Foster, Robertson etc
-
@taniwharugby said in Foster, Robertson etc:
I cant believe that Foster would consider staying on past the RWC
He's on a million a year salary... who wouldn't want to stay on?
@Asterik6 said in Foster, Robertson etc:
@taniwharugby said in Foster, Robertson etc:
I cant believe that Foster would consider staying on past the RWC
He's on a million a year salary... who wouldn't want to stay on?
Most only stay for a while, and think Mariner sums up why a lot of the reason is quite succinctly.
-
Totally, I think it's pathetic for a bunch of professionals to use distraction as an excuse. Get over yourselves, leadership and personel changes happen all the time. Players have said what they're doing, that gives clarity and removes distractions. Stop being so fucking precious and sneaky. State what's happening, including NZR and foster. Razor has been honest and said what he wants, now so should NZR. It's the opaqueness that leads to speculation
@Machpants said in Foster, Robertson etc:
Totally, I think it's pathetic for a bunch of professionals to use distraction as an excuse. Get over yourselves, leadership and personel changes happen all the time. Players have said what they're doing, that gives clarity and removes distractions. Stop being so fucking precious and sneaky. State what's happening, including NZR and foster. Razor has been honest and said what he wants, now so should NZR. It's the opaqueness that leads to speculation
No NZR should say what's going on when it suits them, not because Razor has said something.
-
@Machpants said in Foster, Robertson etc:
Totally, I think it's pathetic for a bunch of professionals to use distraction as an excuse. Get over yourselves, leadership and personel changes happen all the time. Players have said what they're doing, that gives clarity and removes distractions. Stop being so fucking precious and sneaky. State what's happening, including NZR and foster. Razor has been honest and said what he wants, now so should NZR. It's the opaqueness that leads to speculation
No NZR should say what's going on when it suits them, not because Razor has said something.
@Dan54 said in Foster, Robertson etc:
@Machpants said in Foster, Robertson etc:
Totally, I think it's pathetic for a bunch of professionals to use distraction as an excuse. Get over yourselves, leadership and personel changes happen all the time. Players have said what they're doing, that gives clarity and removes distractions. Stop being so fucking precious and sneaky. State what's happening, including NZR and foster. Razor has been honest and said what he wants, now so should NZR. It's the opaqueness that leads to speculation
No NZR should say what's going on when it suits them, not because Razor has said something.
You've missed my point, some people are whining about distractions for the team. If everyone was up front and honest, there would be none. Get the coach decided and announced, and then let foster carry on fucking over the all blacks legacy until some one else arrives. No distractions if there is nothing to speculate and ask interview questions about
-
@Dan54 said in Foster, Robertson etc:
@booboo said in Foster, Robertson etc:
@Chris-B said in Foster, Robertson etc:
Mitch got sacked with an 82% record. Wayne Smith got sacked with a 70% record.
Good post, but just to add re the quoted bits, there were reasons.
Actually not quite correct, Smith actually resigned and wasn't reappointed which I think we can all agree isn't getting sacked! I personally would of reappointed him myself, but have to admit my opinion rightfully wasn't asked by NZR.
I agree with the first bit. It was a new contract that he wasn't offered.
Have to question the consistency of the second bit: if your opinion isn't good enough then your opinion NZR is better than your opinion doesn't hold much muster.
But if your argument means to say they have a process and knowledge that you don't have, that would be more reasonable except
1 they don't seem to have had a clear and consistent process
2 their knowledge led them to renew/extend Foster's contract when the signs were that the AB performance was stale and slipping.What is done is done but the above isn't a strong argument to have faith in the NZR's decision-making process and executive efficiency.
@nostrildamus said in Foster, Robertson etc:
@Dan54 said in Foster, Robertson etc:
@booboo said in Foster, Robertson etc:
@Chris-B said in Foster, Robertson etc:
Mitch got sacked with an 82% record. Wayne Smith got sacked with a 70% record.
Good post, but just to add re the quoted bits, there were reasons.
Actually not quite correct, Smith actually resigned and wasn't reappointed which I think we can all agree isn't getting sacked! I personally would of reappointed him myself, but have to admit my opinion rightfully wasn't asked by NZR.
I agree with the first bit. It was a new contract that he wasn't offered.
Have to question the consistency of the second bit: if your opinion isn't good enough then your opinion NZR is better than your opinion doesn't hold much muster.
But if your argument means to say they have a process and knowledge that you don't have, that would be more reasonable except
1 they don't seem to have had a clear and consistent process
2 their knowledge led them to renew/extend Foster's contract when the signs were that the AB performance was stale and slipping.What is done is done but the above isn't a strong argument to have faith in the NZR's decision-making process and executive efficiency.
Who doesn't have a clear and consistent process? NZR? I have never known the absolute process that is used, and neither do I need to. But as the board actually is changed reasonably often I would assume that the process would change a bit with each one. I have been on quite a few rugby boards (as a few on here have) and know that almost every process for appointing coaches, managers etc etc is changed reasonably often, no big deal . It's the same in anyting you never say but thats how we did it 5 years ago, you remain fuid.
I was tied up with rugby (again like some)in Aus and never knew or felt I was ever going to need to know how they appointed Wallaby coaches , and I would bet that is case all round world. As Mariner says seem we kiwi 'fans' are arrogant enough to think we shoud know. -
@Dan54 said in Foster, Robertson etc:
@Machpants said in Foster, Robertson etc:
Totally, I think it's pathetic for a bunch of professionals to use distraction as an excuse. Get over yourselves, leadership and personel changes happen all the time. Players have said what they're doing, that gives clarity and removes distractions. Stop being so fucking precious and sneaky. State what's happening, including NZR and foster. Razor has been honest and said what he wants, now so should NZR. It's the opaqueness that leads to speculation
No NZR should say what's going on when it suits them, not because Razor has said something.
You've missed my point, some people are whining about distractions for the team. If everyone was up front and honest, there would be none. Get the coach decided and announced, and then let foster carry on fucking over the all blacks legacy until some one else arrives. No distractions if there is nothing to speculate and ask interview questions about
@Machpants yea its ok for players to announce thier plans post-RWC and apparently is not a distraction, but there cant be discussions about the coach post RWC cos its a distraction
-
Any AB coach knows exactly what he's getting into when applying for the job and Foster was hardly on the periphery before he got the gig. For a million bucks and free food, transport and other fringe benefits I'll happily endure the wrath of the press and angry rugby fans. They can rage online while I clean myself off with 100 dollar notes.
But yeah, Foster would have to be something of a masochist if he reapplied. It's a miracle that he still has the job and if another miracle occurs and the ABs win the RWC then he'd be absolutely mad to tempt fate.
-
Any AB coach knows exactly what he's getting into when applying for the job and Foster was hardly on the periphery before he got the gig. For a million bucks and free food, transport and other fringe benefits I'll happily endure the wrath of the press and angry rugby fans. They can rage online while I clean myself off with 100 dollar notes.
But yeah, Foster would have to be something of a masochist if he reapplied. It's a miracle that he still has the job and if another miracle occurs and the ABs win the RWC then he'd be absolutely mad to tempt fate.
@Rancid-Schnitzel said in Foster, Robertson etc:
Any AB coach knows exactly what he's getting into when applying for the job and Foster was hardly on the periphery before he got the gig. For a million bucks and free food, transport and other fringe benefits I'll happily endure the wrath of the press and angry rugby fans. They can rage online while I clean myself off with 100 dollar notes.
But yeah, Foster would have to be something of a masochist if he reapplied. It's a miracle that he still has the job and if another miracle occurs and the ABs win the RWC then he'd be absolutely mad to tempt fate.
I agree, the best course of action for Fozz will be to follow Beaver's lead and ride off into the sunset should the ABs win (unlikely as that is)
-
@Asterik6 said in Foster, Robertson etc:
@taniwharugby said in Foster, Robertson etc:
I cant believe that Foster would consider staying on past the RWC
He's on a million a year salary... who wouldn't want to stay on?
I'd want more than that to put up with the level of scrutiny and bullshit that goes with it
I've always said it's the worst job in the sport. You are expected to win every game, and get no credit when you do win. But you'll cop enormous shit if you not only fail to win, but don't play in a manner that pleases the public
Players get all your credit, but you take all the blame. Because kiwi rugby fans are passionate but arrogant and in the main, clueless.
@mariner4life said in Foster, Robertson etc:
@Asterik6 said in Foster, Robertson etc:
@taniwharugby said in Foster, Robertson etc:
I cant believe that Foster would consider staying on past the RWC
He's on a million a year salary... who wouldn't want to stay on?
I'd want more than that to put up with the level of scrutiny and bullshit that goes with it
I've always said it's the worst job in the sport. You are expected to win every game, and get no credit when you do win. But you'll cop enormous shit if you not only fail to win, but don't play in a manner that pleases the public
Players get all your credit, but you take all the blame. Because kiwi rugby fans are passionate but arrogant and in the main, clueless.
Take the cash - and then also save money on your internet, Sky and newspaper subscriptions - you don't wanna be reading any of that!
-
@nostrildamus said in Foster, Robertson etc:
@Dan54 said in Foster, Robertson etc:
@booboo said in Foster, Robertson etc:
@Chris-B said in Foster, Robertson etc:
Mitch got sacked with an 82% record. Wayne Smith got sacked with a 70% record.
Good post, but just to add re the quoted bits, there were reasons.
Actually not quite correct, Smith actually resigned and wasn't reappointed which I think we can all agree isn't getting sacked! I personally would of reappointed him myself, but have to admit my opinion rightfully wasn't asked by NZR.
I agree with the first bit. It was a new contract that he wasn't offered.
Have to question the consistency of the second bit: if your opinion isn't good enough then your opinion NZR is better than your opinion doesn't hold much muster.
But if your argument means to say they have a process and knowledge that you don't have, that would be more reasonable except
1 they don't seem to have had a clear and consistent process
2 their knowledge led them to renew/extend Foster's contract when the signs were that the AB performance was stale and slipping.What is done is done but the above isn't a strong argument to have faith in the NZR's decision-making process and executive efficiency.
Who doesn't have a clear and consistent process? NZR? I have never known the absolute process that is used, and neither do I need to. But as the board actually is changed reasonably often I would assume that the process would change a bit with each one. I have been on quite a few rugby boards (as a few on here have) and know that almost every process for appointing coaches, managers etc etc is changed reasonably often, no big deal . It's the same in anyting you never say but thats how we did it 5 years ago, you remain fuid.
I was tied up with rugby (again like some)in Aus and never knew or felt I was ever going to need to know how they appointed Wallaby coaches , and I would bet that is case all round world. As Mariner says seem we kiwi 'fans' are arrogant enough to think we shoud know.@Dan54 said in Foster, Robertson etc:
@nostrildamus said in Foster, Robertson etc:
@Dan54 said in Foster, Robertson etc:
@booboo said in Foster, Robertson etc:
@Chris-B said in Foster, Robertson etc:
Mitch got sacked with an 82% record. Wayne Smith got sacked with a 70% record.
Good post, but just to add re the quoted bits, there were reasons.
Actually not quite correct, Smith actually resigned and wasn't reappointed which I think we can all agree isn't getting sacked! I personally would of reappointed him myself, but have to admit my opinion rightfully wasn't asked by NZR.
I agree with the first bit. It was a new contract that he wasn't offered.
Have to question the consistency of the second bit: if your opinion isn't good enough then your opinion NZR is better than your opinion doesn't hold much muster.
But if your argument means to say they have a process and knowledge that you don't have, that would be more reasonable except
1 they don't seem to have had a clear and consistent process
2 their knowledge led them to renew/extend Foster's contract when the signs were that the AB performance was stale and slipping.What is done is done but the above isn't a strong argument to have faith in the NZR's decision-making process and executive efficiency.
Who doesn't have a clear and consistent process? NZR? I have never known the absolute process that is used, and neither do I need to. But as the board actually is changed reasonably often I would assume that the process would change a bit with each one. I have been on quite a few rugby boards (as a few on here have) and know that almost every process for appointing coaches, managers etc etc is changed reasonably often, no big deal . It's the same in anyting you never say but thats how we did it 5 years ago, you remain fuid.
I was tied up with rugby (again like some)in Aus and never knew or felt I was ever going to need to know how they appointed Wallaby coaches , and I would bet that is case all round world. As Mariner says seem we kiwi 'fans' are arrogant enough to think we shoud know.Last time, the process was a total disaster.
Based on the Deans-Henry face-off, NZR required the head coaching applicants to turn up with pre-assembled teams - thereby shutting off access to the most skilled assistants.
With the benefit of hindsight, the rest of us (and frankly NZR found out) can see how disastrous this turned out. Whomever was the supporting recruitment agency should hand back their fee in disgrace!
-
@Dan54 said in Foster, Robertson etc:
@nostrildamus said in Foster, Robertson etc:
@Dan54 said in Foster, Robertson etc:
@booboo said in Foster, Robertson etc:
@Chris-B said in Foster, Robertson etc:
Mitch got sacked with an 82% record. Wayne Smith got sacked with a 70% record.
Good post, but just to add re the quoted bits, there were reasons.
Actually not quite correct, Smith actually resigned and wasn't reappointed which I think we can all agree isn't getting sacked! I personally would of reappointed him myself, but have to admit my opinion rightfully wasn't asked by NZR.
I agree with the first bit. It was a new contract that he wasn't offered.
Have to question the consistency of the second bit: if your opinion isn't good enough then your opinion NZR is better than your opinion doesn't hold much muster.
But if your argument means to say they have a process and knowledge that you don't have, that would be more reasonable except
1 they don't seem to have had a clear and consistent process
2 their knowledge led them to renew/extend Foster's contract when the signs were that the AB performance was stale and slipping.What is done is done but the above isn't a strong argument to have faith in the NZR's decision-making process and executive efficiency.
Who doesn't have a clear and consistent process? NZR? I have never known the absolute process that is used, and neither do I need to. But as the board actually is changed reasonably often I would assume that the process would change a bit with each one. I have been on quite a few rugby boards (as a few on here have) and know that almost every process for appointing coaches, managers etc etc is changed reasonably often, no big deal . It's the same in anyting you never say but thats how we did it 5 years ago, you remain fuid.
I was tied up with rugby (again like some)in Aus and never knew or felt I was ever going to need to know how they appointed Wallaby coaches , and I would bet that is case all round world. As Mariner says seem we kiwi 'fans' are arrogant enough to think we shoud know.Last time, the process was a total disaster.
Based on the Deans-Henry face-off, NZR required the head coaching applicants to turn up with pre-assembled teams - thereby shutting off access to the most skilled assistants.
With the benefit of hindsight, the rest of us (and frankly NZR found out) can see how disastrous this turned out. Whomever was the supporting recruitment agency should hand back their fee in disgrace!
-
@Machpants The teams are already assembled.
Hopefully, NZR have the brains to interview the Head Coach applicants as individuals and not take the teams lock, stock and barrel.
-
@Stargazer said in Foster, Robertson etc:
Splitting hairs.
That's the Fern in a nutshell.
Time to mute this thread again. It's annoying me immensely.
Threads are not airports, no need to announce your departure.
@Kirwan said in Foster, Robertson etc:
.
Threads are not airports, no need to announce your departure.
Very well written!
-
@Victor-Meldrew said in Foster, Robertson etc:
@Machpants said in Foster, Robertson etc:
Totally, I think it's pathetic for a bunch of professionals to use distraction as an excuse. Get over yourselves, leadership and personel changes happen all the time. Players have said what they're doing, that gives clarity and removes distractions. Stop being so fucking precious and sneaky. State what's happening, including NZR and foster. Razor has been honest and said what he wants, now so should NZR. It's the opaqueness that leads to speculation
Pretty much agree. Can understand their wanting to control teh narrative, but some half-decent PR & Comms would help enormously
Razor has been honest and said what he wants, now so should NZR. It's the opaqueness that leads to speculation
Has he? We need to want to see if the rumour of his asking for a release to coach Fiji is correct in light of his previous comments about wanting to stay in NZ.
They are not mutually exclusive, he wants to COACH NZ not STAY in NZ. He can't coach NZ until after the RWC so taking a side job of Fiji for RWC2023 is a sensible thing. Utter stupidity for NZR to turn it down, Razor gets experience elsewhere, international and RWC experience. Not like Fiji will be able to do much until after SR and NH comps have finished anyway.
I’ve had options, but I’ve always said, my preference is to be here in New Zealand and coach my country
@Machpants said in Foster, Robertson etc:
They are not mutually exclusive, he wants to COACH NZ not STAY in NZ. He can't coach NZ until after the RWC so taking a side job of Fiji for RWC2023 is a sensible thing. Utter stupidity for NZR to turn it down, Razor gets experience elsewhere, international and RWC experience. Not like Fiji will be able to do much until after SR and NH comps have finished anyway.
Whether it's a good idea or not (his getting international experience is a really good one, I think) isn't really the issue - I'm highlighting the need to judge the people involved consistently.
I don't think you can attack NZR for not being open, honest and straightforward and not hold other people - in this case Robinson - to the same standards.
-
@Machpants said in Foster, Robertson etc:
They are not mutually exclusive, he wants to COACH NZ not STAY in NZ. He can't coach NZ until after the RWC so taking a side job of Fiji for RWC2023 is a sensible thing. Utter stupidity for NZR to turn it down, Razor gets experience elsewhere, international and RWC experience. Not like Fiji will be able to do much until after SR and NH comps have finished anyway.
Whether it's a good idea or not (his getting international experience is a really good one, I think) isn't really the issue - I'm highlighting the need to judge the people involved consistently.
I don't think you can attack NZR for not being open, honest and straightforward and not hold other people - in this case Robinson - to the same standards.
@Victor-Meldrew said in [Foster, Robertson etc](
Whether it's a good idea or not (his getting international experience is a really good one, I think) isn't really the issue - I'm highlighting the need to judge the people involved consistently.
I don't think you can attack NZR for not being open, honest and straightforward and not hold other people - in this case Robinson - to the same standards.
Have you been drinking?
-
@Victor-Meldrew said in [Foster, Robertson etc](
Whether it's a good idea or not (his getting international experience is a really good one, I think) isn't really the issue - I'm highlighting the need to judge the people involved consistently.
I don't think you can attack NZR for not being open, honest and straightforward and not hold other people - in this case Robinson - to the same standards.
Have you been drinking?
@Old-Samurai-Jack said in Foster, Robertson etc:
@Victor-Meldrew said in [Foster, Robertson etc](
Whether it's a good idea or not (his getting international experience is a really good one, I think) isn't really the issue - I'm highlighting the need to judge the people involved consistently.
I don't think you can attack NZR for not being open, honest and straightforward and not hold other people - in this case Robinson - to the same standards.
Have you been drinking?
Did you read the whole sentence or did you just get triggered by the first part?
-
@Old-Samurai-Jack said in Foster, Robertson etc:
@Victor-Meldrew said in [Foster, Robertson etc](
Whether it's a good idea or not (his getting international experience is a really good one, I think) isn't really the issue - I'm highlighting the need to judge the people involved consistently.
I don't think you can attack NZR for not being open, honest and straightforward and not hold other people - in this case Robinson - to the same standards.
Have you been drinking?
Did you read the whole sentence or did you just get triggered by the first part?
@Victor-Meldrew More triggered by you saying I was triggered to be honest.
NZR shouldn't be in the same sentence as the words you used IMHO:beaming_face_with_smiling_eyes: -
2024 is going to be tough regardless of who is steering the ship
-
2024 is going to be tough regardless of who is steering the ship
@BerniesCorner said in Foster, Robertson etc:
2024 is going to be tough regardless of who is steering the ship
New squad new coach. We are seeing the final end of the GH coaching tree. Probably should have ended a few years earlier
-
-
Don't want anymore learnings in that space
@BerniesCorner said in Foster, Robertson etc:
Don't want anymore learnings in that space
I don't want to hear that word anymore
