So they’ve done it. Two games into a new season, the Queensland Rugby Union have made the decision they perhaps should’ve made in the middle of last year. They’re moving on from Richard Graham.
A mid-afternoon email gave the rugby world just 25 minutes’ notice of an imminent ‘significant announcement’.
‘Significant announcements’ are rarely good news. A new player arriving is generally a ‘significant recruitment announcement’; new sponsors are generally heralded with ‘significant sponsor announcement’. Significant announcements without specifics usually only mean one thing; someone is clearing out their desk.
And sure enough, yesterday afternoon it was Richard Graham. After two losses in the opening two rounds of the 2016 season, the trigger was pulled.
“Queensland Reds Head Coach Richard Graham has been released from the remainder of his contract with immediate effect,” the Queensland Rugby Union media release announced. Graham’s assistant coaches, Matt O’Connor and Nick Stiles will see out the season as “co-interim head coaches”.
Immediately, the questions began mounting.
Most notably, if two losses are enough to pull the trigger now, then how on earth did the Reds’ Coaching Review Panel last July decide that, “Richard was the best equipped candidate to perform the Reds Head Coach role for the 2016”?
The Reds told fans only last week on Facebook of the review process, “the Coaching Review Panel considered several applications of more than 25 coaches of varying backgrounds and experiences from local and international markets,” as well as conducting phone and face-to-face interviews before deciding the best man for the job was already holding the clipboard.
So what’s changed after two games? If Graham was the “best equipped candidate” as “unanimously approved by the Queensland Rugby Union Board” after a worldwide search, then what is so different just seven months and two rounds of a new season later?
And if the decision was so unanimous, why has it taken just weeks after the departure of now former Queensland Rugby Union chairman Rod McCall for the cracks in that decision to appear?
Queensland Rugby Union Executive General Manager, former Queensland and Wallabies centre Daniel Herbert yesterday spoke of an “emptiness” within the dressing room, a sure-fire sign that a coach’s days are numbered. But was the Reds’ dressing room really any ‘fuller’ at the end of last season?
O’Connor and Stiles both interviewed for the top job, and undoubtedly would have made submissions to the board during the process as to why they were a better candidate than Richard Graham, and how they would correct the clearly unhealthy situation that engulfed the Reds last season.
If O’Connor’s and Stiles’ submissions weren’t good enough, or weren’t convincing enough to win the job in the first place, then can they really be expected to be good enough for the remainder of the 2016 season?
Both men have already stated their interest in the top job, and both men obviously think they’re a better candidate than the other.
Both men have solid claims to the job, and both have decent resumes. O’Connor’s success in Europe can’t be ignored, but neither can Stiles’ dual NRC titles with Brisbane City and the familiarity he would enjoy with a significant portion of the playing group he’ll be now co-interimly head-coaching.
Can two candidates with obvious desires on the same position really ignore those desires, and pull together to resurrect even a skerrick of success in 2016?
And how exactly will “co-interim head coaches” work in practise?
How will “co-interim head coaches” make tough decisions? How will differences of opinion around selection or strategy or training work? Who will be the primary voice and who will actually get the message through to the players? How can recruitment plans for 2017 be made and then put into action if one guy thinks the other guy shouldn’t be part of the plan?
(And on that topic, did Wallabies captain Stephen Moore know something before making his decision to return home from 2017?)
Regarding the process for a permanent appointment, yesterday’s release stated, “the Queensland Rugby Union will commence a worldwide process to appoint a head coach for the 2017 Super Rugby season. It is likely that this process will take between 90 and 120 days once the Queensland Rugby Union formally goes to market. Both O’Connor and Stiles will be invited to be part of this open process.”
So less than a year after a worldwide process explored the credentials of at least 25 candidates – including O’Connor and Stiles – and then reappointed Graham, that process will be repeated for the same purpose: to find the best possible candidate to take the Queensland Reds forward.
But what now of 2016? There will quite likely be some element of ‘bounce’ – lest we forget the tipping phenomena regarding sacked coaches – but what is a pass mark for the rest of this season? And if that pass mark is achieved and the players do properly respond to the curious dynamic of co-interim head coaches, will it have been O’Connor or Stiles who really righted the ship?
Though the Reds have at least made a decision that just about everyone in rugby thought would happen sooner rather than later, this latest chapter in the ongoing saga has, in my mind at least, only left more questions rather than provide clear answers.
Any success the Reds do manage in 2016 will almost be in spite of the situation as presented.
And what of the fans? How many of the “I’m not going until Graham is sacked” are now scrambling to renew their memberships? It’s a serious question; I’ll be genuinely interested to here from any Reds fans who had previously aired their grievances around the coaching situation.
Perhaps the perfect fullstop on this current episode was the simple spellcheck quirk that slipped through the cracks in nominating the venue for the significant announcement yesterday: “Media wall behind the western grandstand, Baltimore Stadium.”
Completely innocent, of course. But so simultaneously illustrative.
Dave
Guest
To be fair to the Reds, the ref had a brain fade in the 77th minute against the Rebels, when a Rebel stuck his hands on the ball in a ruck. He told the player to take his hands off, and when a Red protested he said "the ball is available ". That's all very well and nice if we're trying to encourage the game flowing, but we'd just seen the lead change twice from bog standard technical penalties that were hard to detect from the couch. That's moving the goalposts and costing the Reds the points, even is they possibly didn't deserve them. We can't have a game where three points are on offer because two props fall over in a scrum and the ref thinks has to ping somebody yet someone does a blatant foul at ruck time and the ref plays on in the interests of continuity or God knows what got into his head. I'd rather we applied the same approach to scrums though - just let them push and shove til the damn thing comes out would be better than allowing 3 points from a scrum - if you're not going to the obvious and simply not allow kicks at goal from scrum pens, at least outside the 22. Remember most scrums follow knockons - errors - bizarre logic to have the contest for the restart worth 60% of a try. Sometimes it might seem the best tactic is to recruit the best scrum in the world and then drop the ball all the time.
Brisneyland Local
Guest
CG, it comes from an old saying of "They don't have the cattle in the paddock to get the job done". It was a farming saying related to the number of cattle required to make a property a going concern. It has been adapted into the current rugby parlance to mean players.
Seeujim
Guest
I just gave up my membership, I did not stop supporting NSW or stop going to home games. Went to the NSW v Qld game and enjoyed the win. Although $7.80 for a beer in a plastic cup is a bit hard to take.
Old One Eye
Guest
Similarly Cheika's turn around of the Waratahs involved very similar playing staff to those available to the previous coach. IMO too little credit is given to good coaches and too much responsibility given to the cattle for either a loss or a win. The coach is in charge of recruitment, selections, game plan, attacking structure, defensive pattern and ultimately responsible for attitude. Doesn't matter what cows are on the paddock if the farmer is an idiot.
William Tell
Guest
Maybe the Tahs to do it - that the idea? Or was that the organisation that was the subject of an inquiry over performance a few years back? The tide comes in, the tide goes out....
Geoff Stitt
Guest
Jim McKay proved to be an excellent attack coach for the title-winning REDS squad and then the Wallabies. Geeez could they use him as an assistant right now!!!
kingplaymaker
Roar Guru
I represent his entire family and ancestry.
armchair sportsfan
Guest
Could be wrong, but havent seen any mention of Laurie Fisher in these discussions yet.... while no silverware with gloucester, pretty solid track record over a number of years....
PeterK
Roar Guru
thanks I will , when I have time, no it was not grandstanding , slightly offensive but never mind, but intellectual curiosity. I enjoy free thinkers. agree wrong forum.
joe b
Guest
for a second I thought you were going to say something else starting with a capital C.
Tissot Time
Guest
Red Kev agree with your comments above. Thank you for acknowledging International Women's Day.
Anto
Guest
The first day of a chance to rebuild a great franchise from the ashes of prior managements' decisions. The only problem, of course, is that only the coach is gone - the nepotistic management remains sitting on their fat, unaccountable ar*es down at Ballymore. A perennial problem of Qld rugby for as long as I can remember (which is back to the early '80s).
sheek
Roar Guru
Wooowww PK, I see my name mentioned. What I liked back in my day, for want of a better phrase, is that we didn't have the [Mods. Snip. Language pls. Faster posts for you, more efficiency for us] advertising & marketing that we have today. Back then even the TV ads, which were obviously doing their best to lift your money out of your wallet, were done much more tastefully, with humour & wit. Today, so much advertising & marketing is just so crass. I don't know what you mean about not wanting to be entertained. If I watched a crappy test, & yes, there were plenty of them, I would have to wait two weeks, or even months, in the hope the next one might live up to expectations. But I also suspect we were better able to entertain ourselves in life generally. I think we had a more balanced lifestyle. Sporting-wise, I've always been a floater, but I respect the love people have for their team, providing its balanced. The following week being a happy one or crappy because your team won or lost on the weekend is quite sad. But that's the reality for a lot of people. What I object to is being told everything is bigger & better today because some wanker marketing guru tells us so.
grapeseed
Guest
Great post, Train.
Red Kev
Roar Guru
Sorry PeterK - some comments are not appearing or are being moderated and then deleted rather than edited, I think it is a gentle reminder from The Roar not to hijack threads. Should you genuinely wish answers to your questions (i.e. if they were more than internet forum grandstanding) then feel free to contact me via my public profile on The Roar. [Mods. Gents, back to Rugby. Further irrelevant comments will be moderated]
Red Kev
Roar Guru
Except you're not on "no side". You might not identify with any particular party (nor do I much to your dismay I am sure) but you can be positioned on a political spectrum or compass or whichever tool you decide to use to measure such things. Moreover in Australian politics the ALP is on the authoritarian-right, the Coalition slightly more to the right and slightly more authoritarian, but not by a lot (both are within the same 10% of any graphical representation).
soapit
Guest
that just isnt correct breakdown.
HarryT
Guest
Perhaps you are his Mum?
PeterK
Roar Guru
Red Kev - never asked for personality. I stated my political already, I am on no side. I am independent and take each issue on it's merits. I have never read anything positive from you for the right side and nothing negative about the left side, so I deducted from this, so I wanted to know explicitly since you raised it. Now you are being evasive.
mudjimba
Guest
The problem is the cattle are NRC players in a Super Rugby competition.