Foster, Robertson etc
-
Gregor Paul is slightly speculating that Razor would want a mass-cleanout, but it is probably a pretty good educated guess.
I think if the ABs keep losing, NZR will try and persuade Schmidt to take over.
Schmidt would likely keep everyone else on. The fact Schmidt is there lowers Razor's chances of becoming head coach.This might be acceptable looking ass-covering for those at the top without any mass-cleanout being instituted (upon them)
Gregor Paul is slightly speculating that Razor would want a mass-cleanout, but it is probably a pretty good educated guess.
I think if the ABs keep losing, NZR will try and persuade Schmidt to take over.
Schmidt would likely keep everyone else on. The fact Schmidt is there lowers Razor's chances of becoming head coach.This might be acceptable looking ass-covering for those at the top without any mass-cleanout being instituted (upon them)
His comment is also a bit overstated regarding the number of people that need cleaning out. Things like masseurs are ad-hoc pay as you go contractors and not formal parts of the set ups.
Would seem silly to wipe out positions like bag man etc and make them re-apply. That kind of thing is dick swinging and has no positives.
Coaches/Team Management etc are the ones that affect the team so fair enough with them. -
Gregor Paul is slightly speculating that Razor would want a mass-cleanout, but it is probably a pretty good educated guess.
I think if the ABs keep losing, NZR will try and persuade Schmidt to take over.
Schmidt would likely keep everyone else on. The fact Schmidt is there lowers Razor's chances of becoming head coach.This might be acceptable looking ass-covering for those at the top without any mass-cleanout being instituted (upon them)
His comment is also a bit overstated regarding the number of people that need cleaning out. Things like masseurs are ad-hoc pay as you go contractors and not formal parts of the set ups.
Would seem silly to wipe out positions like bag man etc and make them re-apply. That kind of thing is dick swinging and has no positives.
Coaches/Team Management etc are the ones that affect the team so fair enough with them.Gregor Paul is slightly speculating that Razor would want a mass-cleanout, but it is probably a pretty good educated guess.
I think if the ABs keep losing, NZR will try and persuade Schmidt to take over.
Schmidt would likely keep everyone else on. The fact Schmidt is there lowers Razor's chances of becoming head coach.This might be acceptable looking ass-covering for those at the top without any mass-cleanout being instituted (upon them)
His comment is also a bit overstated regarding the number of people that need cleaning out. Things like masseurs are ad-hoc pay as you go contractors and not formal parts of the set ups.
Would seem silly to wipe out positions like bag man etc and make them re-apply. That kind of thing is dick swinging and has no positives.
Coaches/Team Management etc are the ones that affect the team so fair enough with them.I assume that Shand and some of the been there forever and might be a bit too comfortable with it crew (e.g., Enoka) would be in the firing line.
To be honest, I'd be happy with a clean-out from the CEO all the way down.
-
@Joans-Town-Jones said in All Blacks v Pumas 1:
@Victor-Meldrew said in All Blacks v Pumas 1:
@Joans-Town-Jones said in All Blacks v Pumas 1:
Absolutely but how is it Razor appears to get them working cohesively as a unit where Fozzie can't get more than 40 mins out of them?
-
Different level of intensity at Test level. George Bridge can look a million dollars at SR level.
-
Perhaps the Forwards coaching isn't up to par or needs more work.
He also had Hansen version 4 and Foster as an ABs head coach so there's that.
Bit silly to blame the coach for the gap between Test & Super Rugby. It's like arguing Razor's a shit coach because every player who's outstanding at NPC level doesn't become a Crusaders superstar.
@Victor-Meldrew I think that coach of the National side needs to work with the Super coaches, working how to best prep players for the step up, while the super coach balances this with his aspirations or winning the comp.
The fact that our front row forwards circa 2015 were pretty much the envy of the world, where had had skillful players that were strong at thier core roles...ffd a few years and our skills started to drop off, as did our scrum dominance, ffd more years, losing the regular games with SA Super teams and now we are selecting guys who we are told are thier for scrummaging, and they do little else, and even at scrum time arent much cop so we are injecting young players again with skillsets we used to have in abundance.
Fozzie has been part of the set up for what, a decade now...he is at the pointy end of things, in terms of seeing the game change, innovation, yet in his time he hasnt managed to notice the decline in these other skills so crucial to the modern game, along with a slide in the core skills of props too, and help look to rectify it down the chain, until it has become such a big problem.
-
-
Gregor Paul is slightly speculating that Razor would want a mass-cleanout, but it is probably a pretty good educated guess.
I think if the ABs keep losing, NZR will try and persuade Schmidt to take over.
Schmidt would likely keep everyone else on. The fact Schmidt is there lowers Razor's chances of becoming head coach.This might be acceptable looking ass-covering for those at the top without any mass-cleanout being instituted (upon them)
His comment is also a bit overstated regarding the number of people that need cleaning out. Things like masseurs are ad-hoc pay as you go contractors and not formal parts of the set ups.
Would seem silly to wipe out positions like bag man etc and make them re-apply. That kind of thing is dick swinging and has no positives.
Coaches/Team Management etc are the ones that affect the team so fair enough with them.I assume that Shand and some of the been there forever and might be a bit too comfortable with it crew (e.g., Enoka) would be in the firing line.
To be honest, I'd be happy with a clean-out from the CEO all the way down.
I assume that Shand and some of the been there forever and might be a bit too comfortable with it crew (e.g., Enoka) would be in the firing line.
IIRC they made some changes to the management structure a few years back so that Foster, as the AB coach, reports to Shand now. That likely wouldn't change with a new coach, even if Shand was also replaced.
-
@reprobate said in Foster:
@Victor-Meldrew said in All Blacks v Pumas 1:
@Joans-Town-Jones said in All Blacks v Pumas 1:
Razor seems to get players playing well for him?
So does the bloke who coaches the Bodmin 2nd XV. Doesn't mean those players would succeed at 6N level....
So what, Foster's coaching is fine but we just don't have the cattle to beat Argentina at home all of a sudden?
Nope. Nothing to do with coaching. But everything go do with their being big differences between playerd performing at Test level and a lower level.
@Victor-Meldrew said in Foster:
@reprobate said in Foster:
@Victor-Meldrew said in All Blacks v Pumas 1:
@Joans-Town-Jones said in All Blacks v Pumas 1:
Razor seems to get players playing well for him?
So does the bloke who coaches the Bodmin 2nd XV. Doesn't mean those players would succeed at 6N level....
So what, Foster's coaching is fine but we just don't have the cattle to beat Argentina at home all of a sudden?
Nope. Nothing to do with coaching. But everything go do with their being big differences between playerd performing at Test level and a lower level.
Well then we're fucked. Keep the same 23 week in week out and hope they win some games along the way. Lock Fozzie in for another 3 RWCs.
-
@Joans-Town-Jones said in Foster:
@antipodean said in Foster:
@Joans-Town-Jones said in Foster:
Aaron Smith coming off with 20 to go was poor as well. He was playing OK, but more to the point what we needed was experience and cool heads, not a guy with basically no experience.
He was playing dog shit by then. Like the rest of 'em. Christie needs a start now.
Not on the form he displayed this year. Like an excitable puppy with the passing to match.
Give Christie a start. Can it be worse that what it is right now?
The passing and direction from rucks would be. Granted he might run more, but that's not enough to compensate based on his form this year.
@antipodean said in Foster:
@Joans-Town-Jones said in Foster:
@antipodean said in Foster:
@Joans-Town-Jones said in Foster:
Aaron Smith coming off with 20 to go was poor as well. He was playing OK, but more to the point what we needed was experience and cool heads, not a guy with basically no experience.
He was playing dog shit by then. Like the rest of 'em. Christie needs a start now.
Not on the form he displayed this year. Like an excitable puppy with the passing to match.
Give Christie a start. Can it be worse that what it is right now?
The passing and direction from rucks would be. Granted he might run more, but that's not enough to compensate based on his form this year.
We've lost 6 from 8. Smith has started all? The damage to the jersey has already been done.
-
@Victor-Meldrew I think that coach of the National side needs to work with the Super coaches, working how to best prep players for the step up, while the super coach balances this with his aspirations or winning the comp.
The fact that our front row forwards circa 2015 were pretty much the envy of the world, where had had skillful players that were strong at thier core roles...ffd a few years and our skills started to drop off, as did our scrum dominance, ffd more years, losing the regular games with SA Super teams and now we are selecting guys who we are told are thier for scrummaging, and they do little else, and even at scrum time arent much cop so we are injecting young players again with skillsets we used to have in abundance.
Fozzie has been part of the set up for what, a decade now...he is at the pointy end of things, in terms of seeing the game change, innovation, yet in his time he hasnt managed to notice the decline in these other skills so crucial to the modern game, along with a slide in the core skills of props too, and help look to rectify it down the chain, until it has become such a big problem.
@taniwharugby said in Foster:
@Victor-Meldrew I think that coach of the National side needs to work with the Super coaches, working how to best prep players for the step up, while the super coach balances this with his aspirations or winning the comp.
The fact that our front row forwards circa 2015 were pretty much the envy of the world, where had had skillful players that were strong at thier core roles...ffd a few years and our skills started to drop off, as did our scrum dominance, ffd more years, losing the regular games with SA Super teams and now we are selecting guys who we are told are thier for scrummaging, and they do little else, and even at scrum time arent much cop so we are injecting young players again with skillsets we used to have in abundance.
Fozzie has been part of the set up for what, a decade now...he is at the pointy end of things, in terms of seeing the game change, innovation, yet in his time he hasnt managed to notice the decline in these other skills so crucial to the modern game, along with a slide in the core skills of props too, and help look to rectify it down the chain, until it has become such a big problem.
That 'hands off' approach to Super served us well in the past as it brought different ideas into the mix. I'm not so sure that under the current Super structure that it works as well.
A balance between the two would be good. Something like directing Super coaches to set plans within a range (eg an emphasis on rush defence) so that things aren't new when you reach the ABs -
@Joans-Town-Jones said in All Blacks v Pumas 1:
@KiwiMurph said in All Blacks v Pumas 1:
@Kirwan said in All Blacks v Pumas 1:
Pretty funny justifications going on here for Taylor. How many Tests does it take to learn to take a half step and throw it down the middle?
Was kinda important.
If there is any accountability left in selection he’d be gone. Stunk up the joint for 35 minutes.
Also - wasn't it an all Crusaders tight 5 when he came on (and wasn't that the point)?
So then it comes back to...what are the Crusaders doing differently to the ABs that make them so successful? They look a million $ in the red and black...
Not always though. And super rugby teams don't seem to be as strong overall as they were in the past.
@Joans-Town-Jones said in All Blacks v Pumas 1:
@KiwiMurph said in All Blacks v Pumas 1:
@Kirwan said in All Blacks v Pumas 1:
Pretty funny justifications going on here for Taylor. How many Tests does it take to learn to take a half step and throw it down the middle?
Was kinda important.
If there is any accountability left in selection he’d be gone. Stunk up the joint for 35 minutes.
Also - wasn't it an all Crusaders tight 5 when he came on (and wasn't that the point)?
So then it comes back to...what are the Crusaders doing differently to the ABs that make them so successful? They look a million $ in the red and black...
Not always though. And super rugby teams don't seem to be as strong overall as they were in the past.
So then we select potential ABs from where? The Crusaders are a damn strong side and would compete well amongst the Euro teams. They beat the SA teams that are doing well there. Again I have to ask, do we accept now the damage that has been done to the ABs jersey or do we bring in the most successful coach in NZ history to make some changes? What more can the motherfucker do to warrant a place as the head of the ABs when the current coach is breaking records left, right and centre for the all the wrong reasons?
-
@taniwharugby said in Foster:
@Victor-Meldrew I think that coach of the National side needs to work with the Super coaches, working how to best prep players for the step up, while the super coach balances this with his aspirations or winning the comp.
The fact that our front row forwards circa 2015 were pretty much the envy of the world, where had had skillful players that were strong at thier core roles...ffd a few years and our skills started to drop off, as did our scrum dominance, ffd more years, losing the regular games with SA Super teams and now we are selecting guys who we are told are thier for scrummaging, and they do little else, and even at scrum time arent much cop so we are injecting young players again with skillsets we used to have in abundance.
Fozzie has been part of the set up for what, a decade now...he is at the pointy end of things, in terms of seeing the game change, innovation, yet in his time he hasnt managed to notice the decline in these other skills so crucial to the modern game, along with a slide in the core skills of props too, and help look to rectify it down the chain, until it has become such a big problem.
That 'hands off' approach to Super served us well in the past as it brought different ideas into the mix. I'm not so sure that under the current Super structure that it works as well.
A balance between the two would be good. Something like directing Super coaches to set plans within a range (eg an emphasis on rush defence) so that things aren't new when you reach the ABs@Crucial what hands off?
We used to have clinics subscribing to Crons scrummaging practices across nz in order to get everyone on the same page...which has both benefits and drawbacks.
Still doesn't absolve the coaches from needing to recognise areas of weakness they might see in our game atbthe top and seek a collaborative way to address this at super level and lower
I mean a CEO of a big company is still responsible for how things happen on the ground floor, maybe not directly, but still along with board must be responsible for the employees.
-
@taniwharugby said in Foster:
@Victor-Meldrew I think that coach of the National side needs to work with the Super coaches, working how to best prep players for the step up, while the super coach balances this with his aspirations or winning the comp.
The fact that our front row forwards circa 2015 were pretty much the envy of the world, where had had skillful players that were strong at thier core roles...ffd a few years and our skills started to drop off, as did our scrum dominance, ffd more years, losing the regular games with SA Super teams and now we are selecting guys who we are told are thier for scrummaging, and they do little else, and even at scrum time arent much cop so we are injecting young players again with skillsets we used to have in abundance.
Fozzie has been part of the set up for what, a decade now...he is at the pointy end of things, in terms of seeing the game change, innovation, yet in his time he hasnt managed to notice the decline in these other skills so crucial to the modern game, along with a slide in the core skills of props too, and help look to rectify it down the chain, until it has become such a big problem.
That 'hands off' approach to Super served us well in the past as it brought different ideas into the mix. I'm not so sure that under the current Super structure that it works as well.
A balance between the two would be good. Something like directing Super coaches to set plans within a range (eg an emphasis on rush defence) so that things aren't new when you reach the ABsThere's something strange going on in this thread.
Bridge was dropped from the Crusaders so it is hard to argue he looks great at Super level these days (injuries etc may have taken their toll).
Razor has a great coaching record beyond the Crusaders.
If he was such a terrible coach it is unlikely his main rival wouldn't have lured his forwards' coach.
https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby/all-blacks/129306370/headtohead-scott-robertsons-record-as-head-coach-superior-to-ian-fostersRobertson has a wins rate of 85.1% – and six titles – as the Crusaders’ head coach since 2017. Chuck in his 80.9% – and three titles – as Canterbury NPC coach and his 86.6% success rate as New Zealand under-20 coach and his overall head coaching wins rate is 84%. -
@Joans-Town-Jones said in All Blacks v Pumas 1:
@KiwiMurph said in All Blacks v Pumas 1:
@Kirwan said in All Blacks v Pumas 1:
Pretty funny justifications going on here for Taylor. How many Tests does it take to learn to take a half step and throw it down the middle?
Was kinda important.
If there is any accountability left in selection he’d be gone. Stunk up the joint for 35 minutes.
Also - wasn't it an all Crusaders tight 5 when he came on (and wasn't that the point)?
So then it comes back to...what are the Crusaders doing differently to the ABs that make them so successful? They look a million $ in the red and black...
Not always though. And super rugby teams don't seem to be as strong overall as they were in the past.
So then we select potential ABs from where? The Crusaders are a damn strong side and would compete well amongst the Euro teams. They beat the SA teams that are doing well there. Again I have to ask, do we accept now the damage that has been done to the ABs jersey or do we bring in the most successful coach in NZ history to make some changes? What more can the motherfucker do to warrant a place as the head of the ABs when the current coach is breaking records left, right and centre for the all the wrong reasons?
@Joans-Town-Jones said in Foster:
@Joans-Town-Jones said in All Blacks v Pumas 1:
@KiwiMurph said in All Blacks v Pumas 1:
@Kirwan said in All Blacks v Pumas 1:
Pretty funny justifications going on here for Taylor. How many Tests does it take to learn to take a half step and throw it down the middle?
Was kinda important.
If there is any accountability left in selection he’d be gone. Stunk up the joint for 35 minutes.
Also - wasn't it an all Crusaders tight 5 when he came on (and wasn't that the point)?
So then it comes back to...what are the Crusaders doing differently to the ABs that make them so successful? They look a million $ in the red and black...
Not always though. And super rugby teams don't seem to be as strong overall as they were in the past.
So then we select potential ABs from where? The Crusaders are a damn strong side and would compete well amongst the Euro teams. They beat the SA teams that are doing well there. Again I have to ask, do we accept now the damage that has been done to the ABs jersey or do we bring in the most successful coach in NZ history to make some changes? What more can the motherfucker do to warrant a place as the head of the ABs when the current coach is breaking records left, right and centre for the all the wrong reasons?
Most worrying to me from the above would be if the NZR won't appoint Robertson because it would cost too much to use a big broom.
If he can improve the AB record and take the tarnish off the legacy isn't that worth millions? -
@antipodean said in Foster:
@Joans-Town-Jones said in Foster:
@antipodean said in Foster:
@Joans-Town-Jones said in Foster:
Aaron Smith coming off with 20 to go was poor as well. He was playing OK, but more to the point what we needed was experience and cool heads, not a guy with basically no experience.
He was playing dog shit by then. Like the rest of 'em. Christie needs a start now.
Not on the form he displayed this year. Like an excitable puppy with the passing to match.
Give Christie a start. Can it be worse that what it is right now?
The passing and direction from rucks would be. Granted he might run more, but that's not enough to compensate based on his form this year.
We've lost 6 from 8. Smith has started all? The damage to the jersey has already been done.
@Joans-Town-Jones said in Foster:
@antipodean said in Foster:
@Joans-Town-Jones said in Foster:
@antipodean said in Foster:
@Joans-Town-Jones said in Foster:
Aaron Smith coming off with 20 to go was poor as well. He was playing OK, but more to the point what we needed was experience and cool heads, not a guy with basically no experience.
He was playing dog shit by then. Like the rest of 'em. Christie needs a start now.
Not on the form he displayed this year. Like an excitable puppy with the passing to match.
Give Christie a start. Can it be worse that what it is right now?
The passing and direction from rucks would be. Granted he might run more, but that's not enough to compensate based on his form this year.
We've lost 6 from 8. Smith has started all? The damage to the jersey has already been done.
IMO the problem doesn't start with Smith, nor would it be solved by Christie.
-
the problem with looking at Super rugby as a player provider and only looking at the Crusaders is
20% of our pro players are at the Highlanders, a team that went 4-10 in a comp containing MP, Drua, Force and Rebels
Another 20% are at the Canes who at least managed 8 wins.
The Chiefs have another 20% and they somehow went 10-4 without a decent outside back, a decent 10, and losing ALB.The fact is, compared to 15 years ago, the standard of player you had to be to get a Super rugby contract has fallen dramatically.
This in no way absolves the current head coach, who is obviously fucked.
-
There's something strange going on in this thread.
Bridge was dropped from the Crusaders so it is hard to argue he looks great at Super level these days (injuries etc may have taken their toll).
Razor has a great coaching record beyond the Crusaders.
If he was such a terrible coach it is unlikely his main rival wouldn't have lured his forwards' coach.
https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby/all-blacks/129306370/headtohead-scott-robertsons-record-as-head-coach-superior-to-ian-fostersRobertson has a wins rate of 85.1% – and six titles – as the Crusaders’ head coach since 2017. Chuck in his 80.9% – and three titles – as Canterbury NPC coach and his 86.6% success rate as New Zealand under-20 coach and his overall head coaching wins rate is 84%.@nostrildamus said in Foster:
There's something strange going on in this thread.
Bridge was dropped from the Crusaders so it is hard to argue he looks great at Super level these days (injuries etc may have taken their toll).
Razor has a great coaching record beyond the Crusaders.
If he was such a terrible coach it is unlikely his main rival wouldn't have lured his forwards' coach.
https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby/all-blacks/129306370/headtohead-scott-robertsons-record-as-head-coach-superior-to-ian-fostersRobertson has a wins rate of 85.1% – and six titles – as the Crusaders’ head coach since 2017. Chuck in his 80.9% – and three titles – as Canterbury NPC coach and his 86.6% success rate as New Zealand under-20 coach and his overall head coaching wins rate is 84%.100 % correct Razor dropped Bridge because he was struggling to come back from injuries and his form dropped off.
It is staring everyone in the Face who is the better coach and which team has better systems and have their shit together.
But some people do not want to see it for various reasons.Just like the NZR board something in common there Denial.
-
@Victor-Meldrew said in Foster:
@reprobate said in Foster:
@Victor-Meldrew said in All Blacks v Pumas 1:
@Joans-Town-Jones said in All Blacks v Pumas 1:
Razor seems to get players playing well for him?
So does the bloke who coaches the Bodmin 2nd XV. Doesn't mean those players would succeed at 6N level....
So what, Foster's coaching is fine but we just don't have the cattle to beat Argentina at home all of a sudden?
Nope. Nothing to do with coaching. But everything go do with their being big differences between playerd performing at Test level and a lower level.
Gotcha coaches don't matter, I hope NZR see this and sack the lot, save us a lot of money for keeping our players here.
@Machpants said in Foster:
@Victor-Meldrew said in Foster:
@reprobate said in Foster:
@Victor-Meldrew said in All Blacks v Pumas 1:
@Joans-Town-Jones said in All Blacks v Pumas 1:
Razor seems to get players playing well for him?
So does the bloke who coaches the Bodmin 2nd XV. Doesn't mean those players would succeed at 6N level....
So what, Foster's coaching is fine but we just don't have the cattle to beat Argentina at home all of a sudden?
Nope. Nothing to do with coaching. But everything go do with their being big differences between playerd performing at Test level and a lower level.
Gotcha coaches don't matter, I hope NZR see this and sack the lot, save us a lot of money for keeping our players here.
The players could coach themselves a lot better than the man heading this carnage we are watching.
-
@Machpants said in Foster:
@Victor-Meldrew said in Foster:
@reprobate said in Foster:
@Victor-Meldrew said in All Blacks v Pumas 1:
@Joans-Town-Jones said in All Blacks v Pumas 1:
Razor seems to get players playing well for him?
So does the bloke who coaches the Bodmin 2nd XV. Doesn't mean those players would succeed at 6N level....
So what, Foster's coaching is fine but we just don't have the cattle to beat Argentina at home all of a sudden?
Nope. Nothing to do with coaching. But everything go do with their being big differences between playerd performing at Test level and a lower level.
Gotcha coaches don't matter, I hope NZR see this and sack the lot, save us a lot of money for keeping our players here.
The players could coach themselves a lot better than the man heading this carnage we are watching.
@Chris remember when Gatland said anyone could coach the ABs....
But agree, one of our better performances of the year (low bar I know) was the week when our coach wasnt physically at training and the senior players had a larger role in test prep....
So, I think Gatland was wrong, anyone cant coach the ABs, but maybe nobody is better than anybody
-
@nostrildamus said in Foster:
There's something strange going on in this thread.
Bridge was dropped from the Crusaders so it is hard to argue he looks great at Super level these days (injuries etc may have taken their toll).
Razor has a great coaching record beyond the Crusaders.
If he was such a terrible coach it is unlikely his main rival wouldn't have lured his forwards' coach.
https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby/all-blacks/129306370/headtohead-scott-robertsons-record-as-head-coach-superior-to-ian-fostersRobertson has a wins rate of 85.1% – and six titles – as the Crusaders’ head coach since 2017. Chuck in his 80.9% – and three titles – as Canterbury NPC coach and his 86.6% success rate as New Zealand under-20 coach and his overall head coaching wins rate is 84%.100 % correct Razor dropped Bridge because he was struggling to come back from injuries and his form dropped off.
It is staring everyone in the Face who is the better coach and which team has better systems and have their shit together.
But some people do not want to see it for various reasons.Just like the NZR board something in common there Denial.
But some people do not want to see it for various reasons.Just like the NZR board something in common there Denial.
Yeah, including Mo'unga and (I believe) Whitelock who endorsed Foster publicly just now. Those guys are clearly in denial as well.
Foster should have gone months ago, probably at the end of last year. He's only the symptom, he should go, but our problems do not start and finish with the head coach.
The broom should start with the Board, sweep through the CEO and upper management, and head coaching. Hell, we need to look at how Super is preparing players for international rugby, because I think as that quality has fallen off, so has the SH international game.
From here, NH comps look superior, and spit out players who come back and dominate or look very good.
-
@Chris remember when Gatland said anyone could coach the ABs....
But agree, one of our better performances of the year (low bar I know) was the week when our coach wasnt physically at training and the senior players had a larger role in test prep....
So, I think Gatland was wrong, anyone cant coach the ABs, but maybe nobody is better than anybody
@taniwharugby said in Foster:
@Chris remember when Gatland said anyone could coach the ABs....
But agree, one of our better performances of the year (low bar I know) was the week when our coach wasnt physically at training and the senior players had a larger role in test prep....
So, I think Gatland was wrong, anyone cant coach the ABs, but maybe nobody is better than anybody
Agreed :beaming_face_with_smiling_eyes:
-
But some people do not want to see it for various reasons.Just like the NZR board something in common there Denial.
Yeah, including Mo'unga and (I believe) Whitelock who endorsed Foster publicly just now. Those guys are clearly in denial as well.
Foster should have gone months ago, probably at the end of last year. He's only the symptom, he should go, but our problems do not start and finish with the head coach.
The broom should start with the Board, sweep through the CEO and upper management, and head coaching. Hell, we need to look at how Super is preparing players for international rugby, because I think as that quality has fallen off, so has the SH international game.
From here, NH comps look superior, and spit out players who come back and dominate or look very good.
Yeah, including Mo'unga and (I believe) Whitelock who endorsed Foster publicly just now. Those guys are clearly in denial as well.
This bit is a worry because there is a lot of players in denial who have come out supporting foster,
Savea,Havilli,Cane,Retallick,Beauden Barrett,Smith have all either in live interview's or in print have backed Foster. -
Yeah, including Mo'unga and (I believe) Whitelock who endorsed Foster publicly just now. Those guys are clearly in denial as well.
This bit is a worry because there is a lot of players in denial who have come out supporting foster,
Savea,Havilli,Cane,Retallick,Beauden Barrett,Smith have all either in live interview's or in print have backed Foster.Yeah, including Mo'unga and (I believe) Whitelock who endorsed Foster publicly just now. Those guys are clearly in denial as well.
This bit is a worry because there is a lot of players in denial who have come out supporting foster,
Savea,Havilli,Cane,Retallick,Beauden Barrett,Smith have all either in live interview's or in print have backed Foster.Did they all actually just say the support him or that he is the best option for AB head coach?
