International coach of the year

[nik]

Legal tackle if Carter had the ball in hand. Kepu showed no sign of holding back in the tackle after the ball was passed. Tackle with malicious intent and rightly penalised.

Coach of the year doesn't need to employ such tactics.

 

[nzlizard]

It was a legal tackle. Just Carter is faster than Kepu

If it was he wouldn't have been penalized?

 

[Jaguares]

If it was he wouldn't have been penalized?

Yeah. But don't forget that Nigel is the #1 All Black supporter

 

[Kiwi_]

Yeah. But don't forget that Nigel is the #1 All Black supporter

Who isnt? We're too good not to like mate.

 

[nickdnz]

Yeah. But don't forget that Nigel is the #1 All Black supporter

I thought that was Craig Joubert?

Or am I getting my dumb comments from the last two RWC's mixed up?

 

[Jaguares]

Is this the All Black forum?

 

[nickdnz]

Is this the All Black forum?

No, but it's not Youtube either.

If you genuinely are convinced that NIgel Owens was bias against the All Blacks, then make an educated case for it. Cause your trolling is getting tiresome.

 

[TRF C A Iversen]

Is this the All Black forum?

I came on here once and saw many posts by Irish fans, was it the Irish Forum then? Another time, it had heaps of French for a short while, should I have been worried about it turning into the French forum or something? Or did I just decide not to be biased against those countries and get on with my life?

 

[sigesige00]

And the award goes to...
I choose 5 nominees, you can put someone else, and say who is the winner for you.

1_ Michael Cheika
2_ Eddie Jones
3_ Daniel Hourcade
4_ Steve Hansen
5_ Stuart Lancaster...(oops sorry, mi fault)

The winner is : Eddie Jones

Eddie Jones left Japan because of his disappointment with the corrupt and bureaucratic JRFU.

 

[nzlizard]

Yeah. But don't forget that Nigel is the #1 All Black supporter

Me thinks you are bitter.

 

[TRF C A Iversen]

Me thinks you are bitter.

Like a lemon pickled in vinegar.

 

[Jaguares]

No, but it's not Youtube either.

If you genuinely are convinced that NIgel Owens was bias against the All Blacks, then make an educated case for it. Cause your trolling is getting tiresome.

I really like NZ rugby, for some reason my nickname is: "Conrad Smith" but some Kiwis are so arrogants when we talk about rugby.

You can't say that Cheika is better than Hansen, you can't say that Pocock has been than Carter at the WC. Sometimes it's a little frustrating to be surrounded by so many Kiwis.

 

[nickdnz]

I really like NZ rugby, for some reason my nickname is: "Conrad Smith" but some Kiwis are so arrogants when we talk about rugby.

You can't say that Cheika is better than Hansen, you can't say that Pocock has been than Carter at the WC. Sometimes it's a little frustrating to be surrounded by so many Kiwis.

I have no problem with people saying either of those things.

I do have a problem with dumb allegations of bias refereeing, large memes of incidents over a year ago, and just general trolling.

It's not that you're not allowed to say anything - it's that you are going to get called up on making unintelligent and trolling remarks.

 

[cardassian]

I really like NZ rugby, for some reason my nickname is: "Conrad Smith" but some Kiwis are so arrogants when we talk about rugby.

You can't say that Cheika is better than Hansen, you can't say that Pocock has been than Carter at the WC. Sometimes it's a little frustrating to be surrounded by so many Kiwis.

How about we cut a deal. I'll say Cheika is better than Hansen when his record is better than Hansen's. Sounds fair doesn't it?

Now let's compare Pocock and Carter.
Carter looked average against the minnows, but looked awesome in the big games when it counted.
Pocock looked great against the minnows, but average in the big game when it counted.
So do we judge them by how good they look in training runs or how good they are when it comes to the crunch?

 

[RoosTah]

How about we cut a deal. I'll say Cheika is better than Hansen when his record is better than Hansen's. Sounds fair doesn't it?

That's a bit more interesting than you make it sound, because from a whole of coaching career perspective Cheika is arguably more successful than Hansen, having won championships at almost every level he's coached.

He started out at club footy in Sydney with Randwick - wins championship.
Goes to Europe to coach Irish side Leinster - breaks a massive drought for the side and wins championship
Comes back to Australia to coach in Super Rugby - breaks a massive drought for the Waratahs and wins their first ever super rugby championship
Takes over a shambolic, wallabies team - wins Rugby Championship in his first year and takes them to the RWC Final

Now, compared to Hansen, that looks pretty good when you consider Hansen had one stint outside of the All Blacks with Wales where they lost 11 straight, including every game of the 6N one year. That kinda tells me that Hansen is more a cog in a wheel at the All Blacks, rather than a brilliant coaching mastermind.

 

[Fard]

@sanzar you and I may agree on what Cheika has done for Australian rugby over the last year. Or for that matter what he did with the other teams he has coached but you will never convince the one eyed kiwi fans on this site or any site for that matter. They all think the sun shines out of Hansen's arse.

 

[nickdnz]

Now, compared to Hansen, that looks pretty good when you consider Hansen had one stint outside of the All Blacks with Wales where they lost 11 straight, including every game of the 6N one year. That kinda tells me that Hansen is more a cog in a wheel at the All Blacks, rather than a brilliant coaching mastermind.

It also highlights you might not know as much about Hansen as you think you do.

As head coach he was in charge for the Cnaterbury team which won in 1997 and 2001 after basically a decade of Auckland winning it. He was assistant coach at the Crusaders during their 1999 and 2000 Super Rugby campaigns. When he went to Wales they were undergoing the largest restructuring in the unions history - and the two years he was in charge saw a huge amount of changes to set them up for their first grand slam the following year. Since 2004 he has been a part of the coaching setup which has won everything there is to win, almost every year. He's presided over the most successful era in All Blacks history.

I'm taking Hansen's record over Cheika's (you also conveniently misses Cheika's time at Stade Francais).

It's remarkable that some Australian's seem to think it's relevant his stint with Wales over a decade ago - considering his involvement with the All Blacks over the last decade. He's been steering the ship over the last four years, but apparently that's not him doing well. It takes 1 year of relative success for Cheika to be god's gift to coaching though.

I like Cheika as a coach - but trying to write off Hansen's achievements to do so, doesn't make Cheika better.

 

[RoosTah]

I'm taking Hansen's record over Cheika's (you also conveniently misses Cheika's time at Stade Francais).

It's remarkable that some Australian's seem to think it's relevant his stint with Wales over a decade ago - considering his involvement with the All Blacks over the last decade. He's been steering the ship over the last four years, but apparently that's not him doing well. It takes 1 year of relative success for Cheika to be god's gift to coaching though.

I like Cheika as a coach - but trying to write off Hansen's achievements to do so, doesn't make Cheika better.

I'm not writing Hansen off, I'm just saying that he's not exactly had a perfect record and that from the outside looking in, he does appear to very much be more a cog in a machine rather than a grand director.

As for Wales, I bring it up because it's the only data we have to go on of him coaching at an elite level outside of being a part of the All Blacks machine, and it wasn't so crash hot. Sure there were issues in the set-up, but bloody hell if there weren't issues when Cheika took over the Wallabies. The team was an absolute mess and he basically told the ARU he was taking control of everything or he wouldn't get involved and he fixed it all.

Kiwis are trying to write Cheika off because he didn't win the RWC, but the reason he got the award is because most people consider it a greater achievement to make a poor performer a contender than to take the reigns of the world champ and have them just continue winning.

 

[saulan]

As head coach he was in charge for the Cnaterbury team which won in 1997 and 2001 after basically a decade of Auckland winning it. He was assistant coach at the Crusaders during their 1999 and 2000 Super Rugby campaigns. When he went to Wales they were undergoing the largest restructuring in the unions history - and the two years he was in charge saw a huge amount of changes to set them up for their first grand slam the following year. Since 2004 he has been a part of the coaching setup which has won everything there is to win, almost every year. He's presided over the most successful era in All Blacks history.

I'm taking Hansen's record over Cheika's (you also conveniently misses Cheika's time at Stade Francais).

It's remarkable that some Australian's seem to think it's relevant his stint with Wales over a decade ago - considering his involvement with the All Blacks over the last decade. He's been steering the ship over the last four years, but apparently that's not him doing well. It takes 1 year of relative success for Cheika to be god's gift to coaching though.

Just pointing out a bit of inconsistency in that argument, although I do hear what you are saying about the decade with the All Blacks, but a coach is not going to get much of the plaudits for performance when they are the assistant coach. You can't take the fact that both coach have been incredibly successful away from them though.

On the topic of who deserved the coach of the year, I think the right man won. Hansen has done an amazing job and has prepared a great team and has performed consistently over the past four years, which is why he won the award three years in a row from 2012-2014. However, if you are looking at the two coaches, (as a neutral to the two teams), you have to have more respect for what Cheika has managed to do this year in comparison to Hansen. Yes, Hansen did win the World Cup, but I feel that a fair amount of that was due to the good work he has put in over the past four years and the strong chemistry he built into the team. Cheika took a team that looked like it was going nowhere this world cup to win their first rugby championship and finalists in a World Cup.

 

[nickdnz]

I'm not writing Hansen off, I'm just saying that he's not exactly had a perfect record and that from the outside looking in, he does appear to very much be more a cog in a machine rather than a grand director.

As for Wales, I bring it up because it's the only data we have to go on of him coaching at an elite level outside of being a part of the All Blacks machine, and it wasn't so crash hot. Sure there were issues in the set-up, but bloody hell if there weren't issues when Cheika took over the Wallabies. The team was an absolute mess and he basically told the ARU he was taking control of everything or he wouldn't get involved and he fixed it all.

Kiwis are trying to write Cheika off because he didn't win the RWC, but the reason he got the award is because most people consider it a greater achievement to make a poor performer a contender than to take the reigns of the world champ and have them just continue winning.

As I stated, it isn't. You just haven't bothered looking at the rest of his regime. But if we are isolating a career to a two year period, then we may as well say Cheika is only as good as he was for Stade Francais.

Just pointing out a bit of inconsistency in that argument, although I do hear what you are saying about the decade with the All Blacks, but a coach is not going to get much of the plaudits for performance when they are the assistant coach. You can't take the fact that both coach have been incredibly successful away from them though.

On the topic of who deserved the coach of the year, I think the right man won. Hansen has done an amazing job and has prepared a great team and has performed consistently over the past four years, which is why he won the award three years in a row from 2012-2014. However, if you are looking at the two coaches, (as a neutral to the two teams), you have to have more respect for what Cheika has managed to do this year in comparison to Hansen. Yes, Hansen did win the World Cup, but I feel that a fair amount of that was due to the good work he has put in over the past four years and the strong chemistry he built into the team. Cheika took a team that looked like it was going nowhere this world cup to win their first rugby championship and finalists in a World Cup.

Right, and I'm not saying that Cheika wasn't a good candidate to win it (although people talk about Australia like they were Scotland, not a team that spends a fair amount of time at #2). What is ridiculous to me is that sanzar seems to be suggesting that the candidate who won it the last 3 years in a row - doesn't have an extremely impressive record but rather is just a 'cog' in a machine he inherited - despite losing 3 games in four years. He then goes to use evidence of his time in Wales from 2002-2004 as a case study for his ability as a coach. It's ludicrous. Like I said - I have no problem with Cheika winning the award - but diminishing the ridiculous level of success from the other candidate doesn't make a strong argument for me. It simply undermines a coaches input - in a team which has won 90% under his tenure.