The Continuity philosofy that harmed Argentina

[rgman]

The culture of perpetual leader is something that doesn´t work for sports teams in Argentina, Rugby included, in fact most celebrated phrase here is "new coach carries the victory." ("técnico que debuta gana" in spanish), or in other words: players needs new faces in leadership from time to time, may be more often than other places. The good intention of keeping the same coach had a positive effect out: Pumas are serious and looking for a long term project….. Now, within the players appears the "silent need" to change coach specially when you have people that not transmit confidence and when the coach in media said he was tired and was forced to take charge again (22/12/12, Télam., Arg news). Thought that´s the reason of Pumas bad start of 2013 RC: Pumas needs a new coach.

 

[rgman]

"Loffreda" was someone special indeed, that kind of coach that pushed (them to their limits!) Pumas to third place in France 2007.... C´on buddies, tell me please if that guy has the skills to motivate Pumas.... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZZibCX2nBjo

 

[Jaguares]

The culture of perpetual leader is something that doesn´t work for sports teams in Argentina, Rugby included, in fact most celebrated phrase here is "new coach carries the victory." (“técnico que debuta gana†in spanish), or in other words: players needs new faces in leadership from time to time, may be more often than other places. The good intention of keeping the same coach had a positive effect out: Pumas are serious and looking for a long term project….. Now, within the players appears the "silent need" to change coach specially when you have people that not transmit confidence and when the coach in media said he was tired and was forced to take charge again (22/12/12, Télam., Arg news). Thought that´s the reason of Pumas bad start of 2013 RC: Pumas needs a new coach.

Big games of Phelan's Team:

England 13 - Argentina 9 - RWC 2011

Amazing defense! They don't deserve to lose

Argentina 13 - Scotland 12 - RWC 2011

Amazing victory!

All Blacks 33 - Argentina 10 - RWC 2011

Incredible defense! 60 minutes without receiving a try

Argentina 16 - South Africa 16 - Rugby Championship 2012 (Mendoza)

Big game! The victory was close

Australia 23 - Argentina 19 - Rugby Championship 2012 (Gold Coast)

Big game! The victory was close again

All Blacks 21 - Argentina 5 - Rugby Championship 2012 (Wellington)

Amazing defense again!

Argentina 19 - Australia 25 - Rugby Championship 2012 (Rosario)

Good game.

Then, not blame Phelan!

 

[Feicarsinn]

Big games of Phelan's Team:England 13 - Argentina 9 - RWC 2011

No tries scored against a poor English side.

Argentina 13 - Scotland 12 - RWC 2011

A one point victory against Scotland is amazing now is it? Bloody hell, that's low standards if ever I saw them.

All Blacks 33 - Argentina 10 - RWC 2011

23 point loss. Wooo

Argentina 16 - South Africa 16 - Rugby Championship 2012 (Mendoza)

A draw at home is hardly impressive. Ireland and Argentina are roughly comparable, and I wouldn't be over the moon with that result.

Australia 23 - Argentina 19 - Rugby Championship 2012 (Gold Coast)

Another loss (against what was an Australian side with a whole host of injuries if I recall.) Moral victories are worth little and less in modern rugby.

All Blacks 21 - Argentina 5 - Rugby Championship 2012 (Wellington)

I'd never be happy with a 16 point loss.

Argentina 19 - Australia 25 - Rugby Championship 2012 (Rosario)

Loss at home. Hurray.

Only one of those games was a victory and that a one point win against Scotland. Clearly Argentina have had issues in getting over the line in recent years. I'd be far from happy with my coach with those results in mind.

 

[Jaguares]

Only one of those games was a victory and that a one point win against Scotland. Clearly Argentina have had issues in getting over the line in recent years. I'd be far from happy with my coach with those results in mind.

I said: "Argentina had an amazing defense", I never said they were the best around the world.

Cheers

 

[Feicarsinn]

I said: "Argentina had an amazing defense", I never said they were the best around the world.

Cheers

What does that have to do with anything?

 

[SelimNiai]

I said: "Argentina had an amazing defense", I never said they were the best around the world.

Cheers

You can't win games by only having a defence, it cant be called "amazing" as if it was "amazing" then they wouldnt have conceded 130 in the 6 games you mention

 

[Big Ewis]

Only one of those games was a victory and that a one point win against Scotland. Clearly Argentina have had issues in getting over the line in recent years. I'd be far from happy with my coach with those results in mind.

well I know you're half tongue-in-cheek there, but that's just a (caricature of a) thick reading. A loss or a win are the whole difference in the end, sure, but obviously there's also...EVERYTHING THAT HAPPENS DURING THOSE EIGHTY MINUTES OF PLAY.
you know...
Stuff like going into NZ, during their first tournament ever, scoring a try in like 5min, and keeping the Blacks try-less til about the 65th min. Sure they never added anything to the scoreboard after their try, but other Tier 1 teams have taken bigger hidings (France, or even worse...Ireland). Australia couldn't score in NZ that year.
Both their results were very good against the Ozzies.

Anyways. I'm just saying the good or bad play of a side is not measured in just simply a win loss record. And sure everybody obviously understands that, but some ppl will deliberately go deaf about that.

And actually yes, they did have AMAZING DEFENSE last year in the tournament. With the exception of the first game perhaps in SA, but still they were good - and of course at home against the rampant AB.

 

[TRF_heineken]

well I know you're half tongue-in-cheek there, but that's just a (caricature of a) thick reading. A loss or a win are the whole difference in the end, sure, but obviously there's also...EVERYTHING THAT HAPPENS DURING THOSE EIGHTY MINUTES OF PLAY.
you know...
Stuff like going into NZ, during their first tournament ever, scoring a try in like 5min, and keeping the Blacks try-less til about the 65th min. Sure they never added anything to the scoreboard after their try, but other Tier 1 teams have taken bigger hidings (France, or even worse...Ireland). Australia couldn't score in NZ that year.
Both their results were very good against the Ozzies.

Anyways. I'm just saying the good or bad play of a side is not measured in just simply a win loss record. And sure everybody obviously understands that, but some ppl will deliberately go deaf about that.

And actually yes, they did have AMAZING DEFENSE last year in the tournament. With the exception of the first game perhaps in SA, but still they were good - and of course at home against the rampant AB.

By saying that, what should we then say about the last match?

They were **** for 79 and a half minutes and then scored a try, which was like, sooooooo amazing...

Whether you win by 1 point or 100, you still lose, everyone always talks about the coulda, woulda and shoulda... Giving them credit for having a great defence for 60 minutes in a game doesn't count for anything if they go on to concede 4 tries in the final 20 minutes. That just shows how consistantly inconsistant they are...

 

[Jaguares]

You can't win games by only having a defence, it cant be called "amazing" as if it was "amazing" then they wouldnt have conceded 130 in the 6 games you mention

Wales 10 -All Blacks 33 - 24 november 2012

Last 8 games between Wales and Australia:

• 2012: Wales 12-14 Australia

• 2012: Australia 20-19 Wales

• 2012: Australia 25-23 Wales
• 2012: Australia 27-19 Wales
• 2011: Wales 18-24 Australia
• 2011: Aus 21-18 Wales (WC)
• 2010: Wales 16-25 Australia
• 2009: Wales 12-33 Australia

So, if you only care about the result. Wales is a poor team, their past results against the powerful South are poor, you can not beat the southern hemisphere teams, although you made ​​great games and in some games you deserved to win.

Argentina would beat Italy without problems in the 6 Nations and could beat Ireland, Wales, Scotland and England, in fact they did in the past. Any European team would suffer playing the Rugby Championship.

Cheers

 

[Jaguares]

well I know you're half tongue-in-cheek there, but that's just a (caricature of a) thick reading. A loss or a win are the whole difference in the end, sure, but obviously there's also...EVERYTHING THAT HAPPENS DURING THOSE EIGHTY MINUTES OF PLAY.
you know...
Stuff like going into NZ, during their first tournament ever, scoring a try in like 5min, and keeping the Blacks try-less til about the 65th min. Sure they never added anything to the scoreboard after their try, but other Tier 1 teams have taken bigger hidings (France, or even worse...Ireland). Australia couldn't score in NZ that year.
Both their results were very good against the Ozzies.

Anyways. I'm just saying the good or bad play of a side is not measured in just simply a win loss record. And sure everybody obviously understands that, but some ppl will deliberately go deaf about that.

And actually yes, they did have AMAZING DEFENSE last year in the tournament. With the exception of the first game perhaps in SA, but still they were good - and of course at home against the rampant AB.

You understand me, bud. Despite not winning any match, Pumas last year had a good defense. Being an inferior team with less quality players than their opponents, that's admirable.


And we play the game we know how hard it's to defend when your rivals are stronger and better than you.

 

[Jaguares]

What does that have to do with anything?

Argentina is a team that less than 3 nations, and that having players of lesser quality, the mere fact of having a good defense against these powerful teams is a good thing.

You received 60 points last year in Hamilton, do you remember?



So I'm not sure if Ireland could do better than Argentina in The Rugby Championship

Cheers

 

[SelimNiai]

That right there, thats officially a burn.

 

[psychic duck]

Wales 10 -All Blacks 33 - 24 november 2012

Last 8 games between Wales and Australia:

• 2012: Wales 12-14 Australia

• 2012: Australia 20-19 Wales

• 2012: Australia 25-23 Wales
• 2012: Australia 27-19 Wales
• 2011: Wales 18-24 Australia
• 2011: Aus 21-18 Wales (WC)
• 2010: Wales 16-25 Australia
• 2009: Wales 12-33 Australia

So, if you only care about the result. Wales is a poor team, their past results against the powerful South are poor, you can not beat the southern hemisphere teams, although you made ​​great games and in some games you deserved to win.

Argentina would beat Italy without problems in the 6 Nations and could beat Ireland, Wales, Scotland and England, in fact they did in the past. Any European team would suffer playing the Rugby Championship.

Cheers

And who is praising Wales for merely coming close and consistently blowing matches against a pretty weak Australia?

Also in regards to your second point, actually during Phelan's reign of average mediocrity they have a pretty disappointing record against the top 6 Nations sides. Getting 40 points put on them by Kidney's Ireland side should be unacceptable for a top 10 side. During Phelan's reign they have only have won 2 matches against the main 4 6N sides in 5 years, and also lost at home to Scotland twice in 2010. So forgetting gutsy efforts against the top teams, their record against teams they should be comparing themselves against is poor.

Argentina is a team that less than 3 nations, and that having players of lesser quality, the mere fact of having a good defense against these powerful teams is a good thing.

You received 60 points last year in Hamilton, do you remember?

So I'm not sure if Ireland could do better than Argentina in The Rugby Championship

Cheers

What has that got to do with whether Phelan should stay?

So if Argentina are performing averagely, it's okay as another team is also performing averagely and underachieving?

And Ireland saw their mediocrity and underachievement as unacceptable and sacked their coach not long after that. Argentina should follow suit.

 

[Jaguares]

And who is praising Wales for merely coming close and consistently blowing matches against a pretty weak Australia?

Also in regards to your second point, actually during Phelan's reign of average mediocrity they have a pretty disappointing record against the top 6 Nations sides. Getting 40 points put on them by Kidney's Ireland side should be unacceptable for a top 10 side. During Phelan's reign they have only have won 2 matches against the main 4 6N sides in 5 years, and also lost at home to Scotland twice in 2010. So forgetting gutsy efforts against the top teams, their record against teams they should be comparing themselves against is poor.

You have to understand the circumstances, Argentina reached its peak in 2007 with their golden generation when their best players reached their highest level at the same time. After that, began the spare equipment and replacements were not as good as those who left.

With any head coach, they would have had the same problems. With Michael Cheika, Dave Rennie, Jake White and even Graham Henry, they were having trouble because their replacements are not good, and that's a deeper problem than just the coach's fault.

You can be the best coach around the world but if your you don't have enough material, you just can't aspire to much. In this context, the Phelan campaign doesn't seem as bad as some say. This isn't to say he is the best coach around the world nor that Argentina is the best team, but they had many problems and yet could do respectable games against good teams.

What has that got to do with whether Phelan should stay?

So if Argentina are performing averagely, it's okay as another team is also performing averagely and underachieving?

And Ireland saw their mediocrity and underachievement as unacceptable and sacked their coach not long after that. Argentina should follow suit.

The Pumas played 2 times in NZ in recent years (RWC 2011 and TRC 2012) and never received 60 points.

Cheers

 

[Big Ewis]

psychic:
I see your point, but this also stands: while Argentina won't get enough praise because they hadn't won a single game in last year's tournament, you say that Wales doesn't either which puts them both in the same category. But I disagree: Wales losing so consistently, sometimes extremely (dramatically even) close games has become a pattern. They simply - simply - CANNOT beat a Sanzar side. When it's that consistent, there's significance behind it.
Argentina at least drew at home, and scared the hell out of Australia IN Australia (led 6-19 at a point). They even put the AB's at great difficulty at home. The patterns are different from Argentina, though the results are the same: no wins.
Although of course for the Pumas, there is a constant that reoccurs: the 65min syndrome.
But while Argentina just can't over-perform a whole 80min and crack around the 65th minute, Wales cannot conclude their matches against the Big 3. They're right there, score is extremely tight and they will absolutely always lose the 50-50 matchup in the waning moments, they WILL break: their results enumerated up there are an absolute cliché of what I'm saying here, but other examples against the Boks can be listed as well. I'm picking the around 2008 Welsh side (and forth) when their top form really started to peak with their 6N GS, their last 4 encounters:
- 17-16 2011 RWC
- 25-29 2010 Cardiff
- 31-34 2010 Cardiff
- 15-20 2008 Cardiff

EDIT: the point is Wales are most undeniably haunted by that clearly defined, limpid pattern. An absolute constant that follows them and fulfills itself each and every time. I didn't think the 3 losses in Australia were that bad last year, but it turned out to be of a specific significance and cannot be overlooked.

By contrast, a team like France will actually upset the hell out of a top 3, or totally miss their game and never find rhythm and get thrashed. So not every team is haunted by the same complex, and ultimately to get back to the point at hand: Argentina and Wales are different.

But yeh...maybe Argentina should switch coaches ! : D

 

[big ginger 8]

The Pumas played 2 times in NZ in recent years (RWC 2011 and TRC 2012) and never received 60 points.

Cheers

But they lost by 22 points to the team that did wheeeeeeeeey!!!!

 

[Feicarsinn]

The Pumas played 2 times in NZ in recent years (RWC 2011 and TRC 2012) and never received 60 points.

Cheers

True. We were calling for our Declan Kidney's head long before that however. And they did just concede 73 points the other week, so that's a fairly futile point to make.

 

[Jaguares]

True. We were calling for our Declan Kidney's head long before that however. And they did just concede 73 points the other week, so that's a fairly futile point to make.

But I already told you. Argentina didn't have their best forwards in the last year against Boks last game. How many important players lost before you get 60 points?

 

[psychic duck]

You have to understand the circumstances, Argentina reached its peak in 2007 with their golden generation when their best players reached their highest level at the same time. After that, began the spare equipment and replacements were not as good as those who left.

With any head coach, they would have had the same problems. With Michael Cheika, Dave Rennie, Jake White and even Graham Henry, they were having trouble because their replacements are not good, and that's a deeper problem than just the coach's fault.

You can be the best coach around the world but if your you don't have enough material, you just can't aspire to much. In this context, the Phelan campaign doesn't seem as bad as some say. This isn't to say he is the best coach around the world nor that Argentina is the best team, but they had many problems and yet could do respectable games against good teams.

This is BS. Argentina could have clearly achieved more.

They may not have props aplenty any more but they have over strengths such as unprecedented amount of talent in the wings now and streetwise loose forwards.

A better coach would have engineered a game plan to suit their personnel of this generation better. A better coach would have the guts to experiment some of the bulging wing supplies in the sparse 13 position. A better coach wouldn't have been so stupid to approach matches without a goal kicker up to the required level, and then at the same time go into the matches without the try scorers either.

And it's not as if the 2007 team has been replaced entirely by rags either. Roncero was good but Ayerza isn't exactly crappy. Players to have come into the side since such as Carizza, Figallo, Creevy, Leguizamon aren't shoddy replacements. They have good enough players in their first choice team to be able to beat a side like Australia and the 6 Nations sides and heavy losses to Ireland should not be acceptable.

The Pumas played 2 times in NZ in recent years (RWC 2011 and TRC 2012) and never received 60 points.

Cheers

So what? Ireland have never conceded 73 points against South Africa. And at least you didn't see Ireland saying "it's okay we got tonked by the All Blacks as Argentina would have too" either, instead they didn't renew their coach's deal. Phelan's 2 year contract expires this year ....