand down himself and/or take an assistant role. I might think he should be replaced, but he comes across to me as a pretty decent bloke who'd want to do the right thing.
And one thing's for sure, any new coach is going to have a pretty tough time initially as people will expect results. Doubt if that's been thought thru either.
-
Could a new co coach scenario be a possibility
-
@ACT-Crusader said in Foster:
I don’t think the players views have any significant weight in all this. Unless there is a Brumbies like coup/revolt happening… but this is a national team and no one is bigger than the jersey and all that…
The players are not making the decision. Player reviews are all part of the engagement strategy of the NZRU as an organisation. The way I look at it, the players didn’t have a say in the appointment, so why would their views matter now.
Comments from players do certainly add colour to it all and give journos and us fans plenty to discuss.
The main relevance of the players views at the moment is with respect to how they might feel and then perform if Foster is replaced - if Ardie has Fozzies back 100% then how is he going to feel and perform when Razor takes over
-
@BerniesCorner said in Foster:
Could a new co coach scenario be a possibility
I hope not. Wylie-Hart was a fiasco.
