Is it fair to compare Deans and McKenzie?

not fair not fair not fair ooo shiny thing happy now and there we have it, a pap article treating us like children

"Just because one combination doesn’t work doesn’t mean you don’t keep trying. .." You might. But a smart person would consider at least the possibility that there might be other factors at play, e.g: * Is my coaching really the problem? * Are there issues of team dynamics that I haven't allowed for? * Are our structures providing the best development for the players? * Are we giving the players the correct preparation? Show me someone who thinks that the only issue is selection, .and I will show you someone who is trying to avoid considering other factors. "Continually picking players who don’t do the job accepts mediocrity." Why? If "the job" we set ourselves is to beat the number one team in the world when our true positon is about four or five then we may in fact never "do the job", yet its not due to any deficiency in our players. In that situation, continually dropping them and bringing up new players, just because the incumbents didn't beat New Zealand, may result in throwing out perfectly good players in a fruitless quest for perfection. And you always pay a price in terms of team cohesion when you drop players - picking on "form" is not a free lunch. This has special resonance in the instant case, because although our record under Deans wasn't good against New Zealand, it actually wasn't bad against most other countries. Are we going to lose that? I don't know but our start has not been auspicious - South Africa has not managed a win in Australia (except Perth) in 20 years - until Saturday night. Let's hope that's the last such aberration.

Yeah exactly

Yes they had a relatively easy run into the final, but they also did an absolute demolition job on England in pool play; they also beat a very good Argentine team that managed to beat France twice (the second time a thrashing in fact). They certainly deserved to be in the final, its not their fault Aus & NZ lost in the quarters. Okay so they came last in the Tri-Nations that year, but it was a very even Tri-Nations where each team won its home games. The one deciding game was that NZ beat SA in SA. And who really cares where you come in the Tri-nations in WC year ? I also think SA deserved to be in the final in 2011 - they struck one bad day where they made heaps of the play, easily won the possession battle, but a few crucial ref calls went against them and a smart Australian team won. Well done to WB's on winning, but my own feeling is had that been a four test series in 2011, instead of a one-off game, SA would have been in the final. But that's the World Cup. Similar scenario for the WB's in 1987, following a series victory against the AB's in NZ. Similar again to the AB's in 2007. 2011 was SA's turn to miss out when they had superior form to the team that actually made the final. Ironically in each case it was France who was the spoiler, or who made the final.

Jeremy if we follow your logic we should all be watching soccer after all in comparison to the rounball game Rugby is miniscule.

he was dropped on a tour of the windies for the final test.

He could start with something a bit more lowbrow to fix - the WB's fitness levels. Maybe they'll pick their arses off the floor a bit quicker and get to the next play while it's happening or support a player who makes the rare line break.

Aha! The old OJ! Some common sense, a bit of Deans bashing that wanders off point, then a return to rationality "You can't just blame the players" ......."Fixing the defence is something you can do in a week"........."but there's not a lot of evidence they're prepping wel. No improvement in the scrummaging etc." AND NB......"The Wallabies didn't fold last season [with a similar makeshift team (I disagree it was similar)] so why are they struggling now?" These are truths that I would hold to be uncontestable McKenzie is the reason. Linkappears to have rushed in where most coaches taking over a team fear to tread, and further disrupted a team without a stable and readable playmaker at it's core If he were sensible he would have made no changes and let Deans' selections come up against the AB's. Leave the pack alone and wait to see if the new backline could get something happening behind a pack that did well against the Lions until the Frenchman did what he was chosen to do in the third test and take out our scrum Then he could have tinkered, and given Genia his Quade in Queensland but in better circumstances. The changes failed and so more changes are necessary with diminishing likelihood of success Dumping Will speaks of desperation. He hasn't been good but the team has been faltering and the scrum a scrumozzle. Fix that as first priority and watch everything go better, including Genia and Cooper The Brumbies experiment was a mistake so he has to keep trying to prove it wasn't Having said all this, the team from last year fought the All Blacks to a standstill and the players are there to be reinvigorated. It may not happen until the tour, or maybe not until next season when the Tahs will rule again, but Link will eventually correct his prideful errors and get the players performing cohesively But he has to do it next year or i will regard his rule a failure

Yeah they beat the teams that beat the teams that beat you lot and the ABs

Geez.... MARK...harsh....true, yet harsh.

Starry.... The kea is my choice... Bro. This mongrel of a moocher can and will have its way, given all types of interference, traffic and intimidation. Forget the kiwi..... As iconic as this longbilled legend may be,....the KEA is the champion persistor and stops at nothing to achieve its end....... Yep.... The ALL BLACKS resemble the KEA! Holding their ground and waiting for the opposition to drop their gaze... Only to trundle in and make points. Putting up with extraordinary climatic conditions, waiting,watching ...... It's almost entrapment!! Refusing to get caught in an encounter in which the outcome wasn't already part of a scenario. Hard scarred... And able.

I challenge you to a duel, you may be a lowly keyboard warrior but I am a keyboard Shogun.

Deans is still a bias coach who should stay away from the AB's forever.

Everyone forgets to factor in the teams SA had to play to win that WC...

actually most were in favour of GH to take it again... It was mostly Crusaders country that wanted Deans.

The Wallaby head coaching position is a poison chalice. If GH or JW were given the head coach role, they still would have lost against the ABs and the Boks because the Wallabies are plain and simply average as players and again average as an international test side. Granted, these "super" coaches may have added more starch to the Wallaby defence or perhaps may have empowered their troops to make each game more of a contest. But they still would have lost their first three games. Because as other individuals have surmised during recent posts "the cattle is just not good enough at international level". EM has the same issues Dingo had when he began his tenure as WB coach and truth be told, RDs is and always will be a worldclass coach. IMO give credit where credit is due for RDs made the best of a bad situation. He made the Wallabies competitive against great odds, they even won games! Let's face it, the so called "Aussie battler" is being monstered by teams that are just much more clever, experianced, innovative, enthusiastic and measurably harder. Supporters and fans of the WBs can expect poor or at the very best average results from their team until administrators of WB rugby make a comprehensive overhaul of the game in Australia. Come what may, whoever coaches the WBs before this inevitable change occurs, will only struggle.

Is it fair to compare the two coaches? Yes, after the disappointment of the lions series Australia needs immediate wins. Both have had three matches this year. Although McKenzie has played one away game. Both have had similar talent available to pick from (Pocock, Higgingbottom out before the lions) Both had plans on how to play the All Blacks since the beginning of the year (if you believe McKenzie's acceptance speech). A significant proportion of the team are Reds so they would be familiar with McKenzie's coaching already. The other's are professional so should be able to adapt. New Zealand are a less strong team than last year. Everybody loses matches at some point, what is less palatable is "progressing" from close losses to huge defeats. "A chance" to "no chance in hell".

Everyone failed against the All Blacks so take them out of the equation for all teams and then recalibrate

Looks like doe ray me abc, you're outa beat with the word on the street

ding... Congratulations to iamrobert on picking this this weeks 'palooka' award. Well done, have you been trying this hard all your life or is today your special day? Again well done you fully deserve this.