left their leaders at home,
I was thinking about this. What if, hypothetically (i'm trying to give him ALL the benefit of the doubt), Eddie Jones was told 'dont do TOO bad in 2023, but the real goal is 2027's WC'. I dont like how Hooper was treated, not one bit, but i can imagine scenarios (which i couldnt possibly confirm one way or the other) that would explain it. It'd still look terrible to the outside world, but the reasons behind it would be very different.
I am probably being too lenient. Again, hypothetical and giving him a lot of rope.
After throwing the kitchen sink at Wales and getting no reward Aus had to take new risks, but had no plan B.
That's not what i saw. I saw a team who couldn't even find the city with a map and a tour guide, let alone the house, kitchen or sink.
As a coach myself I take every element of performance personally, mistakes from individuals are a result of my performance directly.
I understand that comes from a good place, but i dont think that is true. You taking it personally and you being able to manipulate it at will are two very different things.
Coaches dont have a control board where they can simply input actions and behaviours and players follow them blindly. Not every human action can be dissected and traced back to it's root causes. Let alone by a rugby coach. Some causalities are or might seem obvious, but many are not.
I get the way to judge their performance relies firstly on results, but i hope we can agree this is not an exact science. Sometimes we (mostly me) expect coaches to be flawless strategists, opposition analysts, nutritionists, logistic specialists, motivational experts, PR virtuosos, and why not, clairvoyants. They are not. They are human and the puzzle they face is not only gargantuan but also has a considerable share of unknowns and unknown unknowns.
He ****** up and he knows it.
Not even the contrarian in me believes i ended up defending Jones. Oh well, badge of shame i suppose.