But he selects the team does he not ?

Hi Jaysper

“a) The players aren’t performing as well as they did last year.”
b) The selection policy is failing them.
“c) The game plan is failing them.”

The question is who’s ultimately responsible for those things ?

” Despite the fact that the players are not significantly older/slower than last year, the fact is that many of them will simply be too old/slow come RWC19. For this reason, the selectors start to jettisoning these players NOW in the hope that they can develop younger players in time for the RWC.”

I believe in succession as opposed to total rebuild. No one should be excluded because of their age. ALL Blacks have done it wisely.
.

Thank you.

I would find it unbelievable if Port decided to trade Hartlett.

If Ken Hinkley oversees a kind of clean out on the back of his coaching performance, then he should hold his head in shame.

Swampy, nor do I.

Right now they have a serious log jam with their big men and failed to off load any of them as asset bait.

They’re seriously unbalanced all over the court.

The argument is do you draft the best player available or assess your needs based on team balance ?

The appointment of Mick Byrne can only be a good thing. If it’s true that he’s had an influence within NZ rugby, then hopefully he can be used in a range of ways and leave a similar legacy here. But obviously he’s going to need more than 5 minutes to do so.

But again, this isn’t the reason the Wallabies have been so poor lately !

Brisneyland, i think the point was clearly a metaphor for the importance of fundamentals.

Yes but the world cup isn’t what we’re talking about right now. International rugby is rightfully a scrutinizing position. So there doesn’t have to be all that much gone wrong for a coach to find themselves under the pump, even in a short period. The position is too important to accept mediocrity.

No, Cheika doesn’t have them for unlimited periods, but nor does anyone else. That’s the system all teams work with.

And what’s this “in time” ? The time to be ready for the first test of season- is the first test of the season, it would seem to me. So if that’s true, where does the responsibility for preparation lie ? It’s not the Super Rugby clubs.

Plus, i don’t think anyone expects them to be at All Black standard. But we’re not as bad as we’re so feebly demonstrated to be.

Ted, even if there is truth in what you and many others have been saying recently, it still isn’t an argument as to why the Wallabies have been so poor lately. Which i think i can safely argue, is the reason for articles like yours. If it’s not, than would you still feel the same if the Wallabies were still going well ?

Now i’m not trying to misrepresent the point you were making. I understand exactly what you mean. We’ve heard a fair bit about how there’s a systemic problem that may well exist, and it starts with the ARU, I enjoyed your article and it was well written. Let’s be clear on that.

But if the motivation for pointing this out comes from only recent performance, than we can’t overlook the things that can currently be controlled, regardless of existing systemic problems which you suggest may play some role in the way our performance transpires

The performance of the Wallabies, regardless of all this, rests on the shoulders of the head coach. He can control game plan; where there currently doesn’t seem to be one. He can control discipline; when there is lack of it. He can drill fundamentals; which you argue is evidently a problem.

So i don’t mind this coming up as a reasonable topic for discussion as long as it isn’t making any attempt to shield the Wallabies from things that are currently withing their control, and that any reasonably minded person would be justified in questioning.

You have to feel for Justin Leppitsch. Similar to Michael Voss, you have to wonder if they’ve made the call on the basis they feel as if there is someone better out there ? And if there isn’t then what’s the point ?

I would have liked to have seen him given a further go.

Either way, i can’t really think of an argument against the decision. I don’t think there’s a clear case of right or wrong here. In their view, performances have been below standard so they’ve made the difficult call.

How much time would you suggest this team needs to click ? In any case, you don’t have time to click on the international stage. You need to be ready. This ins’t a 22 round domestic competition, it’s the shortest but most important part of the the rugby calendar.

World in Union, so what if the game isn’t as popular here ? What has that actually got to do with any reasonable criticism at the way Cheika is currently going. Interestingly, we always feel we need to point out the status of the game in this country when things are not going so well. Seems like the typical inferiority complex response to make sure our rivals are aware of this.

How can the performance of Cheika in the post match be defended ? It was so pathetic and embarrassing, it was almost beyond grief.

And what are these unrealistic expectations exactly ? Doesn’t seem to much to ask- win or lose- for something even remotely resembling an improved performance. It’s not losing that’s the issue anyway, it’s the way it keeps happening lately. I’m sorry but the test arena is too rare and too important to be anything short of scrutinising.

Different level of expectation in NZ. But yes, especially because of that !

Firstly, when the Wallabies players and coaches come together, they form the national team as one. So once again, we get this ludicrous suggestion that’s it either one or the other. The real question that seems to be constantly overlooked by the author is actually where does the responsibility ultimately lie ? I don’t think i’m schooling anyone by saying that isn’t a question with a debatable open end. The answer, as it always has been, and always will be, is coaching. So if anyone just points to the in game mistakes that individual players inevitably make, and therefore use that as a way to defend poor coaching, are either not seeing the point or are refusing to acknowledge it. Of course players are responsible. No one denies that. But once more the point is, where is the ultimate responsibility held ?

Secondly, no one is suggesting that simply losing to NZ is the problem. It’s more so the feebleness of how it constantly happens. It can’t go unchallenged and has to make any reasonable thinking follower of the game ask questions. The wallabies have talent and people can’t just keep pointing to the endless problems ( not suggested by me ) that rugby culture here seems to have as a reason why our national team can’t even produce something resembling a competitive, balanced, intelligent and hard nosed defensive performance at the very least. Yes, the All Blacks are good, but we can be to.

Thirdly, there seems to be this notion going around ( not by everyone) that if you have nothing positive to say about the Wallabies than don’t bother saying anything. I’m sorry but this is just so evidently not the way the world works and we know we can be better. We’re not a nation like Japan or Uruguay that can be excused of difficult questions after so many heavy defeats.

And finally i stand by the belief that Cheika shouldn’t of been appointed in the first place. It was unwise, with out diligent thought process, panicked and rushed.

Had to get an another opportunity at some point. I like how Cheika isn’t deterred by the game being in NZ.

Keeping quiet is the best thing that Quade has ever done.

“If coaching has nothing to do with that how did Eddie improve the England side?”

Absolutely ! If players were the one’s held ultimately responsible for the whole range of reasons- a perfectly capable side- wasn’t performing, then no coaching criticism is ever justified. You may as well offer Lancaster his job back if people truly believe that.

Don’t get me wrong, all this talk about funding, grassroots, coaching, resumes, CEO’s etc is perfectly valid. But it still isn’t an argument against the link of coaching and performance, that can be influenced currently by someone who’s up to it and knows what they’re doing.

David,

But when the Wallabies players and the Wallabies coaches come together to form the national team, are they not considered as one and the same thing ? So just asking whether it’s one or the other doesn’t seem to me to be the question here.

To me, the question is where does the responsibility for overall poor performance lie ?

Yes.

Serbia hurt us in this way also.

Be careful in saying that, you’ll be misrepresented and howled out by the anti Jake White lunacy (;

Plus, who decides what is sexy ? Personally, i like the arm wrestle and the game of chess style. So do others.

Also, there’s nothing sexy about the current Wallabies anyway. Quite the opposite.

Great post (:

Tom, it also counters recent comments about the state of the international game by team USA. The world is actually getting stronger and as you rightly say, there will be evidence of this very soon.

Canada get dismissed because they never make it Rio. By 2020, they should be well and truly on their way.

The point was that Australia is producing both quality and quantity. Picks 1&10 illustrate that. Plus Simmons is rare class of talent. Ball handling forwards do bot grow on tree’s.

Of course it doesn’t guarantee anything, but never has there been a better time to hope. Just wait and see.

But it’s not losing to the All Blacks that worries me the most, it’s the feebleness of how it transpires.

Of course they can be challenged. But you don’t help yourself if you constantly make the same mistakes over, over and over again. And once more, never learn from them.

There’s no shame in being outplayed by the All Blacks, but if you shoot yourself in the foot every time, don’t be surprised to see that you make no in roads.

It’s a good point to acknowledge that we’re not alone here, but don’t forget also that no other country plays the All blacks as much as we do. I think i’m right in saying ?

England and South Africa don’t constantly make handling errors. They have a clear kicking game. Their coaches seem to have a blueprint as to how they can match the All Blacks. They play a more intelligent style than we do.

On the contrary, the Wallabies go out time and time again and so frustratingly do the same thing for the same result. Why is that ?

Why can’t these guys bring some kind of performance together so they don’t at least get blown of the park so feebly ?

If we just accept that we’re not in the All Black’s league, then all this criticism of coaching, structures and players ETC would be futile. We would just simply not be good enough. In a way not dissimilar to Japan or Scotland. If they were blown of the park by the All Blacks, there wouldn’t be calls for review or questions raised of coaching.

So why does it happen here ? Because we know we can be so much better.

Swampy, i probably should of just said North America as i did overlook Canada.

Yes it’s baffling the way they seem to underachieve internationally. But they do have a much harder road to qualification. As you probably know, the Boomers only have to beat NZ on aggregate.

Canada narrowly missed out to France for a spot in Rio.

I think we’re lucky that all of our guys put their hands up for the Olympics. Canada couldn’t get Wiggins to participate.

Yes, Canada could be a force for sure. On talent, they should’ve been in Rio, but they have a tougher time of it in qualifying.

And i may have overlooked other nations, but i was focusing on what is happening here.

Simmons is a rare talent as you likely are aware.

Thank you. Very well put. It’s good to see there’s some deeper thinkers out there.

Yes, it’s ludicrous really. And stubborn.

Also, i don’t actually disagree with anyone who says that there are issues within the structure, and that they play some part as to how the fundamentals turn out at test level, but that still doesn’t seem like reason as to why criticism about the way the national team is being coached can’t be put forward.

It’s like when people say things along the line of ” well it wasn’t the coaches dropping passes or kicking to no one” It’s not actually the point in my book.

It actually seems to me to be more of a reason as to why a possible foreign coach with the benefit of looking from the outside-in, may have been a wiser choice had that decision not been so rushed.