[2021 Rugby Championship] Round 4 Argentina v New Zealand (18/9/2021)

[Umaga's Witness]

Could've just changed 5 or 6 players though... if the Boks don't become more inventive in those next two matches they'll lose both of them.

Like I said, it's better for building combinations to make a lot of changes once than it is to make a handful of changes a bunch of times.
And the need to rest everyone at some point is a given.

Mate, Foster is a very average head coach, was a average head coach for the Chiefs too, it looks like he was only selected as Hansen's assistant coach because he was a good mate of his... Hansen was a good coach but not a great one, he didn't have the good sense to include drop goals into our game until the last year or two of his AB coaching career, it's another weapon that can be used to win a tight game at the end, or push you past a 7 point lead.
Also Hansen was tactically poor at trying to break down a rushing defence, all he basically had was to spread the wide to the backs or take it it through the forwards - if you're getting slow ball from your forwards it's very difficult to take the ball up or fire it out wide to your backs with the opposition standing on top of them... with the opposition standing up so flat there's going to be acres of space behind to kick into to turn them around, yet amazingly Hansen hardly ever got his playmakers to use those tactics, players should be thinking for themselves anyway, read the situation & take the best option.

I don't understand the relevance of this post.

 

[NZbloke]

You don't need to keep building combinations though too much, it's all about getting the balance right... combinations work much better when they're kept together for a fair few games in a row, so you are then obviously going to perform at your best as a team.

What ? my other post is very straightforward - I don't rate Foster as a head coach... also as said it was poor tactics by Hansen to hardly use drop goals, also he didn't really come up with a tactic for the rushing defence, christ, all these things are also related to Foster as well because we've basically got the same coaching staff again, except for Hansen.

 

[Kiwiwomble]

isn't it a bit moot now, they changes worked and now we will have more rested first string team to play the boks

I'm not a huge fan of fozzie but i';; give him his dues when he gets it right

 

[Umaga's Witness]

You don't need to keep building combinations though too much, it's all about getting the balance right... combinations work much better when they're kept together for a fair few games in a row, so you are then obviously going to perform at your best as a team.

What ? my other post is very straightforward - I don't rate Foster as a head coach... also as said it was poor tactics by Hansen to hardly use drop goals, also he didn't really come up with a tactic for the rushing defence, christ, all these things are also related to Foster as well because we've basically got the same coaching staff again, except for Hansen.

I'm confused. You say you don't need to build combinations, and then you say combinations work much better when they're kept together for a few games in a row.

And I didn't say I didn't understand your post, I said I didn't understand its relevance. I wasn't saying foster was a great coach, I was saying he had appeared to think through an objective it appeared you shared with him much better than you had. And I wasn't saying Hansen was a god coach, I was saying that every coach of a top team in the professional era would have taken the opportunity to make a lot of changes for this match.

Also, Given how often we kick the ball in behind rush defence under foster I'm surprised you don't like him. And given how fosters vision is to develop players who think for themselves and can adapt mid game I'm again surprised you don't like him. Maybe you like those aspects but just think he is an average head coach overall? I reckon he is trying to develop the players to motivate themselves off the park the same way as he is developing them to direct themselves in the pitch. He isn't a motivator like a Robertson, but that's ok if the team are motivating themselves. I've never been a foster fan but I like what he's trying to do, so I'm willing to sit back with an open mind and see how his vision unfolds.

 

[The Seeker]

I'd like to see the AB's lose a match because you Kiwi's are spoiled. But I think they'll roll through the competition undefeated.

 

[Umaga's Witness]

Difficult to tell from the highlights but how well did Sotutu play?

It can be quite difficult to tell unless you watch a player specifically, and I didn't. He definitely did well on attack, utilising his awesome skills. Probably needs a bigger presence on defence. He has gone downhill a bit this year it seems, in terms of all round play. It was the same in the blues. I wish the all blacks could make room for him on the reserves because his skill set is a great match for the style of play we are trying to play. But ardie is playing better at 8, jacobsons all round game at 8 this year (especially in super rugby) has been very good, and probably Blackadder at 6 with akira at 8 would be ahead of akira at 6 and sotutu at 8 at this stage given how well Blackadder played in this game.

 

[Bada-Bing!]

It can be quite difficult to tell unless you watch a player specifically, and I didn't. He definitely did well on attack, utilising his awesome skills. Probably needs a bigger presence on defence. He has gone downhill a bit this year it seems, in terms of all round play. It was the same in the blues. I wish the all blacks could make room for him on the reserves because his skill set is a great match for the style of play we are trying to play. But ardie is playing better at 8, jacobsons all round game at 8 this year (especially in super rugby) has been very good, and probably Blackadder at 6 with akira at 8 would be ahead of akira at 6 and sotutu at 8 at this stage given how well Blackadder played in this game.

Sotutu is still quite young isn't he at 23 and still a couple of years to develop . But Such great depth in the back row for ABs.

Be a shame if he doesn't max his potential and goes the way of Luatua or Dixon and just another surplus to req.

 

[NZbloke]

I'm confused. You say you don't need to build combinations, and then you say combinations work much better when they're kept together for a few games in a row.

And I didn't say I didn't understand your post, I said I didn't understand its relevance. I wasn't saying foster was a great coach, I was saying he had appeared to think through an objective it appeared you shared with him much better than you had. And I wasn't saying Hansen was a god coach, I was saying that every coach of a top team in the professional era would have taken the opportunity to make a lot of changes for this match.

Also, Given how often we kick the ball in behind rush defence under foster I'm surprised you don't like him. And given how fosters vision is to develop players who think for themselves and can adapt mid game I'm again surprised you don't like him. Maybe you like those aspects but just think he is an average head coach overall? I reckon he is trying to develop the players to motivate themselves off the park the same way as he is developing them to direct themselves in the pitch. He isn't a motivator like a Robertson, but that's ok if the team are motivating themselves. I've never been a foster fan but I like what he's trying to do, so I'm willing to sit back with an open mind and see how his vision unfolds.

I didn't say we don't need to develop combinations, I said we don't need to build combinations too much, we're way overdoing it in the area - yeah, you can't always start your best 15 as some players need to be rested, while others might be out injured... reckon it's fine to make 5 or 6 changes at times, that's still changing about a third of your team, but the real big matches need your best starting 15 & bench playing.

From what I've seen Foster hasn't got the team to kick in behind the rushing defence much at all - what I do like as mentioned before is the ABs forwards taking the ball up through a lot more phases, which is also giving us more possession, that's not really due to Foster... it's because we don't have Aaron Smith constantly firing the ball out to the backs a heap of times, so our forwards weren't doing enough hard yakka smashing the ball up to give us more forward momentum & better front foot ball for the backs.

Really made me laugh when the NZRU said Foster got the job because of the outstanding coaching staff he selected - really ??? Plumtree his assistant coach use to be our Canes head coach as you know, he's clearly in the same category as Foster, an average coach... Chris Boyd use to be the head coach for the Canes & Plumbtree was his assistant, Boyd had 3 years with the Canes, where we made two Super Rugby Finals, winning one of them, also a Semi, that's a great effort when you consider the Canes have always had poor tight-fives... Crusaders have won so many Super comps over the years because they've always had an excellent front 5, as we all know that's where you control the game from.
When Boyd went overseas Plumtree took over the team & we started to go down hill, then he got selected on the AB coaching staff.

 

[Umaga's Witness]

I didn't say we don't need to develop combinations, I said we don't need to build combinations too much, we're way overdoing it in the area - yeah, you can't always start your best 15 as some players need to be rested, while others might be out injured... reckon it's fine to make 5 or 6 changes at times, that's still changing about a third of your team, but the real big matches need your best starting 15 & bench playing.

From what I've seen Foster hasn't got the team to kick in behind the rushing defence much at all - what I do like as mentioned before is the ABs forwards taking the ball up through a lot more phases, which is also giving us more possession, that's not really due to Foster... it's because we don't have Aaron Smith constantly firing the ball out to the backs a heap of times, so our forwards weren't doing enough hard yakka smashing the ball up to give us more forward momentum & better front foot ball for the backs.

Really made me laugh when the NZRU said Foster got the job because of the outstanding coaching staff he selected - really ??? Plumtree his assistant coach use to be our Canes head coach as you know, he's clearly in the same category as Foster, an average coach... Chris Boyd use to be the head coach for the Canes & Plumbtree was his assistant, Boyd had 3 years with the Canes, where we made two Super Rugby Finals, winning one of them, also a Semi, that's a great effort when you consider the Canes have always had poor tight-fives... Crusaders have won so many Super comps over the years because they've always had an excellent front 5, as we all know that's where you control the game from.
When Boyd went overseas Plumtree took over the team & we started to go down hill, then he got selected on the AB coaching staff.

Ahh yeah the whole selection process was a shambles, with no great candidates applying either as head ir assistant coaches, but I guess the assistants Robertson managed to get last minute were equally as inexperienced as him and that's ultimately what made the difference.

interesting what you say about smith though. The highlanders game plan over the last few years has revolves around smith throwing flat passes to forward runners to gain go forward ball before unleashing the backs.

 

[Kiwiwomble]

i was talking to someone in HR at work about the appointment process, they said it was weird, you go to the open market when hiring someone if you dont know whos out there....did we think there was an international level coach out there that people didn't know about?

We should have acted like the big dog and gone out and approach the people we wanted rather than being left with what we were

 

[Umaga's Witness]

i was talking to someone in HR at work about the appointment process, they said it was weird, you go to the open market when hiring someone if you dont know whos out there....did we think there was an international level coach out there that people didn't know about?

We should have acted like the big dog and gone out and approach the people we wanted rather than being left with what we were

That is interesting. I Think they just imagined everyone would apply, and got that massively wrong. Most candidates thought that either they'd already decided and were just inviting candidates for optics sake, or they didn't want to put in the effort to apply without knowing they were a reasonable chance of getting it.

 

[NZbloke]

Ahh yeah the whole selection process was a shambles, with no great candidates applying either as head ir assistant coaches, but I guess the assistants Robertson managed to get last minute were equally as inexperienced as him and that's ultimately what made the difference.

interesting what you say about smith though. The highlanders game plan over the last few years has revolves around smith throwing flat passes to forward runners to gain go forward ball before unleashing the backs.

Reckon, Scott Robertson was always going to be a much better option than Foster, yeah, he hasn't coached at international level, but every coach at one stage hasn't until they get a crack to do so - Super Rugby isn't that far away from the international level, he's 47 & won 4 or 5 Super comps... what really surprised me is that he didn't have a coaching staff properly organized, reckon his coaching staff couldn't have been any worse than the current one, as they're certainly not much chop.

It's fine when Smith fires a flat pass to a big forward that smashes the ball up, that's part of the process of going through the phases... it's when he fires the ball out wide to the backs & the opposition are smothering us because the forwards haven't gone through enough phases to create more space & time for our backs.

What I found hilarious was the NZRU selecting a sheila on the selection panel who was a former netball player... utterly ridiculous, that would be like having a former All Black on a netball panel helping to select their NZ netball team, wouldn't happen.

 

[Kiwiwomble]

thats "sheila" has a name, Waimarama Taumaunu, she wasn't brought in because she was a woman, she was brought in because she was an international level coach, i thought it was great, she wasn't selecting on her own but would have been able to provide a different perspective on attributes that would be looked for in elite sports

We do a similar thing in the last few companies ive worked for, when interviewing you bring in a senior from another part of the business to give a different perspective

and as for the final point, coaches work cross sport all the time, the AB's have gone to NFL teams, eddie jones has worked with my football team i the uk (Wimbledon), its pretty common

 

[NZbloke]

thats "sheila" has a name, Waimarama Taumaunu, she wasn't brought in because she was a woman, she was brought in because she was an international level coach, i thought it was great, she wasn't selecting on her own but would have been able to provide a different perspective on attributes that would be looked for in elite sports

We do a similar thing in the last few companies ive worked for, when interviewing you bring in a senior from another part of the business to give a different perspective

and as for the final point, coaches work cross sport all the time, the AB's have gone to NFL teams, eddie jones has worked with my football team i the uk (Wimbledon), its pretty common

I know her name, so what if I say sheila or bloke etc, most people overseas wouldn't know her & would have trouble pronouncing her name anyway

When you're selecting a rugby head coach you need all the people on the panel to be specialists on the game, doesn't matter what sport it is... it's a completely different story when you are looking for ideas to use from other different sports, training methods etc.

With you talking about companies you'll realize the best run companies are the one's that have the best people at the top... l think we don't have the right people on the NZRU board, get that right, you then have the right people to select the best coach available.

 

[Kiwiwomble]

I know her name, so what if I say sheila or bloke etc, most people overseas wouldn't know her & would have trouble pronouncing her name anyway

When you're selecting a rugby head coach you need all the people on the panel to be specialists on the game, doesn't matter what sport it is... it's a completely different story when you are looking for ideas to use from other different sports, training methods etc.

With you talking about companies you'll realize the best run companies are the one's that have the best people at the top... l think we don't have the right people on the NZRU board, get that right, you then have the right people to select the best coach available.

i mean, i work for one of the largest engineering consultancies in the world with over 70k staff...we're doing ok

I'm glad most successful business have mst past that rather dated approach to things

 

[NZbloke]

You can't relate everything from business into sport though - lets have a look at what makes a good head coach in rugby :

Man Management skills : most of that skill comes through hard yakka as a coach through the different levels, knowing how to relate to each individual to get the very best out of them, depends on a coaches personalty a lot too... Robertson definitely has these skills, we have seen it plenty of times over the years with the huge amount of respect his Crusaders players have for him.

A Plan : which is basically about executing your set pieces well, trying to play in the oppositions half more than they play in yours etc... Tactics : depending on the situation of the game a player has to read the game well by taking the best options available.

Head Coach : has to be able to read the game well from the stand to know when players are tiring or not playing well, then bring on fresh players to replace them so the team can keep performing at it's best - also has to delegate his assistant coach to do a lot of off field duties so he can focus on other stuff... you see a fair few coaches tend to favour players even when they're not playing well, if that's the case they have to be replaced.

 

[OneBlackEye]

Christ I'm over all the anti Foster BS I read on the internet.

I'm not even defending the guy as best option for coach but every argument seems to be blaming every mistake the team makes on him and everything that goes well is based on the individual brilliance of whatever player it is that I like.

I'm sure sometimes it's actually actuate but no one can ever really know. It's such a boring unprovable point of view.

Didn't the ABs just put the most points they've ever scored on the Wallabies who just beat the World Champions who just beat the Lions?

There's a really good chance they are about to beat the Springboks 2 from 2 as well. Time will tell, I don't mind if I'm wrong.

I bet it won't be good enough though. Razor wouldn't just be undefeated, he would have organized extra games and won those too. And he wouldn't have rotated so many players but also would have blooded more new players that I like to reward good form while also playing my favorite older players too. And also in the positions I want them in. And no one would be injured. And also he is a good dancer.

 

[NZbloke]

The point is though if you have a head coach that has better bloody insight your chances are increased in winning very tight matches because that coach is going to make better decisions all-round.

 

[Twistie]

I thought the Abs played well in the 1st half and lost their shape in the 2nd half due to Argentina holding on to the ball, territory and changing players. Overall they had a good game, Blackadder,Takeiaho,Perenara ,Mckenzie,Jordie and Vaai had good games for us and Boffelli and Lavanini ,Montoya for the Pumas .Fingers crossed for Ab form to continue against the Boks