The dust has settled on a turbulent two months in Australian rugby. The newly-appointed Wallabies coach Michael Cheika, is part-time in the job heading in to a World Cup year.
This is an unsatisfactory state of affairs that others on this site have commented upon.
The Wallabies have put in their worst Northern Hemisphere tour in almost a decade. It would take the most optimistic of types to think that this could be turned around before the World Cup.
That Chris Dutton in Fairfax Media saw fit to state that “Cheika is safe a month after starting his job…” is a sign of how precarious the position of Wallabies coach has become.
How did this happen?
News of the inflight fracas over the seemingly trivial matter of a t-shirt between Kurtley Beale and former ARU employee Di Patston broke on October 2 as the Wallabies prepared for their last game of the Rugby Championship in Mendoza.
Following that story breaking, I was struck by the sheer number of stories which quoted or referred to the views of anonymous sources within the team.
From the outset the leaks were out to discredit Patston, the alleged victim of workplace harassment, and McKenzie.
On the same day, “a well-placed source close to Beale” told Guardian Australia that “…Beale’s verbal spat with a senior member of the Wallabies management team is the ‘tip of the iceberg’ of a potentially destabilising rift between players and management…”.
Later, on 9 October, Fairfax Media had “…learnt troubling new details about the extent of the dysfunction within the Wallabies…” This included that “[b]y the middle of the Rugby Championship, unease within the squad had grown in direct proportion to Patston’s involvement in the micromanagement of the team’s day-to-day workings, and the high level of drama that accompanies her involvement.”
We learnt that this dissatisfaction about Patston’s role went as far back as the 2013 spring tour, where McKenzie apparently prevaricated over the issue at a team meeting.
That next day The Guardian’s Rajiv Maharaj reported (rather obviously) that “… too many players are talking off the record…” and that McKenzie had lost the playing group.
We were warned that “… the full story behind Beale’s texts has the potential to tear the Wallabies apart at the seams” and that the incompetence of McKenzie and disquiet over Patston’s role, not Beale’s misconduct, is the real story here.
Not long after these leaks a new theme emerges – that only Michael Cheika, as coach of the Super Rugby winning Waratahs, can bring the prodigal son Beale back into the fold.
Only if he wants the job, of course. We get our first taste on 12 October when Jeff Wilson in Fairfax told us that the Wallabies were about to implode and of “…stories from the Waratahs about how Cheika motivated them – his sometimes unusual ways clearly worked.”
On 13 October Greg Gowden on espnscrum.com had “team sources” that confirmed that “Wallaby team harmony began to collapse even before the Dublin drinking affair on the team end-of-season tour of Europe late last year”.
Not only were the players “troubled by Patston’s increasing influence in the Wallabies preparation for Test matches, and her involvement in team discipline” but apparently several said they were scared of Patston and “potential witch-hunts”.
While admitting that Beale’s conduct was “near impossible to defend”, he had even more inside information that Beale “still has the support of numerous teammates, who are concerned he could be made the ultimate scapegoat.”
It is here that we learnt that the fuss “…has prompted increased interest at the ARU towards Cheika, the successful Waratahs coach, taking over the Wallabies…” But we couldn’t get too excited as “…it is understood that Cheika … has reservations about the Wallabies position…”
On October 14, Sydney Morning Herald Chief Sports writer Andrew Webster sunk the boot in further. His inside information was of the players’ abject lack of faith in McKenzie to the extent that the players apparently couldn’t wait until the season was over (the poor fellows!).
McKenzie was unflatteringly compared to Michael Cheika, the new messiah described as “…the cranky but respected Waratahs coach who unlocked and nurtured the brilliance of Beale this year and achieved the impossible – a Super Rugby title for NSW.”
On 17 October, Rajiv Maraj in The Guardian went in for the third crack, boldly predicting the All Blacks would win the third Bledisloe Test “by plenty” (the Wallabies lost by a point) and that “…if you believe what the players are saying in private” then McKenzie had lost the playing group.
In case you weren’t capable of reading between the lines, on 19 October various observers, including Peter FitzSimons and yes, that man again, Rajiv Maharaj quickly lined up to anoint Cheika as McKenzie’s successor, before the ink on his letter of resignation was even dry.
Now I’m not much of a conspiracy theorist – if there is a choice between a stuff-up and a conspiracy, the stuff-up wins every time. Certainly the McKenzie and the ARU’s handling of Beale’s off field indiscretions bears enough elements of a good, old-fashioned stuff-up.
But it appears that the Beale fiasco was the trigger for a series of co-ordinated leaks from within to selected members of the rugby media.
There’s no way of knowing who was behind the leaks, but it certainly worked out nicely for Cheika. With McKenzie’s resignation coming less than two weeks before the first tour game against the Barbarians, the ARU were in a pretty tight spot when it came to appointing a replacement. This allowed Cheika to drive a hard bargain and to continue coaching the Waratahs in addition to his Wallabies duties.
The long-term ramifications of this affair are quite concerning. As Wallabies coach it seems you need to watch your back against a campaign of destabilisation from within that seems more federal politics than rugby.
You barely get a year in the job to prove yourself. It might have worked for Cheika in the short term and produced some good copy, but you can’t help but feel that this culture is fast making the position of Wallabies coach the worst job in rugby.
Michael
Guest
Where do they find players with the ticker to play in the forwards for the wallabies ? There don' t seem to be much on offer , maybe they could make a bold step and and try one of RL's ageing tough men like Paul Gallen ! ( if they had the money to buy him ) He would certainly stiffen up the forwards and show some guts, what has R U got to lose
AndyS
Guest
I made the comment earlier in response to someone saying Cheika had nothing much better to do anyway, but it was a thought in progress. Taken to its logical conclusion, I am a little surprised Cheika has put himself in the position he has. He is the Wallabies coach, continuing to coach a large proportion of the Wallabies including both play makers, key positional players and his captain elect. And they will be playing the Wallabies game plan, in which they are so well versed they won the competition last year. Frankly, with all those things and up against SR teams, anything less than back-to-back wins could only be a cause for concern regarding him, the game plan and the Wallabies chances going forward. What does he do if NZ and/or SA teams show they've figured it, let alone what a poor year could indicate? Potentially destabilising to say the least...
Mick Gold Coast QLD
Roar Guru
I have an image in my mind of Simon Poedevin pre-match in the dressing room, shuffling awkwardly before his coach and, as I read above, seeking his "inspiration" to play well. :) The Wallabies back then played marvelously well for very little money, they were mature individuals working together in a team (rebadged as a "playing group" with a "leadership group" - gees that initiative made all the difference, eh?) and they valued the honour, the opportunity and the expectation. They could all tackle too, long before earning the jersey.
Mick Gold Coast QLD
Roar Guru
The Qantas Harmless Wallabies
So true - well done anopinion, that's the most telling comment here.William Tell
Guest
Sounds to me like he loves it - rugby that is. Not one coach, not one provincial team, not one player or the other.
Mick Gold Coast QLD
Roar Guru
There is probably a site somewhere on the internet which can connect up all those disjointed words for you Colin, to help one understand what you are attempting to say. English, sentences, phrases, punctuation, paragraphs - that sort of thing. Try Googling lucid dot com, lazy dot com, thirteen years old dot com or not yet literate dot com.
William Tell
Guest
We'll see, won't we.
HiKa
Roar Rookie
You're not alone.
Jim
Guest
Hi Benelong - Rugby is my passion & have played the game at a high level. Politics is not my game. One thing for sure is that any coach, CEO, M/D etc provides a Business Plan. It is then up to the players or Management to abide by that plan. For the last 3 coaches it seems that the players decide what game plan & who should be playing. I can remember the Welsh Pontypool feared front row until Australia picked an unknown Steve Finnane. Yes different game & era but at least the coach & selectors thought outside the square. The issue (in my mind) is that no matter who the coach is the players have way too much input & then do not produce but blame. Why not pick some country raw boned players & then nurture. It seems that the private schools also have way too much pull due to financial preference
handles
Guest
Congratulations on contributing a new word to the English language! I love it.
Michael
Guest
Thank god the Shute shield is gone from tv , it was a bad advertisement for rugby , rugby at its most boring . It's also becoming boring watching RU at every opportunity showing Sam Burgess playing RU , for christ sake is there not a RU player not good enough to watch or do we have to rely on ex RL players to show the way.
firstxv
Guest
One things for sure, The Tahs are not going to come close to winning the sxv in 2015. The pressures on the coach, the players in a world cup year will simply not allow them to match the energy of the other sides, 90% of whom will have nothing to do with post sxv anything. The tahs simply won't be able to match the energy and intensity required, especially as defending champs with the cross on their foreheads. Cheika taking on two roles during a world cup year will only be seen as c*(oc*ky and an affront to the competition, which requires 100% focus. The AI's and RC results has already started that downward momentum for them with the seeds of doubt about a succesful 2015 already firmly planted in the minds of coach and players, and definitely the other sides. Tahs will slide off the map in 2015. As sure as day.
Common Sense
Roar Rookie
The English and South African injury lists were ridiculous.
Graeme
Guest
To be honest the teams we were playing and losing to had far more significant injury lists than we did.
Squirrel
Guest
Well said Jim, as paid professionals they are terrible. How can players like Beale and Qc not be able to tackle and front rowers cannot scrummage. How many wallabies have better skills than the 1991 side. Not many. The 1991 scrum would obliterate these pea hearts
bennalong
Guest
Just one question Jim. Do you like rugby union?
bennalong
Guest
Only problem with your scenario is that it presumes something you cannot substantiate.............a ridiculous conspiracy theory that there's no evidence for. You simply worked backward from the present with your prejudices perverting your rationality.
bennalong
Guest
Hoy My point is simply that Cheika could be doing both, since only one team is present. It's not ideal but who saw McKenzie downing tools without notice two weeks out from the EOYT? I understand that it's not an ideal scene, but that was Cheika's offer to the ARU because he was contracted to the Tahs. I'm sorry, but given the short preparation the likelihood of us winning the WC is so remote I fail to see why he should sacrifice his Super 15 team.
bennalong
Guest
My main point is that the WorldCup is too close to consider it any thing more than something to aim for. When McKenzie took the job his task was to beat the AB's, and he said he could! To suggest Cheika should win the World Cup would be incredibly optimistic, but if he went on to beat the AB's, even once, he would cement his place.
mikeylives
Guest
OK. For those with REALLY short memories - the England loss had NOTHING to do with ANY of the backs. Cooper looked great against England, but - surprise, surprise he failed to get us the win. The Wallabies will not magically transform if we switch Foley for Cooper. Our locks are a major issue. Horwill had a terrible tour - Slow (and I mean way off the pace), missed tackles and poor hands. The one good thing he did was to point and tell McMahon to score a try against the Barbarians. Skelton had a terrible couple of games, but did pretty well at what he is good at in the Ireland and England games - ie barging. He is not good for our set piece (at the moment). NB - It is not easy to "run 3 metres and fall over the line" - especially taking the ball in traffic and carrying 3 people with you. Nobody is slating the Jones selection?? - He was a turnover/penalty magnet against Ireland. He'll be better for the runs though - and I hope he actually turns out to be int'l standard.