Foster, Robertson etc
-
I'd have to say that from the heights of 2011, which you could argue was our best All Black team ever that our current day All Blacks are literally results and history-wise the worst All Black team we've ever had.
The decline has been remarkable.
The asleep at the wheel, don't worry it will come right even when it doesn't approach has been literally a marvel to behold.
@Windows97 said in Foster:
The asleep at the wheel, don't worry it will come right even when it doesn't approach has been literally a marvel to behold.
it has exposed the sycophancy of modern rugby media though ... there is a lot of glitter being sprayed on turds these days
-
I'd have to say that from the heights of 2011, which you could argue was our best All Black team ever that our current day All Blacks are literally results and history-wise the worst All Black team we've ever had.
The decline has been remarkable.
The asleep at the wheel, don't worry it will come right even when it doesn't approach has been literally a marvel to behold.
@Windows97 said in Foster:
I'd have to say that from the heights of 2011, which you could argue was our best All Black team ever that our current day All Blacks are literally results and history-wise the worst All Black team we've ever had.
The decline has been remarkable.
The asleep at the wheel, don't worry it will come right even when it doesn't approach has been literally a marvel to behold.
You obviously haven't reached your 50th birthday yet.
-
@nostrildamus I not dissing Deans, I think he was a good coachm especially at Super level, was merely pointing success at lower level shouldn't alway be used as the barometer of a coach. Rassie Erasmus had no great sucess at lower levels same as Eddie Jones, sometimes slightly different skills needed. I alway thought Deans big weakness in coaching was his selection of players, and perhaps what counted against him at higher level. Regardless Deans said he could take Aussie higher up in the world, and farwhatever reason he didn't (a bit like Rennie at this stage)
@nostrildamus I not dissing Deans, I think he was a good coachm especially at Super level, was merely pointing success at lower level shouldn't alway be used as the barometer of a coach. Rassie Erasmus had no great sucess at lower levels same as Eddie Jones, sometimes slightly different skills needed. I alway thought Deans big weakness in coaching was his selection of players, and perhaps what counted against him at higher level. Regardless Deans said he could take Aussie higher up in the world, and farwhatever reason he didn't (a bit like Rennie at this stage)
Eddie as coach had plenty of lower-level success, he's won club titles with Randwick, Suntory & the Brumbies.
Rassie won a few Currie Cup titles, a Pro14 title with Munster & presided over the Stormers most successful period in Super Rugby history.
-
@nostrildamus I not dissing Deans, I think he was a good coachm especially at Super level, was merely pointing success at lower level shouldn't alway be used as the barometer of a coach. Rassie Erasmus had no great sucess at lower levels same as Eddie Jones, sometimes slightly different skills needed. I alway thought Deans big weakness in coaching was his selection of players, and perhaps what counted against him at higher level. Regardless Deans said he could take Aussie higher up in the world, and farwhatever reason he didn't (a bit like Rennie at this stage)
Eddie as coach had plenty of lower-level success, he's won club titles with Randwick, Suntory & the Brumbies.
Rassie won a few Currie Cup titles, a Pro14 title with Munster & presided over the Stormers most successful period in Super Rugby history.
@kiwi_expat said in Foster:
@nostrildamus I not dissing Deans, I think he was a good coachm especially at Super level, was merely pointing success at lower level shouldn't alway be used as the barometer of a coach. Rassie Erasmus had no great sucess at lower levels same as Eddie Jones, sometimes slightly different skills needed. I alway thought Deans big weakness in coaching was his selection of players, and perhaps what counted against him at higher level. Regardless Deans said he could take Aussie higher up in the world, and farwhatever reason he didn't (a bit like Rennie at this stage)
Eddie as coach had plenty of lower-level success, he's won club titles with Randwick, Suntory & the Brumbies.
Rassie won a few Currie Cup titles, a Pro14 title with Munster & presided over the Stormers most successful period in Super Rugby history.
Yep forgat about Rassies currie cup, but he was only runner up with Munster in Pro 14 wasn't he? And Stormers didn't win with him did they. not sure they ever won super rugby title. I must be getting old . But regardless I still say lower level success doesn't always lead to higher up stuff, and wonder if Deans wouldn't have been better to get some experience up north before trying international coaching, which I am sure you agree is a pretty different beast to test stuff. This is not to say anyone should or shouldn't coach ABs, but I much prefer someone who has coached in a wider range of teams. Just an opinion I have had for quite sometime, quite different skills, selecting is as important as coaching ability, and perhaps man management (I believe a weakness of Deans and Mitchell).
If I thought about it you kind of proved my point, Rassie and Eddie learnt their trade in a few different team? But I can also where people can say success is enough with same team, I always liked Joseph (he had coached in a few places also) as he took Clan from bottom of pile to winning title, -
@Old-Samurai-Jack said in Foster:
Hence I really think a "clean out" is what the ABs have needed since 2019.
I like the idea of a clean out.. problem is who do you bring in? (assuming you're talking players not coaches..)
@WillieTheWaiter Wouldn't throw the baby out with the bathwater. I think they have most of the right players. More about new management and a "cultural shift".
-
@nostrildamus kind of beat me too it Nostri, he certainly won plenty, funnily enough, never anything at super level, which kind of makes a joke of super titiles being the reason for making someone a test coach. I mean Robbie Deans got about 5 super titles, and was hardly a success as a test coach ,though seems to be doing bloody well at top club level in Japan.
@nostrildamus kind of beat me too it Nostri, he certainly won plenty, funnily enough, never anything at super level, which kind of makes a joke of super titiles being the reason for making someone a test coach. I mean Robbie Deans got about 5 super titles, and was hardly a success as a test coach ,though seems to be doing bloody well at top club level in Japan.
Are we talking about Eddie Jones here? The Eddie Jones who won the 2001 Super title (the first non-NZ side) and whose Brumbies were the team to beat for about three years. Or some other Eddie Jones?
-
@nostrildamus kind of beat me too it Nostri, he certainly won plenty, funnily enough, never anything at super level, which kind of makes a joke of super titiles being the reason for making someone a test coach. I mean Robbie Deans got about 5 super titles, and was hardly a success as a test coach ,though seems to be doing bloody well at top club level in Japan.
Are we talking about Eddie Jones here? The Eddie Jones who won the 2001 Super title (the first non-NZ side) and whose Brumbies were the team to beat for about three years. Or some other Eddie Jones?
@Chester-Draws said in Foster:
@nostrildamus kind of beat me too it Nostri, he certainly won plenty, funnily enough, never anything at super level, which kind of makes a joke of super titiles being the reason for making someone a test coach. I mean Robbie Deans got about 5 super titles, and was hardly a success as a test coach ,though seems to be doing bloody well at top club level in Japan.
Are we talking about Eddie Jones here? The Eddie Jones who won the 2001 Super title (the first non-NZ side) and whose Brumbies were the team to beat for about three years. Or some other Eddie Jones?
Yep, as I said, I think I getting old, forgetting Rassie and Eddies win in early 2000s, I was in Qld when Eddie coached there, and must of blanked out his early sucess lol.
-
I'd have to say that from the heights of 2011, which you could argue was our best All Black team ever that our current day All Blacks are literally results and history-wise the worst All Black team we've ever had.
The decline has been remarkable.
The asleep at the wheel, don't worry it will come right even when it doesn't approach has been literally a marvel to behold.
@Windows97 said in Foster:
I'd have to say that from the heights of 2011, which you could argue was our best All Black team ever that our current day All Blacks are literally results and history-wise the worst All Black team we've ever had.
I must retort. Oh, and the next 3-4 years were crap as well - despite the NZRFU pretty ruthlessly sacking coaches who didn't get the required results.
-
@Windows97 said in Foster:
I'd have to say that from the heights of 2011, which you could argue was our best All Black team ever that our current day All Blacks are literally results and history-wise the worst All Black team we've ever had.
I must retort. Oh, and the next 3-4 years were crap as well - despite the NZRFU pretty ruthlessly sacking coaches who didn't get the required results.
@Victor-Meldrew said in Foster:
@Windows97 said in Foster:
I'd have to say that from the heights of 2011, which you could argue was our best All Black team ever that our current day All Blacks are literally results and history-wise the worst All Black team we've ever had.
I must retort. Oh, and the next 3-4 years were crap as well - despite the NZRFU pretty ruthlessly sacking coaches who didn't get the required results.
Yeah immediacy bias
-
Probably a lot of timing involved with looking good as a coach . Not talking about any coach in particular, just generalising .
But moving into the right job at the right time taking over the right group of players and vica versa can make or break you .
@kiwiinmelb said in Foster:
Probably a lot of timing involved with looking good as a coach . Not talking about any coach in particular, just generalising .
But moving into the right job at the right time taking over the right group of players and vica versa can make or break you .
A pretty important consideration and as has been alluded to, take SCW. Known as the Bus “cos he weren’t no coach”, but he had some great cattle.
In re NZ many have compared Henry’s and Hansen’s reigns to Foster without much consideration given to the number of all time greats they had at their disposal - and in their primes. Not to denigrate H&H’s achievements or to make excuses for Foster, but that issue does have a significant impact.
-
@kiwiinmelb said in Foster:
Probably a lot of timing involved with looking good as a coach . Not talking about any coach in particular, just generalising .
But moving into the right job at the right time taking over the right group of players and vica versa can make or break you .
A pretty important consideration and as has been alluded to, take SCW. Known as the Bus “cos he weren’t no coach”, but he had some great cattle.
In re NZ many have compared Henry’s and Hansen’s reigns to Foster without much consideration given to the number of all time greats they had at their disposal - and in their primes. Not to denigrate H&H’s achievements or to make excuses for Foster, but that issue does have a significant impact.
@Catogrande said in Foster:
@kiwiinmelb said in Foster:
Probably a lot of timing involved with looking good as a coach . Not talking about any coach in particular, just generalising .
But moving into the right job at the right time taking over the right group of players and vica versa can make or break you .
A pretty important consideration and as has been alluded to, take SCW. Known as the Bus “cos he weren’t no coach”, but he had some great cattle.
In re NZ many have compared Henry’s and Hansen’s reigns to Foster without much consideration given to the number of all time greats they had at their disposal - and in their primes. Not to denigrate H&H’s achievements or to make excuses for Foster, but that issue does have a significant impact.
There's a chicken and egg though - really good coaches lift players, make them better and really have an effect on the team. Dane Coles is a great example; he got turned from a hothead loose rake to a world class hooker with pace and swerve like a back, and niggle like Fitzpatrick.
-
@Catogrande said in Foster:
@kiwiinmelb said in Foster:
Probably a lot of timing involved with looking good as a coach . Not talking about any coach in particular, just generalising .
But moving into the right job at the right time taking over the right group of players and vica versa can make or break you .
A pretty important consideration and as has been alluded to, take SCW. Known as the Bus “cos he weren’t no coach”, but he had some great cattle.
In re NZ many have compared Henry’s and Hansen’s reigns to Foster without much consideration given to the number of all time greats they had at their disposal - and in their primes. Not to denigrate H&H’s achievements or to make excuses for Foster, but that issue does have a significant impact.
There's a chicken and egg though - really good coaches lift players, make them better and really have an effect on the team. Dane Coles is a great example; he got turned from a hothead loose rake to a world class hooker with pace and swerve like a back, and niggle like Fitzpatrick.
@Catogrande said in Foster:
@kiwiinmelb said in Foster:
Probably a lot of timing involved with looking good as a coach . Not talking about any coach in particular, just generalising .
But moving into the right job at the right time taking over the right group of players and vica versa can make or break you .
A pretty important consideration and as has been alluded to, take SCW. Known as the Bus “cos he weren’t no coach”, but he had some great cattle.
In re NZ many have compared Henry’s and Hansen’s reigns to Foster without much consideration given to the number of all time greats they had at their disposal - and in their primes. Not to denigrate H&H’s achievements or to make excuses for Foster, but that issue does have a significant impact.
There's a chicken and egg though - really good coaches lift players, make them better and really have an effect on the team. Dane Coles is a great example; he got turned from a hothead loose rake to a world class hooker with pace and swerve like a back, and niggle like Fitzpatrick.
Oh for sure. I do wonder what England might have achieved back in the late 90s, early 2000s with an effective coach. In all that time of pretty much NH dominance we won only one Grand Slam - and that with a who's who line up of England greats.
-
@Catogrande said in Foster:
@kiwiinmelb said in Foster:
Probably a lot of timing involved with looking good as a coach . Not talking about any coach in particular, just generalising .
But moving into the right job at the right time taking over the right group of players and vica versa can make or break you .
A pretty important consideration and as has been alluded to, take SCW. Known as the Bus “cos he weren’t no coach”, but he had some great cattle.
In re NZ many have compared Henry’s and Hansen’s reigns to Foster without much consideration given to the number of all time greats they had at their disposal - and in their primes. Not to denigrate H&H’s achievements or to make excuses for Foster, but that issue does have a significant impact.
There's a chicken and egg though - really good coaches lift players, make them better and really have an effect on the team. Dane Coles is a great example; he got turned from a hothead loose rake to a world class hooker with pace and swerve like a back, and niggle like Fitzpatrick.
Oh for sure. I do wonder what England might have achieved back in the late 90s, early 2000s with an effective coach. In all that time of pretty much NH dominance we won only one Grand Slam - and that with a who's who line up of England greats.
@Catogrande said in Foster:
@Catogrande said in Foster:
@kiwiinmelb said in Foster:
Probably a lot of timing involved with looking good as a coach . Not talking about any coach in particular, just generalising .
But moving into the right job at the right time taking over the right group of players and vica versa can make or break you .
A pretty important consideration and as has been alluded to, take SCW. Known as the Bus “cos he weren’t no coach”, but he had some great cattle.
In re NZ many have compared Henry’s and Hansen’s reigns to Foster without much consideration given to the number of all time greats they had at their disposal - and in their primes. Not to denigrate H&H’s achievements or to make excuses for Foster, but that issue does have a significant impact.
There's a chicken and egg though - really good coaches lift players, make them better and really have an effect on the team. Dane Coles is a great example; he got turned from a hothead loose rake to a world class hooker with pace and swerve like a back, and niggle like Fitzpatrick.
Oh for sure. I do wonder what England might have achieved back in the late 90s, early 2000s with an effective coach. In all that time of pretty much NH dominance we won only one Grand Slam - and that with a who's who line up of England greats.
I just remember seeing Josh Lewsey (who I rated very highly ) go into England camp and the longer he was there, the worse he got. Classic coaching setup not getting the best from players
-
@Catogrande said in Foster:
@Catogrande said in Foster:
@kiwiinmelb said in Foster:
Probably a lot of timing involved with looking good as a coach . Not talking about any coach in particular, just generalising .
But moving into the right job at the right time taking over the right group of players and vica versa can make or break you .
A pretty important consideration and as has been alluded to, take SCW. Known as the Bus “cos he weren’t no coach”, but he had some great cattle.
In re NZ many have compared Henry’s and Hansen’s reigns to Foster without much consideration given to the number of all time greats they had at their disposal - and in their primes. Not to denigrate H&H’s achievements or to make excuses for Foster, but that issue does have a significant impact.
There's a chicken and egg though - really good coaches lift players, make them better and really have an effect on the team. Dane Coles is a great example; he got turned from a hothead loose rake to a world class hooker with pace and swerve like a back, and niggle like Fitzpatrick.
Oh for sure. I do wonder what England might have achieved back in the late 90s, early 2000s with an effective coach. In all that time of pretty much NH dominance we won only one Grand Slam - and that with a who's who line up of England greats.
I just remember seeing Josh Lewsey (who I rated very highly ) go into England camp and the longer he was there, the worse he got. Classic coaching setup not getting the best from players
@Catogrande said in Foster:
@Catogrande said in Foster:
@kiwiinmelb said in Foster:
Probably a lot of timing involved with looking good as a coach . Not talking about any coach in particular, just generalising .
But moving into the right job at the right time taking over the right group of players and vica versa can make or break you .
A pretty important consideration and as has been alluded to, take SCW. Known as the Bus “cos he weren’t no coach”, but he had some great cattle.
In re NZ many have compared Henry’s and Hansen’s reigns to Foster without much consideration given to the number of all time greats they had at their disposal - and in their primes. Not to denigrate H&H’s achievements or to make excuses for Foster, but that issue does have a significant impact.
There's a chicken and egg though - really good coaches lift players, make them better and really have an effect on the team. Dane Coles is a great example; he got turned from a hothead loose rake to a world class hooker with pace and swerve like a back, and niggle like Fitzpatrick.
Oh for sure. I do wonder what England might have achieved back in the late 90s, early 2000s with an effective coach. In all that time of pretty much NH dominance we won only one Grand Slam - and that with a who's who line up of England greats.
I just remember seeing Josh Lewsey (who I rated very highly ) go into England camp and the longer he was there, the worse he got. Classic coaching setup not getting the best from players
Classic SCW. Lewsey - great full back, OK wing. Jason Robinson, great wing, OK full back. Now where shall I select these two this week..?
Edit: And this is a thing with so many coaches. Seemingly making selection and replacement decisions just so they can show they are "coaching".
-
@Catogrande said in Foster:
@Catogrande said in Foster:
@kiwiinmelb said in Foster:
Probably a lot of timing involved with looking good as a coach . Not talking about any coach in particular, just generalising .
But moving into the right job at the right time taking over the right group of players and vica versa can make or break you .
A pretty important consideration and as has been alluded to, take SCW. Known as the Bus “cos he weren’t no coach”, but he had some great cattle.
In re NZ many have compared Henry’s and Hansen’s reigns to Foster without much consideration given to the number of all time greats they had at their disposal - and in their primes. Not to denigrate H&H’s achievements or to make excuses for Foster, but that issue does have a significant impact.
There's a chicken and egg though - really good coaches lift players, make them better and really have an effect on the team. Dane Coles is a great example; he got turned from a hothead loose rake to a world class hooker with pace and swerve like a back, and niggle like Fitzpatrick.
Oh for sure. I do wonder what England might have achieved back in the late 90s, early 2000s with an effective coach. In all that time of pretty much NH dominance we won only one Grand Slam - and that with a who's who line up of England greats.
I just remember seeing Josh Lewsey (who I rated very highly ) go into England camp and the longer he was there, the worse he got. Classic coaching setup not getting the best from players
Classic SCW. Lewsey - great full back, OK wing. Jason Robinson, great wing, OK full back. Now where shall I select these two this week..?
Edit: And this is a thing with so many coaches. Seemingly making selection and replacement decisions just so they can show they are "coaching".
@Catogrande said in Foster:
@Catogrande said in Foster:
@Catogrande said in Foster:
@kiwiinmelb said in Foster:
Probably a lot of timing involved with looking good as a coach . Not talking about any coach in particular, just generalising .
But moving into the right job at the right time taking over the right group of players and vica versa can make or break you .
A pretty important consideration and as has been alluded to, take SCW. Known as the Bus “cos he weren’t no coach”, but he had some great cattle.
In re NZ many have compared Henry’s and Hansen’s reigns to Foster without much consideration given to the number of all time greats they had at their disposal - and in their primes. Not to denigrate H&H’s achievements or to make excuses for Foster, but that issue does have a significant impact.
There's a chicken and egg though - really good coaches lift players, make them better and really have an effect on the team. Dane Coles is a great example; he got turned from a hothead loose rake to a world class hooker with pace and swerve like a back, and niggle like Fitzpatrick.
Oh for sure. I do wonder what England might have achieved back in the late 90s, early 2000s with an effective coach. In all that time of pretty much NH dominance we won only one Grand Slam - and that with a who's who line up of England greats.
I just remember seeing Josh Lewsey (who I rated very highly ) go into England camp and the longer he was there, the worse he got. Classic coaching setup not getting the best from players
Classic SCW. Lewsey - great full back, OK wing. Jason Robinson, great wing, OK full back. Now where shall I select these two this week..?
Edit: And this is a thing with so many coaches. Seemingly making selection and replacement decisions just so they can show they are "coaching".
Selection is coaching
Players in their best position
Combinations which complement and are greater than the sum of the parts -
@Windows97 said in Foster:
I'd have to say that from the heights of 2011, which you could argue was our best All Black team ever that our current day All Blacks are literally results and history-wise the worst All Black team we've ever had.
I must retort. Oh, and the next 3-4 years were crap as well - despite the NZRFU pretty ruthlessly sacking coaches who didn't get the required results.
@Victor-Meldrew said in Foster:
@Windows97 said in Foster:
I'd have to say that from the heights of 2011, which you could argue was our best All Black team ever that our current day All Blacks are literally results and history-wise the worst All Black team we've ever had.
I must retort. Oh, and the next 3-4 years were crap as well - despite the NZRFU pretty ruthlessly sacking coaches who didn't get the required results.
We were crap until about '78. And then we were inconsistent until '81.
-
@Victor-Meldrew said in Foster:
@Windows97 said in Foster:
I'd have to say that from the heights of 2011, which you could argue was our best All Black team ever that our current day All Blacks are literally results and history-wise the worst All Black team we've ever had.
I must retort. Oh, and the next 3-4 years were crap as well - despite the NZRFU pretty ruthlessly sacking coaches who didn't get the required results.
We were crap until about '78. And then we were inconsistent until '81.
@Victor-Meldrew said in Foster:
@Windows97 said in Foster:
I'd have to say that from the heights of 2011, which you could argue was our best All Black team ever that our current day All Blacks are literally results and history-wise the worst All Black team we've ever had.
I must retort. Oh, and the next 3-4 years were crap as well - despite the NZRFU pretty ruthlessly sacking coaches who didn't get the required results.
We were crap until about '78. And then we were inconsistent until '81.
IIRC 1977 & Mourie was the turning point, that team played smart rugby. But fuck, it was awful time to be an AB supporter.
Eerily similar to now with a big clamour for the wonder-coach, Bob Duff, to sort everything out. Instead they went backwards.
-
@Victor-Meldrew said in Foster:
I hope they keep Foster as coach until 2030 its so amusing watching people try to defend him.
It's not people defending Foster. It's people not believing the hype that a coach who's undoubtedly good at SR level but with minimal and patchy experience at international level - and zero experience at Test level - is the magic solution to restore the AB's to the glory days, that NZR knows he will do this but there is some secret illuminati plot within NZR to prevent it happening.
So you end up with stupid arguments that Foster should be sacked as he lost to a team we've never lost to before, but a different criteria should apply to Robertson as he needs time to settle into the role due to inexperience at Test level.
International experience has nothing to do with coaching ability, you've either got 'it' or you don't.
It's a skill that is innate & in-built for guys such as Jones, Razor, Galthie, Erasmus, etc..
Foster just doesn't have 'it', the evidence is... he has achieved underwhelming results in every head coaching role across his 20 year coaching career with Waikato, Chiefs, & now the All Blacks...
Kirwan was the head coach of Italy & Japan, he was a poor Blues coach, after coaching Wales for 12 years Gatland lost 8/8 of his Chiefs matches, their worst losing streak ever. Experience is irrelevant in many cases.
@kiwi_expat said in Foster:
@Victor-Meldrew said in Foster:
I hope they keep Foster as coach until 2030 its so amusing watching people try to defend him.
It's not people defending Foster. It's people not believing the hype that a coach who's undoubtedly good at SR level but with minimal and patchy experience at international level - and zero experience at Test level - is the magic solution to restore the AB's to the glory days, that NZR knows he will do this but there is some secret illuminati plot within NZR to prevent it happening.
So you end up with stupid arguments that Foster should be sacked as he lost to a team we've never lost to before, but a different criteria should apply to Robertson as he needs time to settle into the role due to inexperience at Test level.
International experience has nothing to do with coaching ability, you've either got 'it' or you don't.
It's a skill that is innate & in-built for guys such as Jones, Razor, Galthie, Erasmus, etc..
Foster just doesn't have 'it', the evidence is... he has achieved underwhelming results in every head coaching role across his 20 year coaching career with Waikato, Chiefs, & now the All Blacks...
Kirwan was the head coach of Italy & Japan, he was a poor Blues coach, after coaching Wales for 12 years Gatland lost 8/8 of his Chiefs matches, their worst losing streak ever. Experience is irrelevant in many cases.
What is your evidence (examples welcome) that Robertson has the innate / in built skill to be an international coach?
-
@Machpants said in 2022 All Blacks NH tour:
Gawd he's an unispiring speaker
He's full of cliches - learnings, excitement blah blah blah
@TheMojoman said in 2022 All Blacks NH tour:
@Machpants said in 2022 All Blacks NH tour:
Gawd he's an unispiring speaker
He's full of cliches - learnings, excitement blah blah blah
I can’t stand him. Razor is definitely a younger players coach . More inspirational. Foster is limp. You’d get more lift from a cheese sandwich .
-
@Victor-Meldrew said in Foster:
@Windows97 said in Foster:
I'd have to say that from the heights of 2011, which you could argue was our best All Black team ever that our current day All Blacks are literally results and history-wise the worst All Black team we've ever had.
I must retort. Oh, and the next 3-4 years were crap as well - despite the NZRFU pretty ruthlessly sacking coaches who didn't get the required results.
We were crap until about '78. And then we were inconsistent until '81.
IIRC 1977 & Mourie was the turning point, that team played smart rugby. But fuck, it was awful time to be an AB supporter.
Eerily similar to now with a big clamour for the wonder-coach, Bob Duff, to sort everything out. Instead they went backwards.
Ah the 70's a great time to be growing up supporting the AB's NOT!!!
I didn't bother replying to the original post that caused this little diversion as I thought @booboo summed it up nicely.
Add to the similarities it came after an era of game changing global dominance, by a team stacked with all time legends coached by one of the greats.
Here's that decade's record Won 24 - Drew 2 Lost 15. Nine of the wins were against Oz, Ireland and Scotland who were the equivalents of today's Argentina I guess.
By comparison Fozzie's era has been a golden age ...
