Roar Rookie
Joined August 2010
1.4k
Views
1
Published
6
Comments
Published
Comments
The defense of Robbie Deans and his coaching prowess is in full swing by Deans' disciples, but how much of the blame (or credit)…
Regardless of how crucial they are, their impact is minimised by the other coach.
We don’t have to agree on how important their job is to realise that their input is canceled out by the opposition coach doing all of the same things.
Coaches are largely irrelevant in rugby
Ahhh Wayne Bennett, the coach worshipers trump card…. well done sir.
Although it could be argued that Alfie and Lockyer have made him look good. It isn’t hard to coach when you have several legends of the game at your disposal is it?
Coaches are largely irrelevant in rugby
Obviously unaware of Ewan McKenzie’s EPIC FAIL at Stade Francais, Look it up.
The QLD players are a young group of players who got a year older and more experienced. In 2009 they finished 5th, and they made a slight improvement. But sure, give McKenzie the credit.
Coaches are largely irrelevant in rugby
I guess I am trying to point out that there is very little difference between coaches at a pro level.
If you accept that International rugby coaches are all excellent at what they do, coupled with the small influence that they can actually have on a game.
It’s like comparing Matt Gitau and Dan Carter, there isn’t that much to choose between them, sure you may prefer one to the other but ultimately you would be happy with either guy and their presence on the field cancels each other out.
The same is true of coaches, what is the point of hyperventilating over replacing Robbie Deans, when you understand how small their influence is.
An actual analysis of the two teams player by player shows why the ABs should win 9 out of 10 against the current wallaby line up – The players are just better, with the exception of Elsom, Genia and Gitau who are arguably on a par or superior to their opposites, the rest of the players are over matched by superior athletes.
Arguing over the coach is a fools errand when it is clear how big the gulf in talent is between the two teams, if Deans was running the All Blacks and Henry was running the Wallabies do you really think there would have been a different result last weekend?
Coaches are largely irrelevant in rugby
Nice article,
It’s great to see some actual analysis and thought behind your opinion rather than the usual coach praise/criticism.
The Wallibies will never have a problem fielding a great backline due to the number of transferable skills between League and Union, but the forwards are exposed to an unfathomably steep learning curve if this is typical of the experience earned in the juniors.
Cheers
Rugby skills are learned playing junior rugby
You seem to be stuck on the “irrelevance”, I am not saying that they don’t matter, I am simply pointing out that the most of the international coaches are doing all of the same jobs to a very high level.
And this minimises the importance of the coach on the outcome. Quite simple, the Same way that Matfield’s Impact is minimised by Shape.
If you have a crappy coach and the other team has a great coach then he becomes a factor, but both of these guys are excellent at what they do, and neither possesses such an advantage over the other that you could swap coaches and get a different result.
What specifically do you think Henry is doing differently or better than Deans?
Coaches are largely irrelevant in rugby