Can a foreign coach break the RWC duck?

First topic message reminder :

2015: and there are calls for the likes of Mallett, White etc. to take over at England. Home RWCs are historically a huge advantage to progress to the sharp end of the tournament.

I'm pretty certain that foreign coaches tend to come in with such objectivity that without the understanding of the passions and interplays of irrational histories/prejudices/venom/etc. which underpin those players that have a real understanding of the national psyche (and that is equally applies to imported players (the Mike Catts of this world are rare)).

To me a national manager should be born, bred and imbued with the national spirit.

Equally home-born / child immigrants players will inherently understand the underlying passion.

biltongbek wrote:Portnoy. These days the management of an international team consists of many people. Amongst them usually a sports psychologist. Your head coach needn`t be the only ” motivator”

When a B&I Lions squad is put together, the head coach is from one of the home unions, yet in your view he will be general to four nations, these nations have a history of warring each other, they have been ruled by England and the crown, yet each of these home nations have diverse cultures and traditions. How do you explain that?

So the debate turns full circle. Why has no foreign coach (even with the aid of the best sports psychologists) ever won anything significant (outside cricket)?

Didn't Portugal football win something with a Brazilian manager (or vice versa). What about the Greeks when they won the Euros (the footy Euro championships are bigger than the RWC)?

Well let us start looking at how many of the countries that stand a realistic chance to win the RWC has actually had a foreign coach when going to the world cup. I can only think of Deans in the last RWC. So your argument is not founded.

That stands to reason you would need a bigger sample before your argument can stand.

Well let us start looking at how many of the countries that stand a realistic chance to win the RWC has actually had a foreign coach when going to the world cup. I can only think of Deans in the last RWC. So your argument is not founded.

That stands to reason you would need a bigger sample before your argument can stand.

Bringing in the Lions only serves to bring grist to the mill. How many times have the players created a schism between their home countries?

And having Gatland in charge would not exactly create a harmonious environment.

Give it to Kidney...

biltongbek wrote:Well let us start looking at how many of the countries that stand a realistic chance to win the RWC has actually had a foreign coach when going to the world cup. I can only think of Deans in the last RWC. So your argument is not founded.

That stands to reason you would need a bigger sample before your argument can stand.

I know the sample is small Biltong - which why I immediately spread the net to other major sports and as yet one relatively small tiddler in cricket has been captured.

Kiwireddevil wrote:

biltongbek wrote:Portnoy. These days the management of an international team consists of many people. Amongst them usually a sports psychologist. Your head coach needn`t be the only ” motivator”

When a B&I Lions squad is put together, the head coach is from one of the home unions, yet in your view he will be general to four nations, these nations have a history of warring each other, they have been ruled by England and the crown, yet each of these home nations have diverse cultures and traditions. How do you explain that?

But the Lions don't win all that many series Biltong

You aren't exactly helping my argument mate.

biltongbek wrote:

Kiwireddevil wrote:

biltongbek wrote:Portnoy. These days the management of an international team consists of many people. Amongst them usually a sports psychologist. Your head coach needn`t be the only ” motivator”

When a B&I Lions squad is put together, the head coach is from one of the home unions, yet in your view he will be general to four nations, these nations have a history of warring each other, they have been ruled by England and the crown, yet each of these home nations have diverse cultures and traditions. How do you explain that?

But the Lions don't win all that many series Biltong

You aren't exactly helping my argument mate.

Only because you didn't have one Biltong

So what you are saying is for the past hour or so I was only blowing smoke up my own backside.

I'd prefer it if the lions coach was never the current coach of either home nations myself... national bias is almost always in place and players whom should never get a look in seem to make the plane... take 2001 and GH for instance... Wales were the bottom ranked home nation side in that years 6N yet GH took 12 Welsh players with him.... the 2nd largest grouping on tour. It was one of the reasons why the tour failed.

Why did take his own players... familiarity perhaps but 2 (semi selfish) reasons most probably.... first, he knew that if he gave his own players lion touring experience they would improve as players.... which would improve their own results... second, what confidence would his players have in him if he took only 3 or 4 (the actual deserved sum at he time) on his return.

Ryan Jones was on standby in 09.. amazing since his form was so poor yet players like Barclay weren't even getting a look in. How did Jones get a look in... well it helped that 3 of the 4 coaches were from his national side.

As much as people knock the lions I would like to add... teams do not tend to win touring series in the SH..... the lions are the most successful touring side in history when it comes to SH nations. They have the record series wins in SA and are equal most successful in NZ.

How many times have NZ won in SA???.. and remember the Lions are thrown together in 2 months... NZ, SA etc are together for years.

Anyhow back to the question, lets be honest, if Mallett was to coach England it would hardly count as a foreign appointment.

He was born in England to English parents, after emigrating to SA he came back to England for university, spent half his life in England and splits his time between the 2 countries.

English South Africans are often more English then the English themselves.

To put it into perspective.. he's more English than George North is Welsh (not a dig by the way).

For me the question is NOT can a Foreign Coach lead England,but should he?
Some quote Flowers about Englands Number 1 Cricket place,the same side that was whitewashed only a couple of weeks ago.?
Look at the successes of Overseas Coaches,for Wales,Ireland not exactly a great advert is it.?
NOT knocking any Country by that statement,BUT the results have been inconsistent and no RWCs won by them or even finals.
As to Kirsten and India,they have been one of the better World Cricketing sides.

English rugby is in danger of following their football compatriots lead - blame the coach and ignore the shortcomings of the players.

It doesn't matter how hard the players are working - if they're working on the wrong thing.

The Great Aukster wrote:English rugby is in danger of following their football compatriots lead - blame the coach and ignore the shortcomings of the players.

It doesn't matter how hard the players are working - if they're working on the wrong thing.

Isn't that contradictory? What the players are working on is dictated by the coach. If they're working on the wrong thing it's the coach's fault and therefore the blame lies with him. Or have I misunderstood.

fa0019 wrote:I'dAnyhow back to the question, lets be honest, if Mallett was to coach England it would hardly count as a foreign appointment.

He was born in England to English parents, after emigrating to SA he came back to England for university, spent half his life in England and splits his time between the 2 countries.

English South Africans are often more English then the English themselves.

To put it into perspective.. he's more English than George North is Welsh (not a dig by the way).

FA, didn't know all that, makes for all the more reason why Mallet would work.

BB - yeah, the only issue is his family live in SA including his kids. They will probably not want to swap the sun of Cape Town for the drab of London.

I reckon foreign coaches would more easily throw in the towel then home coaches.... they see it as a job, not as an honour and will be less likely to stick around if criticism comes their way etc.

Personally though I think Mallett would be an excellent choice. There is a lot in infighting in the RFU and certainly a power struggle between certain groups.... perhaps a semi-outsider is what they need, someone with no history, no internal baggage.

You looking forward to the S15 season??? Taking my boytjie to his first Stormers match against the highlanders in a couple of weeks... Pappie is hoping he loves it..... if he doesn't, I'll make him love it!!!!

Haha, I am sure your son will enjoy the rugby, mine is not much of a keen sports watcher, he loves to play cricket, but refuses to watch it, he still thinks it is boring to watch sport on TV.

I am not very confident about the SA Franchises this year though.

Stormers have lost some very important players.

Cheetahs have depth in some positions but glaring weaknesses in others.

The lions may have won the currie cup, but with the franchse seemingly in dire financial straits, I think that and the fact that 4 months of hard rugby at such a level will be too much for them.

The Bulls is going to struggle, they have lost their stalwarts, even though most of them has been in poor form for some time, and their rebuilding will begin in earnest this year.

The only SA Franchise that might be fine this year is the Sharks, but then their chequebook has helped a lot.

Feckless Rogue wrote:Sorry to be pedantic. After Waterloo, Napoleon abdicated and the House of Bourbon were returned to the throne. The French were then considered allies and Wellingtons army marched into Paris unopposed.

Which must have irked the families of those who died that such a subtle political realignment could render their deaths so utterly futile.