Scott Robertson
-
He was a one trick pony. His first couple of Super titles were built on the innovation of theming. But that didn't remain an innovation for long.
The superior recruitment of the Crusaders and signing talent from other franchise areas did the rest.
@sparky said in Scott Robertson:
He was a one trick pony. His first couple of Super titles were built on the innovation of theming. But that didn't remain an innovation for long.
The superior recruitment of the Crusaders and signing talent from other franchise areas did the rest.
Innovation of theming? What the fuck does that mean?
-
@sparky said in Scott Robertson:
He was a one trick pony. His first couple of Super titles were built on the innovation of theming. But that didn't remain an innovation for long.
The superior recruitment of the Crusaders and signing talent from other franchise areas did the rest.
Innovation of theming? What the fuck does that mean?
-
@Victor-Meldrew said in Scott Robertson:
@jimmyb said in Scott Robertson:
I’m sorry but that’s an absolutely pathetic reaction and comment. Not a very good coach? No one can question his success at a domestic level. Won a super rugby title in South Africa, undefeated
super rugby season?If you look at the squads he had over the years he was completely responsible for growing most of those players. Completely out coached any super coach he came up against. His game planes against the Blues and Chiefs squads over the past few years completely dismantled them and he was clearly a better coach than McMillan, Crotter, McDonald, Joseph etc.
These are the same arguments we heard when he was was being fluffed by all and sundry as the Super Coach who sort out all the problems of the Foster years. They were poor arguments then - and now..
He shouldn’t have had the ABs coaching job and he was out of his depth.
From what we've seen/heard, he would probably have been out of his depth coaching any team other than the Crusaders.
I’m not arguing for it. I’m saying the witch hunt style comments without acknowledging the success domestically is ridiculous. I’m glad he’s gone but this is getting pathetic
@jimmyb said in Scott Robertson:
I’m not arguing for it. I’m saying the witch hunt style comments without acknowledging the success domestically is ridiculous. I’m glad he’s gone but this is getting pathetic
Blowback not surprising when you consider the hype the man generated.
-
@jimmyb said in Scott Robertson:
I’m not arguing for it. I’m saying the witch hunt style comments without acknowledging the success domestically is ridiculous. I’m glad he’s gone but this is getting pathetic
Blowback not surprising when you consider the hype the man generated.
@Victor-Meldrew said in Scott Robertson:
@jimmyb said in Scott Robertson:
I’m not arguing for it. I’m saying the witch hunt style comments without acknowledging the success domestically is ridiculous. I’m glad he’s gone but this is getting pathetic
Blowback not surprising when you consider the hype the man generated.
There’s blowback, which is entirely appropriate, and then there’s borderline neurotic revisionism over what is the best super rugby record ever, winning three titles when it was still a competition (and not just get to the finals and watch Dmac shit the bed and hand you the game).
-
@Victor-Meldrew said in Scott Robertson:
@jimmyb said in Scott Robertson:
I’m not arguing for it. I’m saying the witch hunt style comments without acknowledging the success domestically is ridiculous. I’m glad he’s gone but this is getting pathetic
Blowback not surprising when you consider the hype the man generated.
There’s blowback, which is entirely appropriate, and then there’s borderline neurotic revisionism over what is the best super rugby record ever, winning three titles when it was still a competition (and not just get to the finals and watch Dmac shit the bed and hand you the game).
@jimmyb said in Scott Robertson:
@Victor-Meldrew said in Scott Robertson:
@jimmyb said in Scott Robertson:
I’m not arguing for it. I’m saying the witch hunt style comments without acknowledging the success domestically is ridiculous. I’m glad he’s gone but this is getting pathetic
Blowback not surprising when you consider the hype the man generated.
There’s blowback, which is entirely appropriate, and then there’s borderline neurotic revisionism over what is the best super rugby record ever, winning three titles when it was still a competition (and not just get to the finals and watch Dmac shit the bed and hand you the game).
You could almost call it ironic.....
-
@jimmyb said in Scott Robertson:
@Victor-Meldrew said in Scott Robertson:
@jimmyb said in Scott Robertson:
I’m not arguing for it. I’m saying the witch hunt style comments without acknowledging the success domestically is ridiculous. I’m glad he’s gone but this is getting pathetic
Blowback not surprising when you consider the hype the man generated.
There’s blowback, which is entirely appropriate, and then there’s borderline neurotic revisionism over what is the best super rugby record ever, winning three titles when it was still a competition (and not just get to the finals and watch Dmac shit the bed and hand you the game).
You could almost call it ironic.....
@Victor-Meldrew said in Scott Robertson:
@jimmyb said in Scott Robertson:
@Victor-Meldrew said in Scott Robertson:
@jimmyb said in Scott Robertson:
I’m not arguing for it. I’m saying the witch hunt style comments without acknowledging the success domestically is ridiculous. I’m glad he’s gone but this is getting pathetic
Blowback not surprising when you consider the hype the man generated.
There’s blowback, which is entirely appropriate, and then there’s borderline neurotic revisionism over what is the best super rugby record ever, winning three titles when it was still a competition (and not just get to the finals and watch Dmac shit the bed and hand you the game).
You could almost call it ironic.....
The sentiment and discourse around NZ rugby is now mirroring exactly what has gone wrong in Australia over the past 10-12 years. It’s tribal, it lacks context, it’s overly emotive, and obsessed with domestic allegiances. This kind of sentiment around Robertson is part of the problem
-
@Victor-Meldrew said in Scott Robertson:
@jimmyb said in Scott Robertson:
@Victor-Meldrew said in Scott Robertson:
@jimmyb said in Scott Robertson:
I’m not arguing for it. I’m saying the witch hunt style comments without acknowledging the success domestically is ridiculous. I’m glad he’s gone but this is getting pathetic
Blowback not surprising when you consider the hype the man generated.
There’s blowback, which is entirely appropriate, and then there’s borderline neurotic revisionism over what is the best super rugby record ever, winning three titles when it was still a competition (and not just get to the finals and watch Dmac shit the bed and hand you the game).
You could almost call it ironic.....
The sentiment and discourse around NZ rugby is now mirroring exactly what has gone wrong in Australia over the past 10-12 years. It’s tribal, it lacks context, it’s overly emotive, and obsessed with domestic allegiances. This kind of sentiment around Robertson is part of the problem
@jimmyb said in Scott Robertson:
The sentiment and discourse around NZ rugby is now mirroring exactly what has gone wrong in Australia over the past 10-12 years. It’s tribal, it lacks context, it’s overly emotive, and obsessed with domestic allegiances. This kind of sentiment around Robertson
iswas part of the problemFIFY
-
@Dan54 said in Scott Robertson:
I thought the English test worried me more , we looked lost whole test.
Yep, I actually stopped watching that game when we were 12 in front. Had already seen enough.
@mohikamo said in Scott Robertson:
@Dan54 said in Scott Robertson:
I thought the English test worried me more , we looked lost whole test.
Yep, I actually stopped watching that game when we were 12 in front. Had already seen enough.
Mate I admit one thing I can't do is ever stop watching a test
Lol perhaps I just a desperate though mate, and understand why you did. -
@His-Bobness said in Scott Robertson:
That’s what it looked like from the outside to me as well. I know there’s a school out there among the Crusaders rusted-ons that this was all a fiendish plot by Ardie Savea, but Captain Kirk and co would not have turned the stun guns to kill if the problem was just a clash of personalities.
Yes I dont buy that player power did Razor in.
But . . . conversely . . . the players may have been able save him, if they had all backed him at review time . . . but some of them, at least, clearly didn't do that.@mohikamo said in Scott Robertson:
@His-Bobness said in Scott Robertson:
That’s what it looked like from the outside to me as well. I know there’s a school out there among the Crusaders rusted-ons that this was all a fiendish plot by Ardie Savea, but Captain Kirk and co would not have turned the stun guns to kill if the problem was just a clash of personalities.
Yes I dont buy that player power did Razor in.
But . . . conversely . . . the players may have been able save him, if they had all backed him at review time . . . but some of them, at least, clearly didn't do that.I dont either. The squad was clearly underperforming and had issues. You don't have to look to hard to see that. nz is a small place, all the issue would have been known well in advance.
Kirk made two points (around Oct/Nov) when he started his role - results are unacceptable and the process to appoint razor was flawed. Why say that? Well, it was clear to me at the time that it was like Game of thrones foreshadowing and Razor is not secure.
I doubt the players would have been able to save him. I think the issues were known for some time and that NZR had this outcome in mind for some tine
-
@mohikamo said in Scott Robertson:
@Dan54 said in Scott Robertson:
I thought the English test worried me more , we looked lost whole test.
Yep, I actually stopped watching that game when we were 12 in front. Had already seen enough.
Mate I admit one thing I can't do is ever stop watching a test
Lol perhaps I just a desperate though mate, and understand why you did.@Dan54 said in Scott Robertson:
@mohikamo said in Scott Robertson:
@Dan54 said in Scott Robertson:
I thought the English test worried me more , we looked lost whole test.
Yep, I actually stopped watching that game when we were 12 in front. Had already seen enough.
Mate I admit one thing I can't do is ever stop watching a test
Lol perhaps I just a desperate though mate, and understand why you did.I stopped watching the 23 RWC final at halftime. In absolute disgust at how we were being forensically examined on everything but SA werent.
I flicked through the 2nd half and my disgust grew and grew.
-
@mohikamo said in Scott Robertson:
@Dan54 said in Scott Robertson:
I thought the English test worried me more , we looked lost whole test.
Yep, I actually stopped watching that game when we were 12 in front. Had already seen enough.
Mate I admit one thing I can't do is ever stop watching a test
Lol perhaps I just a desperate though mate, and understand why you did.@Dan54 said in Scott Robertson:
@mohikamo said in Scott Robertson:
@Dan54 said in Scott Robertson:
I thought the English test worried me more , we looked lost whole test.
Yep, I actually stopped watching that game when we were 12 in front. Had already seen enough.
Mate I admit one thing I can't do is ever stop watching a test
Lol perhaps I just a desperate though mate, and understand why you did.No ‘perhaps’ about Danny!
-
@Dan54 said in Scott Robertson:
@mohikamo said in Scott Robertson:
@Dan54 said in Scott Robertson:
I thought the English test worried me more , we looked lost whole test.
Yep, I actually stopped watching that game when we were 12 in front. Had already seen enough.
Mate I admit one thing I can't do is ever stop watching a test
Lol perhaps I just a desperate though mate, and understand why you did.No ‘perhaps’ about Danny!
@DaGrubster said in Scott Robertson:
@Dan54 said in Scott Robertson:
@mohikamo said in Scott Robertson:
@Dan54 said in Scott Robertson:
I thought the English test worried me more , we looked lost whole test.
Yep, I actually stopped watching that game when we were 12 in front. Had already seen enough.
Mate I admit one thing I can't do is ever stop watching a test
Lol perhaps I just a desperate though mate, and understand why you did.No ‘perhaps’ about Danny!
SShhh mate, if people find out how long you known me, they may actually believe really am a rugby nerd!!
-
@mohikamo said in Scott Robertson:
@His-Bobness said in Scott Robertson:
That’s what it looked like from the outside to me as well. I know there’s a school out there among the Crusaders rusted-ons that this was all a fiendish plot by Ardie Savea, but Captain Kirk and co would not have turned the stun guns to kill if the problem was just a clash of personalities.
Yes I dont buy that player power did Razor in.
But . . . conversely . . . the players may have been able save him, if they had all backed him at review time . . . but some of them, at least, clearly didn't do that.I dont either. The squad was clearly underperforming and had issues. You don't have to look to hard to see that. nz is a small place, all the issue would have been known well in advance.
Kirk made two points (around Oct/Nov) when he started his role - results are unacceptable and the process to appoint razor was flawed. Why say that? Well, it was clear to me at the time that it was like Game of thrones foreshadowing and Razor is not secure.
I doubt the players would have been able to save him. I think the issues were known for some time and that NZR had this outcome in mind for some tine
@DaGrubster said in Scott Robertson:
@mohikamo said in Scott Robertson:
@His-Bobness said in Scott Robertson:
That’s what it looked like from the outside to me as well. I know there’s a school out there among the Crusaders rusted-ons that this was all a fiendish plot by Ardie Savea, but Captain Kirk and co would not have turned the stun guns to kill if the problem was just a clash of personalities.
Yes I dont buy that player power did Razor in.
But . . . conversely . . . the players may have been able save him, if they had all backed him at review time . . . but some of them, at least, clearly didn't do that.I dont either. The squad was clearly underperforming and had issues. You don't have to look to hard to see that. nz is a small place, all the issue would have been known well in advance.
Kirk made two points (around Oct/Nov) when he started his role - results are unacceptable and the process to appoint razor was flawed. Why say that? Well, it was clear to me at the time that it was like Game of thrones foreshadowing and Razor is not secure.
I doubt the players would have been able to save him. I think the issues were known for some time and that NZR had this outcome in mind for some tine
The departure of Panadol was a huge Red Flag.
It was handled very diplomatically at the time, but should have resulted in a full behind the scenes debrief.
Would be no surprise if Robinson saw that as unnecessary.
-
@jimmyb said in Scott Robertson:
I’m sorry but that’s an absolutely pathetic reaction and comment. Not a very good coach? No one can question his success at a domestic level. Won a super rugby title in South Africa, undefeated
super rugby season?If you look at the squads he had over the years he was completely responsible for growing most of those players. Completely out coached any super coach he came up against. His game planes against the Blues and Chiefs squads over the past few years completely dismantled them and he was clearly a better coach than McMillan, Crotter, McDonald, Joseph etc.
These are the same arguments we heard when he was was being fluffed by all and sundry as the Super Coach who sort out all the problems of the Foster years. They were poor arguments then - and now..
He shouldn’t have had the ABs coaching job and he was out of his depth.
From what we've seen/heard, he would probably have been out of his depth coaching any team other than the Crusaders.
@Victor-Meldrew said in Scott Robertson:
@jimmyb said in Scott Robertson:
I’m sorry but that’s an absolutely pathetic reaction and comment. Not a very good coach? No one can question his success at a domestic level. Won a super rugby title in South Africa, undefeated
super rugby season?If you look at the squads he had over the years he was completely responsible for growing most of those players. Completely out coached any super coach he came up against. His game planes against the Blues and Chiefs squads over the past few years completely dismantled them and he was clearly a better coach than McMillan, Crotter, McDonald, Joseph etc.
These are the same arguments we heard when he was was being fluffed by all and sundry as the Super Coach who sort out all the problems of the Foster years. They were poor arguments then - and now..
Nah. Prior success is a decent argument and clearly a big positive. It's also clearly not everything, but you are treating it as so irrelevant that you don't even mention it vs his 'perceived charisma and powerpoint', which is if anything more absurd.
It's easy to say in hindsight that Robertson should not have been selected - but his record of success was a huge positive, it's about all that was actually visible to the punters, and in sharp contrast to Foster's lack of success with the Chiefs.
The responsibility for assessing the rest lies with the employers, as they are the people who interviewed him and made the decision based on more information. We all know they are/were a shitshow, because they appointed Foster with a shit process, then decided to sack him because we were shit, then didn't follow through because some players who Foster selected told them not to.
-
@sparky said in Scott Robertson:
Over-hyped and over-rated fraud. He must have known that he wasn't a very good coach and would be exposed hideously at the top level. The Emperor had no clothes. What an idiot!
No sympathy at all over his firing. Good riddance!
I’m sorry but that’s an absolutely pathetic reaction and comment. Not a very good coach? No one can question his success at a domestic level. Won a super rugby title in South Africa, undefeated
super rugby season?If you look at the squads he had over the years he was completely responsible for growing most of those players. Completely out coached any super coach he came up against. His game planes against the Blues and Chiefs squads over the past few years completely dismantled them and he was clearly a better coach than McMillan, Crotter, McDonald, Joseph etc.
He shouldn’t have had the ABs coaching job and he was out of his depth. But calling him a fraud and an idiot is a neurotic, witch hunter style comment.
@jimmyb said in Scott Robertson:
If you look at the squads he had over the years he was completely responsible for growing most of those players. Completely out coached any super coach he came up against. His game planes against the Blues and Chiefs squads over the past few years completely dismantled them and he was clearly a better coach than McMillan, Crotter, McDonald, Joseph etc.
Not acknowledging that the Crusaders do a much better job than other franchises in almost every aspect - having better players, greater depth and a stronger overall setup for success - is just as crazy as not acknowledging Robertson’s success. You make it sound like he would’ve won seven titles with any franchise.
-
Arriving in NZ tomorrow. I want to get hard copy of story behind thread. Anyone able to tell me which day NZH published the story in paper?
@pakman said in Scott Robertson:
Arriving in NZ tomorrow. I want to get hard copy of story behind thread. Anyone able to tell me which day NZH published the story in paper?
Saturday’s hard copy
-
@pakman said in Scott Robertson:
Arriving in NZ tomorrow. I want to get hard copy of story behind thread. Anyone able to tell me which day NZH published the story in paper?
Saturday’s hard copy
@zedsdeadbaby Cheers, Z!
