Wallabies reveal Matt Taylor as new defence coach

GH: Can you please read my reply before replying yourself?

Doesn’t matter - still no legal basis to sack him. The course of action that you say Castle should have taken would have required paying out at least $2 million to Cheika and probably the same again to his assistants. It also would have required a hasty search for a new top tier coach in circumstances where: 1. there probably weren’t any top tier coaches available anyway. 2. The replacement would have had RA over a barrel because the wallabies would have been without a coach. 3. Any top tier coach would be extremely wary of taking a job where the replacement got sacked without warning following a winning season. No reasonable person could possibly consider that to be a smarter course of action than what Castle and the board actually followed

GH: I don't remember being as enthusiastic as you are at Cheika's 2017 success rate. Wins Fiji Italy Argentina Japan Wales NZ Losses Scotland twice NZ twice England To round it off they drew with SA twice. This does not support your view of an upward trajectory. It sounds to me like a year of the lesser teams as the opposition. NZ exempted of course and Wales, although we have a strong record against them. A short term replacement in Johnson, may not have done better but could not have been worse. The writing was on the wall but you may not have been able to read it!

I’m talking about 2018 when Castle got the job. In 2018 Cheika was coming off a 7-2-5 2017 season, having improved on the previous rebuilding season In 2016. That might be a bit mediocre, but it is showing an upward trajectory and just isn’t grounds to sack a coach for underperformance. No reasonable CEO would have sacked Cheika At the beginning of 2018. It would definitely have resulted in millions of dollars paid out to Cheika and his assistants. Cheika has a shocker in 2018 and Castle appointed Scott Johnson, the wallabies subsequently doubled their win rate and made the quarter finals of the World Cup. There is no reason to expect that a hastily chosen short term replacement (who would that even have been?) would have performed any better.

Who says Johnson was going to do that?

Gray-hand is this 2016? I was referring to 2018 when Castle started and his issues were known by most roarers. My issue on results is between RWC’s v the top teams: England played 6 lost all games! NZ played 11, lost 9 won 2 games. SA played 7, 3 wins 2 losses 2 draws Ireland played 4, 2 wins 2 losses So against the top teams: played 28 games won 7 lost 19 drew 2 for win ratio 25% (ignoring draws). Now Cheika in 2016 a building year: played against all teams, 15 games, won 6 for a 40% win ratio. Compared to Deans in 2008 a building year: Played 14 won 9 lost 5 for 64% win ratio – Or the building year 2012 under Deans (before he resigned in 2013): Played 15, won 9 lost 5 drew 1 for a 60% win ration (ignoring draw) You think there was no reason to sack Cheika? Mate, you’ve had too much Christmas cheer..

TWAS: predictable response from you. She could have got Johnson to run the team through the RWC and move to director afterwards. She chose to keep Cheika, employ Johnson and watch the financial slide of income disappearing. Now she has to re-negotiate a major contract with a lousy financial set up herself and Fox in a similar position. I am not convinced this will come out well unless another sensible offer can be negotiated.

Not sure that a 7-2-5 win-draw-loss record (which was an improvement on the previous post World Cup rebuilding year) would have been legally sound grounds for termination for non performance. Probably also not the sort of management decision that would impress any high quality replacements.

Sure. As long as you’re willing to pay them out, their assistants, and then pay for a short term replacement and whoever they want.

You are blaming her for things that existed before she started.

TWAS: Too busy with the Guardian?

TWAS: True, I think your ability to excuse her 2 years of ignoring the elephant trampling over Australian rugby but you and dilkington seem to think she has done an OK job! The coffers are bare, the eyeballs have left in droves, Fox is suiciding and can't afford to pay, whilst the hypocritical little idi-t playing aeroplanes cost RA money we don't have. Then you can bleat about grassroots, well that is rooted very well.

Grey-hand, nonsense - poor performance is a good enough reason to sack anyone. Cheika wasn't working for the public circus!

No. The major reasons are because: - they have more prime time content - they’ve historically had much larger fan bases - more people watch the games on each medium 40 years ago Richmond were averaging 65k supporters at the MCG during the regular season. You don’t think this may be more valuable to broadcasters? And anyway, what does any of this have to do with the point? When did I claim to be in step with the majority of the population?

TWAS, ''I don’t watch any FTA TV…'' Well TWAS you are out of step with 70% of the Australian population. Don't you think that the major reason that the AFL & NRL get so much more Broadcasting Revenue than RA is that they are shown on Ch 7 & Ch 9 as well as Foxtel?

With their magic wand.

She would not take on Cheika when he needed to be removed or at least brought down a peg and in the end, he resigned she did not sack him! She took him down a peg by appointing Scott Johnson above him which resulted in doubling the wallabies win/loss ratio. She had no grounds to sack Cheika because his contract had no KPIs.

Or he did it before he’s contract wasn’t renewed and he becomes public ally dumped. What sort of person do you have to be to make a public showing of sacking somebody, who has no further contract anyway?

I don’t watch any FTA TV...

There are downsides no matter what. There is no “resolving” that. Just picking the outcome you think you can just manage. Just because I think something, it doesn’t mean it’s the best or only way.