What is decline?
-
@sparky said in What is decline?:
@Snowy said in What is decline?:
Whilst I agree with all the concern about the loss, and the inconsistent results for quite a few years now, the Boks “declined” to the point where we beat them by 57 points in NZ and 42 points at home within a year.
They seem to have recovered…
But they made tough choices, really tough choices, to turn things around.
I don't see that sort of leadership from anyone involved in New Zealand Rugby at the moment.
I’m sure Bok fans felt the same way in 2017. And yet here we are.
The trouble for NZ is I don’t see someone like Rassie waiting to be brought in. Unless we are talking about Joe Schmidt.
Graham Henry laid the groundwork for the dominance in the 2000s and 2010s. It was his vision and structure (ex head master), and Hansen (people person) and Smith (culture and passion) helped him to deliver it. It all started with selecting the right characters and instilling responsibility and accountability into a new leadership group.
It is now 8 years since the ABs started their decline from the top if people are being honest. The Lions tour. And nobody at the top has sought to really challenge or change anything in the hope that success will just continue for a bit longer.
The Emperor has no clothes. It is ok to say it.
-
@antipodean said in What is decline?:
@stodders Mark Robinson has been CEO of NZR since Jan 2020. IMO it's not unreasonable to suggest his tenure has been a catastrophic failure which will take as long again to resolve.
Yep. 100%.
It would be good to know the criteria he was selected against.
-
@antipodean said in What is decline?:
@stodders Mark Robinson has been CEO of NZR since Jan 2020. IMO it's not unreasonable to suggest his tenure has been a catastrophic failure which will take as long again to resolve.
Steve Tew was very canny to bow out when he did. He probably saw what was coming.
-
-
@gt12 said in What is decline?:
The rot started in 2017. It's the one question I'd ask Steve Hansen if I met him again - had he quit then, would we have had a better succession plan?
We were fat from success by then. If he left in 2017 as he originally intended, who would NZRU have turned to to succeed him? His assistants were Smith and Foster. I don't think they would have wanted to rock what appeared to be a winning boat, maybe we would have got Foster earlier than otherwise, or maybe Smith would have had another crack at being HC? I don't see them going outside the tent at that stage.
Maybe Razor (who I thought would usher in a new era, but has been exposed as a false prophet) will take us to rock bottom, and someone will come in next time to start from scratch as Henry did?
-
Can you imagine Razor doing this? Great insight about Rassie by Conor Murray.
Conor Murray issues ‘feck you, Rassie’ response to ‘dig at me’ Munster video room incident involving 'proper club player' Billy Vunipola
🗣️ "It was definitely directed at me."
-
@stodders said in What is decline?:
Can you imagine Razor doing this? Great insight about Rassie by Conor Murray.
🗣️ "It was definitely directed at me."
"we need to find our connection piece"
"we really played with care, care for each other, care for the jersey"
"test footie eh"
"yeahhhhhhh, yeaaaahhhhh, pretty special"
-
@canefan Did Henry really start from scratch though?
He maintained much of the forward pack from the 03 team after flirting with a couple of experienced heads in Gibbs’s and Rush. He kept the Mils/Dougie/Rok back 3 and introduced Gear, Sivi and Evans.
He initially kept Dan at 2nd 5 where Mitchell played him and then made the change to 1st 5 only after going back to the Mertz well. Umaga stayed in the midfield despite some limitations.
Yes he chose a new captain and dropped the old one but then re selected him eventually.
What I think Henry did well was have a couple of reset moments during his tenure - the shake up of responsibilities of assistants (where the ‘FGH’ originated from) after our forwards were exposed in the infamous All Pinks test. Then there was the gameplan change after 2009.
-
@ACT-Crusader said in What is decline?:
@canefan Did Henry really start from scratch though?
He maintained much of the forward pack from the 03 team after flirting with a couple of experienced heads in Gibbs’s and Rush. He kept the Mils/Dougie/Rok back 3 and introduced Gear, Sivi and Evans.
He initially kept Dan at 2nd 5 where Mitchell played him and then made the change to 1st 5 only after going back to the Mertz well. Umaga stayed in the midfield despite some limitations.
Yes he chose a new captain and dropped the old one but then re selected him eventually.
What I think Henry did well was have a couple of reset moments during his tenure - the shake up of responsibilities of assistants (where the ‘FGH’ originated from) after our forwards were exposed in the infamous All Pinks test. Then there was the gameplan change after 2009.
He built his pack around workhorses, not show ponies. He knew they type of player he wanted. It started off with Maxwell, Robinson then moved onto Sam Whitelock and Brad Thorn. Hard working, no frills players. Collins and So'oialo in the back row. He flirted with Flavell until he proved himself a liability, but you could see he wanted an edge up front with set piece excellence. A front row that was mobile, but good at scrummaging - Woodcock and Hayman as props, with Andrew Hore and Mealamu becoming the one-two punch.
It took time, but you could see where he was trying to get to.
Henry's main change after 2004 IMO was to jettison some of the players who weren't prepared to keep working for the jersey. He gave players an environment to hold themselves accountable to each other. 2004 in Paris we saw the first glimpses. 2005 Lions series we saw the potential realised.
Did he makes mistakes, yes. But he sought players that fit his gameplan and moved on from those that didn't. I think with Razor, he either has the wrong players for his gameplan (bad selection), or the players don't have clarity on what they are being asked to do (bad communication).
I'm just an outsider, but that's my view.
-
@stodders Mitchell had Thorn and Collins. He also selected Rodders for that one test but he was still learning how to be a #8 having played more 7. So once he developed there Henry bought him back.
Henry also kept Ali Williams but once Sam came along post the 07 RWC, Henry selected him.
There was a shift in the type of props plus Mealamu kept developing into a class player. Henry went back to the Oliver well also and had at his disposal 3 quality hookers (Kev, Oliver and Hore) plus using Flynn and Whitcombe in there.
Agree on the workhorses, but some of those workhorses had started out under Mitchell. We did move to a more inside centre game rather than a 2nd 5/8 with Sammy T, Umaga shifting in and eventually Nonu (again after the 07 RWC).
A lot of learning on the job and changes during that initial 4 years and then even more in years 5-8.
-
-
@Jet said in What is decline?:
We have lost 19 games since the 2019 RWC semi final exit.
McCaw lost 15 games in 148 tests.
Yikes
-
@MiketheSnow said in What is decline?:
@Jet said in What is decline?:
We have lost 19 games since the 2019 RWC semi final exit.
McCaw lost 15 games in 148 tests.
Yikes
Bear in mind there was a pandemic in the middle of that too....
Razor has lost 6 already....
-
@canefan said in What is decline?:
@gt12 said in What is decline?:
The rot started in 2017. It's the one question I'd ask Steve Hansen if I met him again - had he quit then, would we have had a better succession plan?
We were fat from success by then. If he left in 2017 as he originally intended, who would NZRU have turned to to succeed him? His assistants were Smith and Foster. I don't think they would have wanted to rock what appeared to be a winning boat, maybe we would have got Foster earlier than otherwise, or maybe Smith would have had another crack at being HC? I don't see them going outside the tent at that stage.
Maybe Razor (who I thought would usher in a new era, but has been exposed as a false prophet) will take us to rock bottom, and someone will come in next time to start from scratch as Henry did?
Gatland is free
-
@Jet said in What is decline?:
@MiketheSnow said in What is decline?:
@Jet said in What is decline?:
We have lost 19 games since the 2019 RWC semi final exit.
McCaw lost 15 games in 148 tests.
Yikes
Bear in mind there was a pandemic in the middle of that too....
Razor has lost 6 already....
Thought it was 8
-
@MiketheSnow said in What is decline?:
@Jet said in What is decline?:
@MiketheSnow said in What is decline?:
@Jet said in What is decline?:
We have lost 19 games since the 2019 RWC semi final exit.
McCaw lost 15 games in 148 tests.
Yikes
Bear in mind there was a pandemic in the middle of that too....
Razor has lost 6 already....
Thought it was 8
SA x 3 (2 away, 1 home). 1 from 4 against SA
Arg x 2 (1 away, 1 home). 2 from 4 against Argentina
Fra x 1 (1 away). 3 from 4 against France*- for the obvious under strength France team that toured
Hasn’t lost to anyone else yet. Oz x 2 to come, then Ireland, Scotland, England and Wales in Nov. I can see 2 from 4 out of that lot.
-
@mohikamo said in What is decline?:
@nonpartizan said in What is decline?:
Kiwi diaspora. Surely there is a way to partner with a northern union or a handful of clubs where kiwi coaches and players go on loan to gain experience whilst still being affiliated to the NZR. kind of like an exchange student programme..... Ofc similar to what Jordie just did but even earlier in his career. That way these players and coaches can get exposed to a different rugby environment and be more equipped to play against different styles instead of just the super rugby bubble 24/7. Push players out of their Christchurch/Wellington etc comfort zones and have them learn about rugby and life in a different milieu.
A very big deal. In the amateur days virtually all those players and coaches were still in NZ.
But you cant blame them diasporing; 20% of NZ citizens dont live in NZ because they're trying to make a decent quid somewhere else.You are right about NZR.
What ever you think about them they are a NZ entity that is actually world leading.
The NZRU owns the contracts of all the pro players in NZ (about 700) and they should operate like a club.
Export the talent but retain the rights.
Send young players on loan overseas.
Not sure of the exact structure, they call it a sabbatical, but really I think its just a loan agreement.
More of that kind of thing.
Or even buy into a club in a top European competition.Exactly.
What I would think along the lines of is partnering with the SRU/Edinburgh.
The Scots have a tough time producing enough players to fill up the rosters of both their pro teams so you say, let's have an agreement where we send you cattle every year on loan as part of a player development program. NZR would retain rights to the player and if the player plays well they return to NZ to play for their parent SR club, if they are ok but nothing spectacular they could still stay in Scotland and carve out a living playing rugby who need the players. Before they become residency qualified you keep taking a look at them to see if they are worthy of a SR contract or making the NZ XV for example.
The type of players I would have in mind would be someone like Dylan Pledger or Eli Oudenryn. Have them head north after the NPC season is over on loan. Let them train and play in Edinburgh for a few months, maybe get on the bench v a visiting South African side or two, play some minutes in Dublin, play in Wales. If the arrangement works for both parties have them stay the duration of the season, if the SR club wants their player back sooner, ok.
As things currently stand if a player leaves the NZ system and heads overseas they are lost to NZR and so you lose a James Lowe or a Bundee Aki. Try to create a system where the players can head overseas but NZR still has some degree of control over the player instead of NZ being a feeder system for other countries.
It all might be impractical to do but I think you have to try and do something because I would argue that NZR is not currently benefitting to the fullest extent from the talent NZ produces.
-
When the AB's were at their strongest (most profitable) they should have bought teams in a couple of competitions around the world....you want a sabatical? go play for "London Kiwis" where we also have up and coming coaches getting experience in different competitions, built in fan base of expats and kids on their OE's and touring teams run lighter knowing there are emergency cover in country already
*huge tongue in cheek but fun idea
-
@Kiwiwomble said in What is decline?:
When the AB's were at their strongest (most profitable) they should have bought teams in a couple of competitions around the world....you want a sabatical? go play for "London Kiwis" where we also have up and coming coaches getting experience in different competitions, built in fan base of expats and kids on their OE's and touring teams run lighter knowing there are emergency cover in country already
*huge tongue in cheek but fun idea
Not completely off the wall. Just expensive. Why not one in the northern hemisphere. Another in MLR. Have the northern hemisphere team for established guys. Have the MLR side for U23s and players with Super potential..
