Foster, Robertson etc
-
@canefan said in Foster must go:
@Chris said in Foster must go:
@canefan said in Foster must go:
@Chris said in Foster must go:
@Victor-Meldrew said in Foster must go:
@Chris said in Foster must go:
Mate your post to me sounds like another chance to put down Robertson.
No, I'm commenting on the article which @mency kindly posted which pushes the idea that all the problems can be fixed at a stroke by signing a contract with one person. Because that is what the article is saying.
Sure didn't have a good 2016 U/20 but that can be down to who comes through in what year.He won it in 2015 one of the 2 years he coached the u/20s.
Then it would have been better if the author had made it clear Robinson has a 50% success rate at international level, don't you think?
As for addressing other issues besides coaching yep agree, but starting with a decent coach is a step forward hopefully the rest will follow
A new coach is part of the solution but to just hopefully think the rest will simply follow and deeper problems don't need looking at just doesn't cut it in the real world. I would suggest it's that type of thinking which has got us into the mess we're in.
I said hopefully will follow.
It’s better than this shit show carrying on.If we stay this course more pain will surely follow. I'm ready to gamble
Yep me too
And I'm no Razor fan boy. But his record commands respect. Seems like a player's coach
It doesn't have to be Razor just clear out this clown show.
-
@Chris said in Foster must go:
@canefan said in Foster must go:
@Chris said in Foster must go:
@canefan said in Foster must go:
@Chris said in Foster must go:
@Victor-Meldrew said in Foster must go:
@Chris said in Foster must go:
Mate your post to me sounds like another chance to put down Robertson.
No, I'm commenting on the article which @mency kindly posted which pushes the idea that all the problems can be fixed at a stroke by signing a contract with one person. Because that is what the article is saying.
Sure didn't have a good 2016 U/20 but that can be down to who comes through in what year.He won it in 2015 one of the 2 years he coached the u/20s.
Then it would have been better if the author had made it clear Robinson has a 50% success rate at international level, don't you think?
As for addressing other issues besides coaching yep agree, but starting with a decent coach is a step forward hopefully the rest will follow
A new coach is part of the solution but to just hopefully think the rest will simply follow and deeper problems don't need looking at just doesn't cut it in the real world. I would suggest it's that type of thinking which has got us into the mess we're in.
I said hopefully will follow.
It’s better than this shit show carrying on.If we stay this course more pain will surely follow. I'm ready to gamble
Yep me too
And I'm no Razor fan boy. But his record commands respect. Seems like a player's coach
It doesn't have to be Razor just clear out this clown show.
He deserves the opportunity. His longterm future in the job should not be based purely on results from this year. I just need to see systemic improvement
-
-
@chimoaus said in Foster must go:
In terms of players, how many Irish players would you have picked in a combined 15 pre series? They play so well as a unit they get the most out of the stock they have.
As I mentioned the Irish team is essentially Leinster so they play together all year. That has to be an advantage to Farrell and co.
-
@chimoaus said in Foster must go:
In terms of players, how many Irish players would you have picked in a combined 15 pre series? They play so well as a unit they get the most out of the stock they have. We should be able to do the same.
Goldie was on the news tonight. He believes we still have rugby players that are right up with the best in the world. He isnt far off. But we are not employing them effectively. We just need a coach who can succeed where Foster is failing. To organise them so they can make use of their individual abilities
-
@Bovidae said in Foster must go:
@chimoaus said in Foster must go:
In terms of players, how many Irish players would you have picked in a combined 15 pre series? They play so well as a unit they get the most out of the stock they have.
As I mentioned the Irish team is essentially Leinster so they play together all year. That has to be an advantage to Farrell and co.
That level of understanding and anticipation is a massive bonus. Combinations matter.
-
@Chris said in Foster must go:
I said hopefully will follow.
You did. And that's what you think and that's fine.
I don't want to hopefully think things will get better - I want to feel confident they will get better and there's a risk that just appointing a new coach could be a band-aid and the NZ rugby public deserve a bit more than that. We need NZR to take wider look at the problems which got us into the current mess and identify and fix the issues.
-
@Victor-Meldrew said in Foster must go:
@Chris said in Foster must go:
I said hopefully will follow.
You did. And that's what you think and that's fine.
I don't want to hopefully think things will get better - I want to feel confident they will get better and there's a risk that just appointing a new coach could be a band-aid and the NZ rugby public deserve a bit more than that. We need NZR to take wider look at the problems which got us into the current mess and identify and fix the issues.
I don’t disagree new coach and a massive review of everything rugby in NZ would be what I want to see as well.
-
@Victor-Meldrew said in Foster must go:
No, the problems go much deeper than just the Coaching set-up and they need addressing as well.
What are those problems?
We know Foster is definitely one, but what are the others? -
@Frank said in Foster must go:
@Victor-Meldrew said in Foster must go:
No, the problems go much deeper than just the Coaching set-up and they need addressing as well.
What are those problems?
One example: Our two premier locks are 31 & 33 and nearing the end of their shelf-life. We've had nearly 10 years to identify succession options and it's been a known problem since 2016. Who do we have?
Now either the player pool in NZ is better and deeper than anywhere in the world and coaching teams haven't picked the right players for the last 6 years, or we've been deluding ourselves and our pool of cattle ain't that great. Who has analysed that and put fixes in place all those years ago? Did anyone?
We know Foster is definitely one, but what are the others?
I'm not sure Foster is the main problem as we've been on a downward trend since 2016, but he ain't the man to fix the problems he can fix either.
-
@Victor-Meldrew said in Foster must go:
@Frank said in Foster must go:
@Victor-Meldrew said in Foster must go:
No, the problems go much deeper than just the Coaching set-up and they need addressing as well.
What are those problems?
One example: Our two premier locks are 31 & 33 and nearing the end of their shelf-life. We've had 10+ years to identify succession options and it's been a known problem since 2016. Who do we have?
Now either the player pool in NZ is better and deeper than anywhere in the world and coaching teams haven't picked the right players for the last 6 years, or we've been deluding ourselves and our pool of cattle ain't that great. Who has analysed that and put fixes in place all those years ago? Did anyone?
We know Foster is definitely one, but what are the others?
I'm not sure Foster is the main problem as we've been on a downward trend since 2016, but he ain't the man to fix the problems he can fix either.
Shag became increasingly unable to usher in young talent as he went on. Off the top of my head, Luatua was one guy who we hoped would be good, but he left. BBBR and Whitelock are in the top drawer of locks to play for the ABs. Like so many other positions we have struggled to find immediate replacements. I think in part this is also a problem when you get such longevity from great players, they block the way for a whole generation of young players who then leave
-
@Higgins said in Foster must go:
@NTA Partially right in your observations but we at least can now acknowledge and (almost) accept when we get beaten by better teams on the day eg England tonking the ABs in the last World Cup. What sticks in the craw more than anything is the continual usage of gameplans that have been proven not to work. In times past if things weren't working you had astute rugby brains (Graham Mourie just as one example) on the field that could see that and changed things accordingly. Nowadays Captains seem to rely solely on the instructions coming down via radio from the coaches box and conveyed by the water runners.
Surely players on the field have better "feeling" on how opposition players and tactics are working and can sense minute things like marginal dropping off in speed levels of players as they every so slightly tire much better than the bank of computers that coaches seem to place 100% faith in can ever do. Ditto for members of their own team.Out of interest in and around what you've said (which I agree with), I'll quote Ben Darwin again on this:
-
@NTA said in Foster must go:
@Higgins said in Foster must go:
@NTA Partially right in your observations but we at least can now acknowledge and (almost) accept when we get beaten by better teams on the day eg England tonking the ABs in the last World Cup. What sticks in the craw more than anything is the continual usage of gameplans that have been proven not to work. In times past if things weren't working you had astute rugby brains (Graham Mourie just as one example) on the field that could see that and changed things accordingly. Nowadays Captains seem to rely solely on the instructions coming down via radio from the coaches box and conveyed by the water runners.
Surely players on the field have better "feeling" on how opposition players and tactics are working and can sense minute things like marginal dropping off in speed levels of players as they every so slightly tire much better than the bank of computers that coaches seem to place 100% faith in can ever do. Ditto for members of their own team.Out of interest in and around what you've said (which I agree with), I'll quote Ben Darwin again on this:
If the boys are ignoring Fozz then someone has to go. Easier to get rid of the coach than all the players
-
@canefan said in Foster must go:
@Victor-Meldrew said in Foster must go:
@Frank said in Foster must go:
@Victor-Meldrew said in Foster must go:
No, the problems go much deeper than just the Coaching set-up and they need addressing as well.
What are those problems?
One example: Our two premier locks are 31 & 33 and nearing the end of their shelf-life. We've had 10+ years to identify succession options and it's been a known problem since 2016. Who do we have?
Now either the player pool in NZ is better and deeper than anywhere in the world and coaching teams haven't picked the right players for the last 6 years, or we've been deluding ourselves and our pool of cattle ain't that great. Who has analysed that and put fixes in place all those years ago? Did anyone?
We know Foster is definitely one, but what are the others?
I'm not sure Foster is the main problem as we've been on a downward trend since 2016, but he ain't the man to fix the problems he can fix either.
Shag became increasingly unable to usher in young talent as he went on. Off the top of my head, Luatua was one guy who we hoped would be good, but he left. BBBR and Whitelock are in the top drawer of locks to play for the ABs. Like so many other positions we have struggled to find immediate replacements. I think in part this is also a problem when you get such longevity from great players, they block the way for a whole generation of young players who then leave
Always think Hansen was on a wing and a prayer to get a RWC2019 win and development was not his priority.
And ironically, though we may bemoan his not selecting our favourite players, Foster has at least tried to address this. Balance aside, our 6/7/8 options are strong and he deserves credit for that.
-
@Victor-Meldrew said in Foster must go:
@canefan said in Foster must go:
@Victor-Meldrew said in Foster must go:
@Frank said in Foster must go:
@Victor-Meldrew said in Foster must go:
No, the problems go much deeper than just the Coaching set-up and they need addressing as well.
What are those problems?
One example: Our two premier locks are 31 & 33 and nearing the end of their shelf-life. We've had 10+ years to identify succession options and it's been a known problem since 2016. Who do we have?
Now either the player pool in NZ is better and deeper than anywhere in the world and coaching teams haven't picked the right players for the last 6 years, or we've been deluding ourselves and our pool of cattle ain't that great. Who has analysed that and put fixes in place all those years ago? Did anyone?
We know Foster is definitely one, but what are the others?
I'm not sure Foster is the main problem as we've been on a downward trend since 2016, but he ain't the man to fix the problems he can fix either.
Shag became increasingly unable to usher in young talent as he went on. Off the top of my head, Luatua was one guy who we hoped would be good, but he left. BBBR and Whitelock are in the top drawer of locks to play for the ABs. Like so many other positions we have struggled to find immediate replacements. I think in part this is also a problem when you get such longevity from great players, they block the way for a whole generation of young players who then leave
Always think Hansen was on a wing and a prayer to get a RWC2019 win and development was not his priority.
And ironically, though we may bemoan his not selecting our favourite players, Foster has at least tried to address this. Balance aside, our 6/7/8 options are strong and he deserves credit for that.
Fair call. He just doesn't seem to have to ability to knit them into a cohesive unit with a single minded plan
-
@Higgins said in Foster must go:
What sticks in the craw more than anything is the continual usage of gameplans that have been proven not to work. In times past if things weren't working you had astute rugby brains (Graham Mourie just as one example) on the field that could see that and changed things accordingly. Nowadays Captains seem to rely solely on the instructions coming down via radio from the coaches box and conveyed by the water runners.
Surely players on the field have better "feeling" on how opposition players and tactics are working and can sense minute things like marginal dropping off in speed levelsWe've been blessed with smart rugby brains in the last decade but poss. not so much now. The likes of Ritchie, Conrad, Ma'a etc stood out as keen students of the game but not so much now. Whether it's the team culture or coaching, who knows?
-
@MrDenmore in fairness I thought Cane looked spent about 10 minutes before he was subbed!
-
@Victor-Meldrew said in Foster must go:
So who in NZR was responsible for spotting this, didn't notice, express concerns and help fix the lack of succession planning in key positions?
Succession planning is fucking hard when it is tougher to get out of the team than into it - that was the going statement for the Baggy Greens under Steve Waugh. The ABs have generally been good with blooding young players but incumbency is a hard thing to shake when the whole squad is performing well.
Did they have a process in place to identify and action issues like this? If not then why?
Look at it another way: while you were still barred up from winning 2 x RWC in a row, and 80%+ of your Test matches, and retaining the Bledisloe and Trinations, did anyone give a fuck?
I think a lot of the RWC2019 SF loss was written off as "England bashed us good" instead of "How does our game plan stop us getting bashed in future?" and really, that wasn't Hansen's issue to solve as he wandered off because you almost never played England and never got the other 6N in any sort of form.
Well, Ireland have form now, and you're right in asking those questions. Leading the pack by a distance is tortoise-and-hare stuff sometimes. Again: Wallabies 98-2002 was a ticking time bomb when things started falling apart.
-
@antipodean said in Foster must go:
@Bovidae said in Foster must go:
@chimoaus said in Foster must go:
In terms of players, how many Irish players would you have picked in a combined 15 pre series? They play so well as a unit they get the most out of the stock they have.
As I mentioned the Irish team is essentially Leinster so they play together all year. That has to be an advantage to Farrell and co.
That level of understanding and anticipation is a massive bonus. Combinations matter.
I'll point to the stuff Ben Darwin's company is producing in data terms.
He even said that a change in shirt colour has a statistical effect on teams. Look at England in red v the Barbarians - muddied a little by the different combinations, but in regular leagues it is also a factor, apparently.
In pro sport, every little edge matters.
-
In his performance review, foster identified scoring more points than the opposition as the key to victory. « I think we need to adapt a bit ».
