Cheika and Australian Rugby Union's triumphs should be praised, not dismissed

Stompa- well stomped.

The use of the phrase ‘Aussie Union’ is an indicator of someone speaking from outside the fan base. Where did you play your ‘union’ Republican? What is the ‘union’ club that you belong to? If you have no answer to either of these why are you here?

I thought this article was about something, but it turns out I was mistaken.

Ok, I'll address the "gender benefit" - you have no evidence for this and haven't even tried to argue it. You just state that she has escaped scrutiny because she's a woman, well back it up with something. I've said I don't think she does, she gets a lot of criticism and have given examples including that she probably gets it worse for being a woman from some (such as Jones who has a bit of tendency there). Plenty of things can be blamed on some in the current administration - Clyne for instance should have been pushed out a long time ago and its a disgrace that he's still there. But you can only blame people for things under their control and that occurred when they were there - the real tests for Castle in my opinion is how she goes hiring a new coaching staff (not just the head coach, but the support as well) and how they implement the new high performance structure and also how they do with the next TV deal. If she stuffs any of that up, I'd agree she should go. And there's no need to get snarky and start the name calling - you can call me an apologist all you want and I can counter that you're a reactionary who wants to destroy everything without thinking. But its all a bit pointless isn't it? I can't remember on the Folau evidence - you may well be right. But I still think that one needs to be judged on the outcome of the court case - if they lose it, then that is a big mark against her.

Wow, thanks for your great input WayneS. You really told me...

Ever heard of Mourne Kransky?

Sorry Greysy with all due respect, you are in denial.

So you are saying that Cheika had a free sole hand in all decisions regarding the team and the fact that Johnson was appointed to oversee him made no difference and Castle and Clyne never interfered with his decisions.

The sex is irrelevant, but if you are appointed to a position despite your debacle at a previous position of which you also had no experience of the sport, then there are questions that need answering.

Harsh but ultimately very fair. England showed the blueprint for beating the All Blacks yesterday and they executed it almost perfectly. The one thing that makes my blood boil is our lack of basic skills especially when fatigued or under pressure. Kickoffs, exits from the 22 and tactical kicking in general play are very poor. How can this be when they are professional players ??? If you asked every rugby fan whether we would prefer "playing the Australian way" or winning we all know what the answer would be ...

What a lot of rubbish! "Now the perception of elitism due to the sports’ ties with private schools." Private school bashing has no facts to support the comment. Support you throw away comments and publish your research where junior players are registered? Rugby I would think should be proud that "elite" Schools support Rugby! The public system is not catering for Rugby, take out the private Schools and your back to Club football, creating a far greater decline in participation. Take out the Private Schools are you suggesting the rapid decline and death of one proven system of Junior development! Guess what it is not a cash drag on RA it is a free Rugby development area for RA. "What Cheika has done, despite these circumstances, in getting the Wallabies to the final and quarter-final in union World Cups, is very much Superhuman indeed".   Cheika's failing has been he had a game "style / plan", self named the Australian way, unfortunately failed! Why did Cheika game style fail should be the question! Why after 5 years it worked, failed, failed, failed, failed? Why did he pick & stick with players that could not deliver his Australian way plan? Why did he not have support staff that are able to train the skills for his "Australian way?   "TV ratings, domestic competition crowds" -Is the decline due to poor results from the Wallabies? Moving on to a good question that is the real problem!  "Waning junior participation, an increasing desire from Australian-based Pacific Islanders to follow rugby league instead through their connections to Tonga, Fiji and Samoa."   "Fewer Australian-born kids than ever now find the prospect of playing for the Wallabies an appealing prospect. "  There is a very sound reason this is happening and should be one of the first items on the RA agenda addressing how to improve the Grass roots community coaching. Having been involved from the Mid 80's and currently involved in junior Rugby I see the problem ever weekend. Junior Club Rugby from a young age are Coached be well meaning Parents, more often that not have never played Union. They watch and the juniors watch League on the free to air. They Coach what they see. Developing talent is identified very early be talent scouts from NRL & AFL and junior scholarships are offered or incentives given to the junior players. Rugby can not compete with the funding of 15 League Clubs continually scouting Junior Rugby players. Rugby does not have the "financial pathways of the 15 Leagues Clubs. Luckily some Private Schools offer scholarships to save defections. The Islanders - Tonga, Fiji and Samoa." Yes they are playing Union and league- they chase the money and support on offer in League. The real issue is lack of RA funds and a very small pathway system, simply because most of Union is an amateur sport. A failed National team that lost wider community support has not helped with cash flow.  My local Club lost 50% of a crack Junior Team to League poaching and the end result they could not field a Team. The local "Private" Catholic School with a rich Union history is now offering League. The flagship is the Wallabies and the success of the Coaching Team led by the Head Coach has a huge influence on Juniors, cash flow and community support. The rest is not worthy of a comment.

Concur. The big elephant in the room of Aussie Union is the unrealistic expectation of it supporters. The Wallabies are a very good outfit especially considering the codes lowly status in this country. We are overly obsessed by NZ's pedigree, courtesy of geography which hasn't benefited the code here as much as some like to believe. The Wallabies have been psychologically damaged from decades of humiliating defeats by the mighty AB's and an overexposure to Trans Tasman monotony.

@Greysy 1:03pm Agreed. And there’s a bloke involved at a senior administrative level – Clown, Clod, Clune, or some such – who has mastered the role of Invisible Man. A Big Bird snuffalupagus? He is Exhibit A for the case that Castle’s gender is irrelevant.

@Sandbox re: male CEO in thongs… If said questions were alone raising doubts about the quality of his performance? Yes. Ad hominem is non-gender specific in application.

Most of Cheika’s wins came against tier 2 nations

She’s auditioning for the Vicar of Dibley reboot

Most unprofessional media work ever by a national coach

Yep. While he was still in the job they all sucked up to him no matter what the results were.

I do love a satire article

With respect, the conclusion is errant nonsense. I suppose such was inevitable given the false premises, assertions and lack of coherent reasoning from the headline onward. “Triumphs”? The Wallabies are ranked 7. One win against the ABs proved to be an enjoyable aberration. “Gritty”? Having 60% possession and repeatedly gifting the ball to an opposition whose game plan relied on the Wallabies making simple mistakes is not gritty. England’s defence was gritty. Six Nations rugby in the mud with torrential rain is gritty. To be fair, the Wales contest was tense and tight. The Wallabies lost. Running rugby is an ideal made possible only if players can pass, catch and know how and when to kick the ball. England made as many metres kicking the ball as the Wallabies did running with it. Gritty? 17-16 down and lose 40-16 - gritty? Alan Border in the late 80s was gritty. Boonie was gritty. Gritty losing? Underperforming recidivists in schoolboy errors are not to be celebrated. Nepotism in selection policy from schoolboy representative level upward is not good enough. Apologists for blokes paid $100K and more to lose because opponents rely on turnovers is Rugby Australia and Waratahs usual propaganda served up as post-match reflection. What really matters is evidence of selection based on merit and form, players with requisite skills for an elite level, and fielding a national team that includes at least a player who can read a game. Just one. That fellow lovers of the game continue to refer to the Folau dispute at all let alone ss a factor relevant to the Wallabies woeful World Cup 2019 campaign is an embarrassment. Do you reckon the ABs, Boks or Poms would be ranked 7 if a winger or fullback had been punted 6 months ago? Shouting yourself in the foot for three years is not gritty. Rule 303 should have been enforced well before this inevitable debacle.