John Mitchell.

Discussion in 'The Clubhouse Bar' started by sambãd5, Apr 2, 2006.

  1. all blacks coach which brought us to the shame which was the 2004 rugby world cup. although he did have a excellent lead up to the world cup, by winning the tri-nations by a million points, he peaked too early. during the world cup, he made several mistakes which cost us the world cup. he taught the team to use extreme attacking. good thing? yes. in a world cup? no. he did not teach the team to play safe rugby.

    selections also let mitchell down. keeping players such as ruben thorn in the squad, (not to mention captianing the team) even after having a dip in form for about a year. not utalizing players such as ma'a nonu in the semi/quarter finals of the world cup cost us dearly, especially as leon macdonald was used to replace tana.

    his relationship with the media, and new zealand public was woefull - and often the conection with his mind was also missing. picking a very young squad, where key players, such as daniel carter, joe rokococo, mills mulinia, in connection with a very risky carlos spencer (who played well, won games, played poorly and his style of play made it very difficult for the team to move momentum) then used excuses such as "the reason why we lost was because of immaturity" when a) it was his job to teach them to play safely and maturely. and B) when he had players such as andrew mertins and christian cullen at his disposal BUT WERNT EVEN TAKEN TO AUSTRALIA!

    because of his poor coaching technique, of playing a very risky gameplan, when no backup plan was in place, poor selections, an inadequate squad come world cup, stobborness and poor relationship with the media - and intern the new zealand public, the nzru gave him the ass from the allblacks coaching job. he then moved to waikato, who had a poor season, and has now coach of the super 14 franchise western force. after 8 rounds, they are 0-8, with poor results score wise, and mitchell at the helm, they look to go the other 6 rounds without a win.

    take what you will from mitchells pre-worldcup campaign. he was poor in the world cup, when it counts. we could have done better, if not won it, if simple errors on mitchells behalf were corrected.
  2. Forum Ad Advertisement

  3. Gay-Guy

    Gay-Guy Guest

    2004????? That must have been sooo bad I totally missed it!

    Any coach at International level who runs with the players like he thinks he could actually slot in the team......shouldn't be coaching :blink:
  4. Ripper

    Ripper Guest

    And he had a bald head...


    Anyone stupid enough to go into a World Cup Semi Final with No Goal Kicker, Rueben Thorne and Leon MacDonald at centre has done more then enough to become a member of the illustrious Hall of Shame.
  5. Serge

    Serge Guest

    Mitchell developed a lot of great talent of which we have today. Mitchell was amazing at developing an attacking game. Our non-existant plan B did let us down, but I do think the players do need to take some responsibilty in the loss. Overall I do not think Mitchell deserves to be in the hall of shame. He had a good tenor with and 86% win rate and his reputation has been destroyed by one game in the semi of the World Cup. Not fair if you ask me.
  6. kaftka

    kaftka Guest

    Agreed to an extent, however... I believe he played far more of a role in the World Cup failure than the players. We had no backup plan, he looks like a giant penis and....Wait. No. It was Mortlocks fault.

    But anyway, he still looks like a giant penis, and he had no media skills etc.

    But I agree, he doesn't belong on the Wall yet. Clive needs to come before John imo.
    Simply because of the brilliant win at the world cup. Then, the much anticipated Lions Series which turned to a disastrous flop. That sort of plummet deserves to be recognised.
  7. woosaah

    woosaah Guest

    agreed, except about the part with mitchel not being recognised yet

    i think he needs to go on there 2, look how well he is doing with the force and its not that bad a team ;)
  8. I hate him, i hate him, i hate him, i hate him, i hate him x10000000

    He really annoys me.

    He was a **** coach for the All Blacks.
    Lost us the world cup :angry:
    Didnt handle the media at all!!


    He can rot in hell for all i care :p
    I hope the force fail(which im sure they will), then he'll get kicked out of coaching the force, then be a nobody
  9. BigTen

    BigTen Guest

    One thing that no-one has mentioned is Mitchell's role in building an England squad (specifically the forwards) into a world-cup winning one. I believe that it was Mitchell that injected the steel into England and the win-at-all-costs mentallity that England teams stereotypically lack.

    Mitchell did make some mistakes before and during the World Cup campaign I do not deny that but I think that he also did a lot of things well.

    Losing Umaga in the Italy game was a big loss and it had the biggest effect on the whole campaign. He was not, and could not have been replaced and the All Blacks missed him. Thorne was always a quiet captain who would lead not by words but by action. For me he has always been a quiet achiever - only people that really know their rugby seem to appreciate him and the amount of work that he gets through in a game.

    The only thing wrong about him was that he didn't fit into the typical role of All Black captain - Fitzpatrick, Shelford etc.

    The loss of Umaga and the style of captaincy were big factors. But another factor was that no-one else in the All Black squad stepped up to support Thorne. And this is supported in that when looking for a new All Black's captain only McCaw is in contention. So many great players no obvious captain.

    Most great teams always have at least two, if not three or even more, players that take an active role in leading the team.

    England had at least three during the world cup and this took a lot of pressure of MJ and if he was ever playing under his best he could give the nod to Lawrence and concentrate on his game for a while until he had everything under control again.

    Should John Mitchell be in the hall of shame? No way! Give the guy more time to tie his own noose - if he is as bad as some seem to think then time will prove them right.

    There are far more obvious people that should be inducted first.
  10. John Mitchell didn't lose the AB's the 2003 semi.

    Professional players should be able to see what is going on and adapt their stle of play themselves, without the coach telling them what to do every minute.

    No team should need any extra motivation during a World Cup, but New Zealand seemed to cruise that day, asuming they would win.

    Mabye Mitchell can take some critcism for not getting his players mentally up for the game, but they really should bear the responsibility.

    One defeat doesn't make a bad coach. 3 pathetic performances in a row does, a la Andy Robinson...
  11. your kidding me right? he was nearly invisible for the last 2 years of his all black carrer.

    saying other players didnt stand up? yeah right. with such a young team they had what? 3 experainced players or so. if he had selected a better squad, a more mature squad (which was his excuse for losing) with players like cullen (who would have been the number one fullback at the time) and mertz we would have done significantly better. i mean, you might say mertz was old, and slow, but he did have a good npc, and just the experiance in the team would have done us good.
  12. BigTen

    BigTen Guest

    Yeah that is true Sambad - he did choose to not take many experienced players but decisions to leave some players out were justified.

    Cullen and Mehrtens were two players that I would liked to have seen in the squad for the world cup. But then neither player really had reputations for leadership certainly not Cullen. And I am a big Cullen fan but I was sick of seeing him miles out of position. He definitely lost a lot of speed as well. The injuries that he got contributed to that.

    I think that the main reason for the All Blacks loss against Australia in the semi came down to three numbers 2, 8, and 9. The Australians highighted them as potential weak links and went after them. I also think that the number 13 was again unlucky just like four years previous.

    GH should take one extra centre just to make sure the curse does not hit the All Blacks again.
  13. Im sorry but i disagree with whoever said he didnt lose us the world cup.

    Yes while it wasnt all his fault.

    But he was the coach at the time. The coach has to take most of the blame. He was telling our boy's what to do. They just did what he tild them.
  14. loratadine

    loratadine Guest

    why is it when nz loose, they never blame the team.
  15. BigTen

    BigTen Guest


    That is because New Zealand never "loose".

    And Kimmy,

    You can't always blame the coach for the team's performance. Obviously Mitchell has to take some blame for the world cup performance but remember that there is a board of selectors and the NZ team was good enough to win.

    It is just that they didn't.

    Who's to blame - well the buck stops at the top and every NZ coach knows that they have to win the world cup to keep their job. But the players have to take some of the blame too.

    It was they that actually lost the game.
  16. Yeh i know what ya saying.

    But i really hate him. Anything coulda happened in 2003....*sigh* we shall never know.
    If only tana wasnt injured... :lol:
  17. kaftka

    kaftka Guest

    I was getting ready to seal the deal before I entered this thread. Compelling arguments by BigTen and SaintsFan have left me undecided however. I would like to call on chiro to give me his arguments in rap form before we get a definite answer.

    Also, may I point out that nobody has argued against the fact he looks like a penis.

    Also, Kimmy the Kiwi, I disagree with that mentality entirely. Lets take the Wales situation for a minute. Lets say that instead of Ruddock resigning for Wales, it was Henry resigning for New Zealand this year. Someone else has to fill his shoes. The Abs then go on to lose in the Quarter finals of the world cup next year, and whatever wins they did get, they were not very convincing. Do you think a coach should be sacked then? Sure, he had a good team to work with, but with different coaches comes different gameplans. It takes time to develop teams. No matter how good they may be on paper.
    Clive Woodtard was with England for a number of years through ups and downs before he had a very formiddable... formidable... formidible... good team, timed to perfection I might add, winning the the world cup for the very first time. Prime example of the complete opposite, the Lions series where he was well prepared in everything except where it counts. He had no solid gameplan. A solid gameplan which took him years to get with England.
    Real Madrid. Best football team in the world. Absolute crap.

    I rest my case.

    No sacking a coach after two or three years.

    Graham Henry didn't have a perfect start. He was trying things out like the flat backline which failed miserably.

    Now I rest my case.

    Wheres your rap chiro?
  18. The TRUTH

    The TRUTH Guest

    very true

    me too
  19. I think people have been quite unfair with John Mitchell, yes he wasn't really much to write home about. But from what I hear, he really wasn't that much to blame, bad with the media maybe, but bad coach, I don't think so. He worked with his talent and winning third is good for any team.
  20. Gay-Guy

    Gay-Guy Guest

    Kaftka does have a good point as a lot of people say that Mitchell was sacked prematurely....that NZ coaches don't seem to survive any type of disaster......

    There were calls for Laurie Mains to be dropped in ' '95 he had created a team that should have won the RWC outside of any suspicious influences....

    Normally a NZ coach should get a team the year after a RWC and take it throygh to the next one.......Mitchell did have his work cut out for him after Smith resigned.... all fairness perhaps the coach who was more a disaster than Mitchell is Hart. He inherited a fantastic side that basically played Mains style of all out attack for Harts first two years. Then when Australia developed the league defence to counter the attacking AB's...Hart had no answer for it.............'98 was a shocker with 5 defeats in a row and '99 was our most lowest ranked RWC ever......4th in the world!!!! Hart had all the time, money, talent, resources a coach could ask for yet still came up short.....
  21. Ripper

    Ripper Guest

Enjoyed this thread? Register to post your reply - click here!

Share This Page