2021 Rugby Championship Round 1 (Bledisloe 2) - New Zealand v Australia (14/8/2021)

[Umaga's Witness]

One would have thought that he was handed only 2 years in order to prove himself at the helm of the ABs…what exactly has he proved so far? Last year was abysmal and this year he won against either second tier nation or a highly inexperienced Aussie side. Not to mention that in the first game against Australia only Lolesio's night off the boot prevented the visitors winning the game.

What if the ABs lose both tests against the SA? Or the EOTY tour will reveal losses to France or Wales?

Appointing Foster through that farce of a process was a mistake, after the RWC 2019 failure, NZRU needed to start afresh. Foster is a continuation of the Hansen declining regime that started more or less with the Lions tour in 2017.

If I were a Kiwi, my blood would boil!

Giving someone two years to prove themselves is a seriously bad idea given they are typically rebuilding years after a World Cup. I seriously doubt that was the reason.
They were openly disappointed about the lack of applications for head coach; they never wanted foster, but they wanted Robertson even less (due to lack of experience). Hiring foster and then switching to Robertson would never have been considered a real option, giving foster four years is better than giving Robertson two even if Robertson is better than foster.

but if a vastly experienced coach with international experience became available, theyd want to be able to consider him. There was only ever one person who fitted this bill - gatland. They were waiting to see if gatland could prove himself with the chiefs and more importantly with the lions. He didnt, so foster stays on.

Gatland isn't doing any more coaching while the rugby championship or the EOYT is on, so they didn't need to wait before making the decision.

also, you're not a kiwi?

 

[Umaga's Witness]

and most people i talk too are pretty annoyed for exactly the reason you mention, i dont think people could actually name his prefered XV....and lots would disagree with the few names that seem to be carved in stone like savea at 8

Its this sort of thing though where your preconceived ideas about someone are what matters most. People never agree with selections, but if they like the coach they're like "oh well, I'm sure they have their reasons", if they don't they're like "see, that's proof the coach is crap"

take de groot as an example, I understand feek never wanted him in the squad, that's right the scrum coach didn't want a prop and he was picked anyway, because the other coaches liked how good he was around the field. Two important points there - 1. Foster isnt who decided bower is better than de groot, 2. Bower was selected ahead of de groot for good reasons. Yet people blame foster for selecting bower over de groot, and saying foster is a bad selector because of it. I doubt if graham henry were the coach they'd be saying he was a bad selector for selecting bower over de groot.

 

[Kiwiwomble]

Its this sort of thing though where your preconceived ideas about someone are what matters most. People never agree with selections, but if they like the coach they're like "oh well, I'm sure they have their reasons", if they don't they're like "see, that's proof the coach is crap"

take de groot as an example, I understand feek never wanted him in the squad, that's right the scrum coach didn't want a prop and he was picked anyway, because the other coaches liked how good he was around the field. Two important points there - 1. Foster isnt who decided bower is better than de groot, 2. Bower was selected ahead of de groot for good reasons. Yet people blame foster for selecting bower over de groot, and saying foster is a bad selector because of it. I doubt if graham henry were the coach they'd be saying he was a bad selector for selecting bower over de groot.

maybe its a communication thing then, sure there are always disagreements but some of his choices have been surprises to almost everyone (Jodie getting picked getting picked back to back on the wing when there were specialist wings in the squad), his results havent proven what hes trying to achieve so he might actually need to verbalise it

 

[Ruggerz]

The All Blacks squad has assembled in Auckland today to fly to Australia for the Fortinet Rugby Championship and then onto the Northern Tour to the USA and Europe.
All Blacks Head Coach Ian Foster said: "We'll be playing ten Tests in 12 weeks in both the southern and northern hemispheres, and with Covid-19 travel and quarantine restrictions, this will be a tour like no other for us in the professional era. We can't wait to get underway and once again represent our country on the world stage."

The All Blacks squad departs to Perth at 6.30PM. The All Blacks' next Test is against Australia before Tests against Argentina and South Africa.

The All Blacks initial travelling squad is as follows:

Forwards:

Hookers: Asafo Aumua, Samisoni Taukei'aho and Codie Taylor.
Props: George Bower, Ethan de Groot, Nepo Laulala, Tyrel Lomax, Joe Moody, Angus Ta'avao, Karl Tu'inukuafe and Ofa Tuungafasi.
Locks: Scott Barrett, Brodie Retallick, Patrick Tuipulotu and Tupou Vaa'i.
Loose forwards: Ethan Blackadder, Akira Ioane, Luke Jacobson, Dalton Papalii, Ardie Savea and Hoskins Sotutu.

Backs:

Halfbacks: Finlay Christie, TJ Perenara and Brad Weber.
First five–eighths: Beauden Barrett.
Midfielders: Braydon Ennor, David Havili, Rieko Ioane, Anton Lienert-Brown and Quinn Tupaea.
Outside backs: Jordie Barrett, George Bridge, Will Jordan, Damian McKenzie and Sevu Reece.

Source: allblacks.com

 

[Kiwiwomble]

@Ruggerz

All Blacks 2021-2023 Thread

I always see ABs fans complain about the AIG on the front but as far as sponsors go it’s one of the far less visually intrusive and looks perfectly fine in my opinion. Is it something about the company itself that people have an issue with? Definitely not a fan of a company that lost people...

www.therugbyforum.com

 

[Umaga's Witness]

@Ruggerz

All Blacks 2021-2023 Thread

I always see ABs fans complain about the AIG on the front but as far as sponsors go it’s one of the far less visually intrusive and looks perfectly fine in my opinion. Is it something about the company itself that people have an issue with? Definitely not a fan of a company that lost people...

www.therugbyforum.com

@alex angel

we ought to stop talking about things in two places, my bad

 

[Alex Anghel]

No

Giving someone two years to prove themselves is a seriously bad idea given they are typically rebuilding years after a World Cup. I seriously doubt that was the reason.
They were openly disappointed about the lack of applications for head coach; they never wanted foster, but they wanted Robertson even less (due to lack of experience). Hiring foster and then switching to Robertson would never have been considered a real option, giving foster four years is better than giving Robertson two even if Robertson is better than foster.

but if a vastly experienced coach with international experience became available, theyd want to be able to consider him. There was only ever one person who fitted this bill - gatland. They were waiting to see if gatland could prove himself with the chiefs and more importantly with the lions. He didnt, so foster stays on.

Gatland isn't doing any more coaching while the rugby championship or the EOYT is on, so they didn't need to wait before making the decision.

also, you're not a kiwi?

No, I am not a Kiwi, I thought that my profile flag already revealed that. I am Romanian and also a huge All Blacks fan since early 80s.

 

[Umaga's Witness]

No

No, I am not a Kiwi, I thought that my profile flag already revealed that. I am Romanian and also a huge All Blacks fan since early 80s.

Ahh, i just use my phone so can't see the flag unless I go into your profile.

 

[Umaga's Witness]

maybe its a communication thing then, sure there are always disagreements but some of his choices have been surprises to almost everyone (Jodie getting picked getting picked back to back on the wing when there were specialist wings in the squad), his results havent proven what hes trying to achieve so he might actually need to verbalise it

Good point. I think a lot of it depends on the media, because he does verbalize some things (other things are more coded), but the media aren't choosing to spread that word. The media has an incentive to confirm people's negative biases.

 

[Kiwiwomble]

whats their incentive?

I have to say compared to the football teams i follow, who have the head coach post an interview on their social after every game about what the plan was, what worked, what didnt etc...its stark

 

[Umaga's Witness]

whats their incentive?

I have to say compared to the football teams i follow, who have the head coach post an interview on their social after every game about what the plan was, what worked, what didnt etc...its stark

Media have incentive to reflect their consumers opinions and write about what they're interested in. I think a lot of people aren't interested in knowing fosters game plan, they'd rather read an article that casts doubt on his credentials.

yeah, you have to watch shows on sky sport to get anything. Some of that stuff gets into the media, but not a lot.

 

[Kiwiwomble]

Media have incentive to reflect their consumers opinions and write about what they're interested in. I think a lot of people aren't interested in knowing fosters game plan, they'd rather read an article that casts doubt on his credentials.

yeah, you have to watch shows on sky sport to get anything. Some of that stuff gets into the media, but not a lot.

have to agree to disagree on what most people want to see, most people i talk to would love to know what his plan is

I was more meaning directly, ive had this discussion a couple of times, being in aus and seeing the different between how NZR markets the game and how say the AFL do...is polar opposites, Rugby seems to take a "if you know you know approach" where the AFl and football in the UK will keep giving as much content around the game as they can, everything is an event

 

[Al Bangor]

New Zealand will beat Australia yet again. That's a pretty easy prediction.

 

[Umaga's Witness]

have to agree to disagree on what most people want to see, most people i talk to would love to know what his plan is

I was more meaning directly, ive had this discussion a couple of times, being in aus and seeing the different between how NZR markets the game and how say the AFL do...is polar opposites, Rugby seems to take a "if you know you know approach" where the AFl and football in the UK will keep giving as much content around the game as they can, everything is an event

Yeah, honestly the level of Info in rugby is really poor, they rely on people already liking rugby, then catering to the fans through sky sport. That's a really good point about marketing because I wouldn't say they do much with regard to marketing (they have never even really had to ads like they do for the nrl), they should be owning it, not relying on the media to disseminate information.

NZ herald has a little bit more for the less than casual fan, but you have to pay for it (I don't).

the media resource is relatively limited, so they tend to prefer to say something high level or write about nzr failings, or silver lake, or changes due to covid, or how crap the wallabies are, or how foster is crap, rather than saying something about fosters game plan or vision.