Foster, Robertson etc
-
@PecoTrain said in Foster must go:
If we have little to no confidence in Foster developing the team, why leave him in-place to leave a mess for his successor when the chances of RWC are largely independent of the current coaching team? At worst we start to move forward again...
Genuine question. If Foster is replaced - and I think he should be - and the new coach drops more than one game in the TRC and/or loses a game on the EOYT (more than possible the way England, Wales & Scotland are playing at the moment), he will have done no better, or possibly worse, than Foster in 2021.
What do we do then? Do we sack the new coach and look for another to turn things around in time for Sept 2023?
-
@Victor-Meldrew said in Foster must go:
@PecoTrain said in Foster must go:
If we have little to no confidence in Foster developing the team, why leave him in-place to leave a mess for his successor when the chances of RWC are largely independent of the current coaching team? At worst we start to move forward again...
Genuine question. If Foster is replaced - and I think he should be - and the new coach drops more than one game in the TRC and/or loses a game on the EOYT (more than possible the way England, Wales & Scotland are playing at the moment), he will have done no better, or possibly worse, than Foster in 2021.
What do we do then? Do we sack the new coach and look for another to turn things around in time for Sept 2023?
Obviously not. The new coach’s mandate should be to come in and arrest the current slide and try get this current crop of players to the stage where they don’t embarrass themselves at the World Cup next year. Whoever comes in will have I imagine quite a bit of goodwill for volunteering to take on the difficult task of turning around this shitshow, and probably because he will have shown some coaching ability in the past so people will immediately believe he can actually turn things around (and hopefully so do the players). The damage to this team may be irreparable and impossible to turn around, but we may as well try, right?
-
@Victor-Meldrew progress for the new coach won't just be winning, but clarity around selections, game plans and direction. There may be short term losses, but there has to be hope for the future.
You raise a really good point though, the issue is deeper than just the coach. But the coach has appeared to be a significant part of the issue.
-
@junior said in Foster must go:
@Victor-Meldrew said in Foster must go:
@PecoTrain said in Foster must go:
If we have little to no confidence in Foster developing the team, why leave him in-place to leave a mess for his successor when the chances of RWC are largely independent of the current coaching team? At worst we start to move forward again...
Genuine question. If Foster is replaced - and I think he should be - and the new coach drops more than one game in the TRC and/or loses a game on the EOYT (more than possible the way England, Wales & Scotland are playing at the moment), he will have done no better, or possibly worse, than Foster in 2021.
What do we do then? Do we sack the new coach and look for another to turn things around in time for Sept 2023?
Obviously not. The new coach’s mandate should be to come in and arrest the current slide and try get this current crop of players to the stage where they don’t embarrass themselves at the World Cup next year. Whoever comes in will have I imagine quite a bit of goodwill for volunteering to take on the difficult task of turning around this shitshow, and probably because he will have shown some coaching ability in the past so people will immediately believe he can actually turn things around (and hopefully so do the players). The damage to this team may be irreparable and impossible to turn around, but we may as well try, right?
So if it turns out the new bloke's not a great success and doesn't do any better than Foster? What do we do then?
Don't think it's viable to just accept that level of performance, keep the new bloke in place, blame it all on Foster and effectively shrug our shoulders and say "at least we tried". Need a bit more planning than that surely.
-
@Victor-Meldrew said in Foster must go:
@junior said in Foster must go:
@Victor-Meldrew said in Foster must go:
@PecoTrain said in Foster must go:
If we have little to no confidence in Foster developing the team, why leave him in-place to leave a mess for his successor when the chances of RWC are largely independent of the current coaching team? At worst we start to move forward again...
Genuine question. If Foster is replaced - and I think he should be - and the new coach drops more than one game in the TRC and/or loses a game on the EOYT (more than possible the way England, Wales & Scotland are playing at the moment), he will have done no better, or possibly worse, than Foster in 2021.
What do we do then? Do we sack the new coach and look for another to turn things around in time for Sept 2023?
Obviously not. The new coach’s mandate should be to come in and arrest the current slide and try get this current crop of players to the stage where they don’t embarrass themselves at the World Cup next year. Whoever comes in will have I imagine quite a bit of goodwill for volunteering to take on the difficult task of turning around this shitshow, and probably because he will have shown some coaching ability in the past so people will immediately believe he can actually turn things around (and hopefully so do the players). The damage to this team may be irreparable and impossible to turn around, but we may as well try, right?
So if it turns out the new bloke's not a great success and doesn't do any better than Foster? What do we do then?
Don't think it's viable to just accept that level of performance, keep the new bloke in place, blame it all on Foster and effectively shrug our shoulders and say "at least we tried". Need a bit more planning than that surely.
Human sacrifices?
-
@nzzp said in Foster must go:
@Victor-Meldrew progress for the new coach won't just be winning, but clarity around selections, game plans and direction. There may be short term losses, but there has to be hope for the future.
You raise a really good point though, the issue is deeper than just the coach. But the coach has appeared to be a significant part of the issue.
My point is if/when we dump Foster we have to expect much more than just visibility of new game plan and getting more information at pressers on selection thinking.
Sure, I'll give a loss or two if that means progress, but I'd want some pretty rapid progress after 2-3 games if I were NZR and have some contingency plans on re-appointment in place if it doesn't happen. Hope is all well and good, but let's not have another Foster-like fiasco.
-
@stodders said in Foster must go:
@Victor-Meldrew said in Foster must go:
@junior said in Foster must go:
@Victor-Meldrew said in Foster must go:
@PecoTrain said in Foster must go:
If we have little to no confidence in Foster developing the team, why leave him in-place to leave a mess for his successor when the chances of RWC are largely independent of the current coaching team? At worst we start to move forward again...
Genuine question. If Foster is replaced - and I think he should be - and the new coach drops more than one game in the TRC and/or loses a game on the EOYT (more than possible the way England, Wales & Scotland are playing at the moment), he will have done no better, or possibly worse, than Foster in 2021.
What do we do then? Do we sack the new coach and look for another to turn things around in time for Sept 2023?
Obviously not. The new coach’s mandate should be to come in and arrest the current slide and try get this current crop of players to the stage where they don’t embarrass themselves at the World Cup next year. Whoever comes in will have I imagine quite a bit of goodwill for volunteering to take on the difficult task of turning around this shitshow, and probably because he will have shown some coaching ability in the past so people will immediately believe he can actually turn things around (and hopefully so do the players). The damage to this team may be irreparable and impossible to turn around, but we may as well try, right?
So if it turns out the new bloke's not a great success and doesn't do any better than Foster? What do we do then?
Don't think it's viable to just accept that level of performance, keep the new bloke in place, blame it all on Foster and effectively shrug our shoulders and say "at least we tried". Need a bit more planning than that surely.
Human sacrifices?
Well, pitch-forks and flaming torches are (rightly) all the rage right now....
-
Anybody wonder if Foster doubts himself or does he really believe he is capable of turning things around?
Must be very hard to coach effectively if you think everyone thinks you are an idiot.
I imagine he must be low on self confidence and it must be a very hard headspace to be in which surely does not help things.
When things go wrong people start pointing fingers and you wonder what the locker room chat is among players, coaches etc re Foster.
-
@Victor-Meldrew said in Foster must go:
@PecoTrain said in Foster must go:
If we have little to no confidence in Foster developing the team, why leave him in-place to leave a mess for his successor when the chances of RWC are largely independent of the current coaching team? At worst we start to move forward again...
Genuine question. If Foster is replaced - and I think he should be - and the new coach drops more than one game in the TRC and/or loses a game on the EOYT (more than possible the way England, Wales & Scotland are playing at the moment), he will have done no better, or possibly worse, than Foster in 2021.
What do we do then? Do we sack the new coach and look for another to turn things around in time for Sept 2023?
I’d accept keeping the bledisloe and not losing to wales or Scotland on end of year tour. Oh and going 2-0 vs Argentina. Can’t expect a guy to come in at short notice and not potentially lose to SA in SA.
-
@ploughboy said in Foster must go:
foster to stay to be joined by gatland and schmidt
Schmidt and Gatland like water and oil.
-
@pakman said in Foster must go:
@ploughboy said in Foster must go:
foster to stay to be joined by gatland and schmidt
Schmidt and Gatland like water and oil.
Both focus on defence, prefer to play to set patterns (which some argue the ABs need right now). It might work 😁
-
@Billy-Tell said in Foster must go:
I’d accept keeping the bledisloe and not losing to wales or Scotland on end of year tour. Oh and going 2-0 vs Argentina. Can’t expect a guy to come in at short notice and not potentially lose to SA in SA.
Not good enough. We'd be treading water or going backwards compared to Foster with no guarantee things are really on the up.
Enough mediocrity - put success measures in place and have an action plan if they aren't met.
-
@chimoaus said in Foster must go:
Anybody wonder if Foster doubts himself or does he really believe he is capable of turning things around?
Must be very hard to coach effectively if you think everyone thinks you are an idiot.
I imagine he must be low on self confidence and it must be a very hard headspace to be in which surely does not help things.
When things go wrong people start pointing fingers and you wonder what the locker room chat is among players, coaches etc re Foster.
On a personal level, you'd have to have a heart of stone not to feel for the guy. He's had a load of stuff hit him which is out of his control and I don't doubt he's doing his best.
But he's paid to do a job and if he can't do it then he should consider his position. At the very least you'd hope NZR are giving him the support he needs no matter what he and they decide to do.
-
@Victor-Meldrew said in Foster must go:
@Billy-Tell said in Foster must go:
I’d accept keeping the bledisloe and not losing to wales or Scotland on end of year tour. Oh and going 2-0 vs Argentina. Can’t expect a guy to come in at short notice and not potentially lose to SA in SA.
Not good enough. We'd be treading water or going backwards compared to Foster with no guarantee things are really on the up.
Enough mediocrity - put success measures in place and have an action plan if they aren't met.
Do t think so. I have only hope and not expectation when the ABs play these days.
-
The Blues wound up in this situation. So have the Warriors.
What doesn't work :
-- pretending it was not a problem and nothing needed fixing.
-- staying with poor coaches, hoping they'd get better.
-- picking nice guys to coach with mana rather than those with winning records because the other guys were kind of prickly and irritating and were going to ruffle some feathers.
-- endless rants about "lack of development" and how the whole organisation was dysfunctional and needed a hard reboot.. This was a Fern speciality. Still is, apparently. (The Waikato RU is as dysfunctional as any on the planet. They can still have winning seasons.)
-- spending money on players.
What did work :
-- trying new things until one stuck.
-- a good coach.
It turns out that that pretty much everything hung on the coaching. Everything else was fine when he was good.
Rennie showed that Foster was the problem at the Chiefs, although in his case it was also the useless WRU -- but cronyism with Foster was part of that.
My predictions:
-- doing nothing will be a disaster.
-- eventually the problems will be sorted by the right coach.
-- nothing else matters. Back room chair organising will not fix poor coaching.
-
@Chester-Draws said in Foster must go:
What did work :
-- trying new things until one stuck.
-- a good coach.
It turns out that that pretty much everything hung on the coaching. Everything else was fine when he was good.
-- nothing else matters. Back room chair organising will not fix poor coaching.Agree, very few teams have won trophies with a poor coach.
-
@Chester-Draws I respectfully disagree.
Good coaches in poor environments will struggle. Bad coaches in good environments will look better than they are.
The Blues renaissance came with a new board. Everything good flowed from there; a good coach, better player selection and retention, a competent back room staff, stakeholders/owners that weren't at war with each other. The coach can't fix those issues.
It's like a good 10 in a bad team. They'll be dragged down.
-
@Chester-Draws said in Foster must go:
Rennie showed that Foster was the problem at the Chiefs, although in his case it was also the useless WRU -- but cronyism with Foster was part of that.
Especially this. Though somehow ten years on he's now coaching the All Blacks...
-
@Chester-Draws said in Foster must go:
It turns out that that pretty much everything hung on the coaching. Everything else was fine when he was good.
Sorry, but I think that's way too simplistic and assumes quality of cattle, player development, quality of opposition, the quality of the people choosing and supporting the coach and the processes around managing the game have no impact on the results.
Sure, a good coach is essential and can get the best out of what he's been given, but he can't fix the structural issues in his union.
-
@nzzp said in Foster must go:
@Victor-Meldrew progress for the new coach won't just be winning, but clarity around selections, game plans and direction. There may be short term losses, but there has to be hope for the future.
He has clarity and has managed to sell that 'vision' to his employers about three times now.
Trouble is that it either doesn't work, the players can't apply it and/or it simply isn't right for the situation we face against structured low error teams.
The public also can see zero evidence of positive change and the few public statements about what needs to change seem at odds to what is happening.
'We need more power in the forwards', OK now I'm going to bench or leave out our most powerful hooker
