Robbie Deans: Why a book, and why now?

By Brett McKay / Expert

I was more than a bit flattered when The Roar and Robbie Deans’ biographer and publishers got in touch last week, asking me to interview the former Wallabies coach again.

It’s been well over two years since I interviewed Deans for The Roar, still twelve months out from the arrival of the British and Irish Lions, and with a back drop I’ll probably never top.

Short of a text message I sent at the time, I’d not spoken to Deans since he was removed as Wallabies coach, but then again, neither had anyone.

Prolonged silence like that often means that a tell-all book is in the works, but Deans never struck me as a book kind of guy.

As we’ve already seen from last Thursday’s ‘Fed to the Lions‘ extract, Deans and author Matt McILraith certainly haven’t missed. Just as the Wallabies found themselves dealing with the Kurtley Beale fallout, senior members of the team were suddenly defending themselves from suggestions they played a role in their former mentor’s removal.

For a man known throughout the rugby world as being economical with his words, Deans was certainly happy to speak in detail on a number of topics during our chat, and you can hear the full audio of what was a really enjoyable, revealing chat below.

After such a lengthy and dignified silence, why a book, and why now?

Probably because of that fact and that I had a bit of time on my hands. It was something that, to be honest, I’d resisted. Over a long period of time I’d had approaches, as you do.

But not only for the fact that I’d had a window of opportunity, but also Matt McILraith who wrote it – and he’d generally been the bloke badgering me to do one. So I sort of felt a little bit responsible that he was in between gigs as well.

[Matt McILraith was Deans’ media manager at the Wallabies, Crusaders, and All Blacks, previously.]

It’s been good actually. The timing’s worked pretty well and it’s all been good, a good chance to reflect.

Was the reasoning and subsequent assumption around why you missed out on the All Blacks’ role in 2008 fair?

Oh, people will justify their decisions in whichever way they choose. To suggest that I was underprepared is ridiculous; that’s not the case.

But, it’s an understandable decision when you look at the reality of the circumstance. You had a team that had been working together effectively, for the greater part. They fell on a hurdle in the quarter finals [of the 2007 Rugby World Cup], but aside from that you had a combination – and by combination I don’t just mean the coaching staff, I mean the whole organisation, whether it be board and executive, or team staff.

And I guess combined with that, you had the history where New Zealand had been jumping at shadows and chopping and changing at every piece of adversity they encountered. There had been number of World Cups where the IP was discarded immediately upon the point of failure.

In this instance [the reappointment of Graham Henry], history shows that they got it right, because they didn’t throw everything out, they committed to a group that had been functioning pretty well. And that doesn’t mean that another combination couldn’t have come in and been just as successful, it just means they opted not to chop and change as they had been, because the fact of the matter is the organisation had been getting in their own way for a while.

And you had the precedent of England. In 1999, they retained Clive Woodward, and he turned around and won the title in 2003.

But how they justify it, well that’s their business.

Is coaching New Zealand still an ambition?

It’s the ultimate coaching gig, isn’t it. Any coach, particularly any New Zealand coach, would aspire to it, just as any New Zealand player aspires to be an All Black.

Yeah, it would be great, but as to whether that opportunity presents itself, who knows? But like I’ve said [in the book], if it was to present itself I’m much better for my recent experiences.

Did you see the Wallabies decision coming?

Oh look, you’re aware of the potential, always. There’s not a lot of certainty in this industry.

Likewise, to use an analogy of players and teams, when they step out onto the terrain, they understand that at any given day, they can come second. And it’s no different for us as coaches.

So you’re aware of that possibility, but insofar as you’ve been appointed, you presume the best and you presume you’ve got the backing, and you get on with it. You spend your time and energy where you can get a return, where it’s best invested.

Were you surprised to learn of the depth and breadth of the goings-on behind the scenes?

Yes and no. There were some things where the extent of it was surprising, particularly in terms of the proximity to the team and the playing group, and obviously the awareness of some of those parties.

But then on the other hand… Yeah, I was aware that the terrain, if you like, was pretty fertile.

I recall clearly the press conference after the third Lions Test in Sydney, and that much of the discussion afterwards was that you appeared as a coach not just defeated, but perhaps knowing your fate?

No, not at all. I had no idea what my fate was. But obviously, with the benefit of hindsight, there were a number of parties who knew a lot more than I did.

I recall one journalist, from north of the border, who basically stated that [my termination] was a given, in one of his articles. And so he was obviously in a position of insight.

But again, you get that sort of conjecture all the time. It’s only with the benefit of hindsight that you get the confirmation.

In the book, you spoke of the need for a more streamlined or centralised approach for Australian rugby. What do you think would be required to properly unify the states and the ARU?

There’s been a lot of effort and energy go into this area, if you were to put the same question to [ARU Chairman] Michael Hawker. I mean, they changed the constitution essentially, in order to achieve a fully independent board, so the wheels are in motion.

They did a full review, and I identified pretty consistent issues and the wheels are in motion to try and address them. A part of that was an independent governance and they’ve got the licence to push on with that, but it’s not in place yet obviously. But that’s where any organisation that wants to be successful has to get to.

New Zealand got there over time, but it took some pretty tough conversations and typically, the various interested parties tend to look at what’s in it for them first and foremost. But the irony in all that is that if you look at the New Zealand situation, for example, they centrally contracted the managers, the coaches, the conditioning staff, the doctors and are part of the appointments process to that end.

So it’s a huge advantage in terms of getting alignment [between the national team and Super Rugby franchises], and obviously there is the fear that you end up with a homogenous approach where one decision-maker makes the decision for all, but that’s not the case. It’ll never be the case, and innovation has always come out of the provinces and franchises, and previously the clubs. And they still, and will always have the incentive to innovate and to evolve in order to be competitive first, and successful second.

When New Zealand made this decision back in 2001, I was on the All Blacks staff at the time, and we lay down the All Blacks jersey on the floor and we said, ‘what you all need to understand is that this jersey has to be priority if New Zealand rugby is to thrive.’

And the irony in that is that while there was a certain anxiety as to what that would mean for the various bodies, since that day the franchises have been more consistently successful as well, because you’ve got a cooperative approach. But obviously that comes from a position of strength, whereby one party is the ultimate reference point and is ultimately accountable and hence, if there’s indecision, is responsible for making a decision.

How did your family take the news of the termination?

I think it’s tough on everyone, really. But they were like a typical family, they care first and foremost for me, so it wasn’t something they enjoyed.

But just as they’re provide great source of perspective when you are in a campaign, they also provide a great source of support when things don’t go so well. There’s no doubt it’s hardest, in this industry, it is harder for the people around you in many ways than it is for yourself because at least you’ve got the opportunity to influence in some way, to do something towards your destiny, where others really are spectators to that end, but are also exposed to the ups and downs.

Was it difficult to maintain the silence? Were you ever tempted to set the record straight?

No, it’s not my way.

You do things in real time, you give it your best crack, you keep going. It’s no different to a player, in terms of selection or non-selection. All you can do is do what you do, and keep the faith, and hope that the experience is good and successful in the first instance.

I’m a great believer in actions, rather than words. Not a lot is achieved through words.

****

I was fortunate to be able to speak to Robbie Deans for more than half an hour for this piece, and in the full audio clip below you’ll hear extended discussion on a number of the questions above. In addition, we also spoke about what he did in the days and weeks after losing the Wallabies job, on what coaching against the Lions meant to him, and on coaching and life in Ota, Japan, where he and wife Penny now call home.

The Crowd Says:

2014-10-13T15:13:48+00:00

RobC

Roar Guru


Hi Brett. Just got a chance to listen to the pod in the background. V interesting Would have been interested to know why he accepted the role of head coach whilst not being able to source his own assistants, if that was indeed the case.

2014-10-10T12:05:41+00:00

Jordan Crothers

Roar Rookie


I agree, he did put the team first and put development at the front of his coaching regime' perhaps a little too much. The public got sick of the "building for improvement" line after it was thrown out for a few years. I liked aspects of Deans' coaching but some of the selection decisions baffled me none the less along with playing hot potato with captaincy.

2014-10-09T08:27:02+00:00

Anthony

Roar Rookie


shineycomet@gmail.com Very interesting. It seems that some factors have not been ironed out. I think the interfering factors within the Wallabies outweighs the ability to achieve results on the field.

2014-10-09T04:08:07+00:00

Sel

Guest


He was always a class act. Disappointed he didn't mention that he had played a bit of squash after his departure from Wallabies. No doubt the hits helped him relax and squash needs all the publicity it can get. It's a great game and I hope Robbie continues to play in japan. He needs all the practice he can get!

2014-10-09T04:03:47+00:00

Anthony Hird

Roar Guru


Funny how the men from South Africa and NZ praise the man, yet the minority of Wallaby fans gave him credit. What he brought to Australian Rugby was fantastic, yet he received nil credit as he was a Kiwi. You'll be missed Dingo Deans.

2014-10-09T04:00:41+00:00

Anthony Hird

Roar Guru


Samoa - what coach would risk fielding their best squad 2 weeks prior to the RWC kick off? Did you learn the injury exodus with Pocock missing? Scotland - the worst rugby conditions EVER when played in Newcastle. When played in Scotland, shouldn't the players cop a little flack. Robbie took us from 5th to 2nd in World Cup rankings. Won our first Tri Nations in over a decade, yet because he was a kiwi, received nil credit. Its all doomed under 'Australian Rugby Saviour' Mckenzie.

2014-10-09T03:04:22+00:00

Harry

Guest


Yes he could Mike.

2014-10-09T01:40:47+00:00

hog

Guest


Hi Ya Midfielder, I some how doubt whether the NRC is gonna get much more funding next year. http://www.espnscrum.com/australia/rugby/story/243671.html It ultimately hints to the problem that is structurally, Australian rugby, simply cannot survive under the present structure. we are going broke. That is why i advocate for withdrawal from Super rugby, The competition is essentially sending rugby in Australia down the drain.

2014-10-08T23:46:10+00:00

Huh?

Guest


Breet, you miss the point. Our cultural problem is that people in positions of influence (ARU, provinces, media) persist in taking either parochial or self-interested points at the expense of the game. Deans puts the game first. NZ has changed their whole set up to do that. Deans is a winner, NZ are winners. And we spend our time in childish debates. First and foremost: it's a game. If you love the game, you put the game first and let the players and other participants get on with it. IMO (and I have about 30 years experience of journalism under my belt), the two opinionated columnists we all think of are mouthpieces for what's wrong. Connect the dots to their sources and you can see what needs to change.

2014-10-08T23:21:34+00:00

Midfielder

Guest


Mike Twil be interesting to watch as these two new competitions both of roughly 32 games evolve over time. But I wish to make one point pertaining to both your posts regarding supposed funding of the FFA. FFA have a 40 [up from only 17 million before this year] million dollar media deal for the A-League and the AFC control most Socceroo matches for WCQ & ACQ and FFA get I think one million per match so over four years an average of 6 to 7 million per year. Meaning FFA have say 46 million dollars, to fund and run 10 A-League teams, 10 W-League teams and 9 national sides... Rugby from what I have read has about 34 million per year currently from SANDZAR & other tests.. to run 5 Super Teams and maybe 2 national teams.. The key difference is the salaries paid to players, Football is happy to let players ply their trade overseas and build a local competition as long as the best players come back for the national side.. Meaning there is funding left over to develop and promote things like the FFA Cup The ARU chooses to spend a lot of its money on salaries ... IMO this is a critical question for Rugby over the next 5 to 25 years ... investment in park teams and developing a national competition requires money to be diverted away from the Super Teams and first 15 squads and steered towards development systems... TBH I don't know the answer wiser heads than me to make the calls however I can see a issue that needs debate..

2014-10-08T22:46:28+00:00

Mike

Guest


Midfielder, all good points. However, what intrigues me is the difference in ratings, simply because FFA is higher profile and better known - its been far better advertised by the FFA than the ARU has done with NRC. That is not entirely the ARUs fault, because it is strapped for cash. "Just as an aside part of the early claims of those supporting the NRC was it would generate TV ratings and help spread the game .. to date this has not happened .." Well, yes and no. As I wrote above, the NRC was put together at the last minute - it seemed like only a few weeks before the first game that anyone knew for certain that it was going to proceed. That's hardly a way to generate TV ratings! Under the circumstances, I would have thought that generating half what the FFA Cup does is not a bad effort. I think the real issue with TV ratings is gaining a presence on FTA TV - this is what hasn't happened (yet), and its the issue that really matters. Rugby in Australia desperately needs a professional game on FTA TV, and it really has no choice except to work away until it achieves that. NRC looks like it is the only product in the ARU cupboard with any potential to be taken up by FTA: As for Super Rugby, FTA broadcasters have expressed interest, but only in the local derbies, which is unworkable; As for Tests, they already have the same FTA presence they have always had, and they can't get any more; and as for State club competitions they suffer from two defects: (i) they are State based whereas FTA broadcasters want national comps; and (ii) they are amateur. Anyway, we can only keep plugging away. At least the first year of NRC has proved financially viable and provided a good standard of rugby.

2014-10-08T22:31:34+00:00

Midfielder

Guest


Mike Both the FFA Cup and the NRC are funded by the parent bodies and the teams taking part... The NCR also receives one million a year from Fox. FFA receive nothing for the FFA Cup. However that FFA provide more to fund their competition and have organised it better as you indicated is in and of itself worth discussing. Just as an aside part of the early claims of those supporting the NRC was it would generate TV ratings and help spread the game .. to date this has not happened .. The FFA Cup rating have for by and large just over double except for a couple of games that rated very well one in particular Sydney United V SFC crowd estimated to be about 9 K , rated at 59K which is more than many Super Rugby Matches. Also the last 7 matches will rate reasonably high.

2014-10-08T21:53:14+00:00

Midfielder

Guest


Footballs not ... but its about interest in the how and why the media deal is where its at... that has folk talking

2014-10-08T14:58:17+00:00

Scrumpoacher

Guest


Should have gone after RWC. As for the next one, Chieka is the man. Link on his way for one reason or another by the end of next week. The Patson affair will kill him off. Back to the Reds where Graham needs replacing.

2014-10-08T11:36:42+00:00

RobC

Roar Guru


aha. Yes, true. there is only one Robbie Deans. There are, however, around 50 head coaches at national, SR, NRC and club level. And more if counting captains :) I have heard interviews from other sites and they are v revealing. Moreover it gives us a good idea of the real Rugby, not just tier-1. Its just an idea. btw I also enjoy the cheap shots also, so thank you for that too

2014-10-08T11:25:09+00:00

Mike

Guest


"1. No back up 7 at the World Cup. .... The first one was an enormous error in judgement." How do you work that out? It was only an error of judgment if there was some alternative course that would have made a difference. What player in Australia, if taken, would have made a real difference to the outcome of the Ireland match or the RWC as a whole? Unless you have a credible answer to that, then there's no basis to say it was an error in judgment at all, let alone an "enormous" one.

2014-10-08T11:20:37+00:00

Mike

Guest


Actually any coach can also take a team backwards. Many critics of Deans assumed with blind optimism that things could only improve if he left. They may assume the same about McKenzie.

2014-10-08T10:38:25+00:00

Harry Jones

Expert


Great work, Brett. Interesting interview with a quiet guy.

2014-10-08T10:37:46+00:00

Harry Jones

Expert


Me too. He is a very smart coach. He got a lot out of what he had to work with

2014-10-08T10:22:21+00:00

Ruckin Oaf

Guest


IF

More Comments on The Roar

Read more at The Roar