Mallett & Lancaster are NOT good enough - HAS TO BE AN ENGLISHMAN

First topic message reminder :

Time is short.....No one is taking this seriously....rfu about to ruin the latest last chance to revive the English rugby team....CAN EVERYONE PLEASE JUST STOP AND RECONSIDER THIS PLEASE !!!!!

Nelson says every man must do his duty so come on all you English coaches, for the love of your god man up and sort this out!

Jim Malinder you are top of the list.....

Richard Hill would be a great candidate.

I would say Andy Farrell as an outside bet.

Fairly bizarre in that English Rugby fans demand an English coach but accept players from around the World whilst English footie is happy to have foreign coaches but the players MUST be home grown.Weird.

kingelderfield wrote:

PJHolybloke wrote:What about SA under Mallett kingelderfield?

Any good?

No as I mentioned earlier NM's experience with RSA is ancient history, nearly 15 years ago, therefore not relevent.

NM is yesterday's man, he will not bring success to England - nad that means a team that wins the 2015 world cup.

kingelderfield, why is Nick Mallet's record with SA not relevant?

I have always been under the impression that a CV is built upon history and proof of previous achievements.

Taffineastbourne wrote:Fairly bizarre in that English Rugby fans demand an English coach but accept players from around the World whilst English footie is happy to have foreign coaches but the players MUST be home grown.Weird.

that isnt true at all is it taff- i explained above in my post. however you must understand that on the whole i am sure we are much more against having an england coach for football over rugby- for the obvious reasons!

When you say "not true at all",do you really,really mean that?

biltongbek wrote:

kingelderfield wrote:

PJHolybloke wrote:What about SA under Mallett kingelderfield?

Any good?

No as I mentioned earlier NM's experience with RSA is ancient history, nearly 15 years ago, therefore not relevent.

NM is yesterday's man, he will not bring success to England - nad that means a team that wins the 2015 world cup.

kingelderfield, why is Nick Mallet's record with SA not relevant?

I have always been under the impression that a CV is built upon history and proof of previous achievements.

Yeah, I'm with Biltong (since when did you get modded anyways?) experience is everything isn't it?

Mallett's got the job anyway.

Taffineastbourne wrote:Fairly bizarre in that English Rugby fans demand an English coach but accept players from around the World whilst English footie is happy to have foreign coaches but the players MUST be home grown.Weird.

Got any stats to back that up?

Taffineastbourne wrote:When you say "not true at all",do you really,really mean that?

100% if you are talking about the fans view overall! yes

its as if your making comparisons against what happens within our sporting associations and then a fans view of the situation.

i think most rugby fans would be happy to have a quality foriegn coach!

but most footie fans want an english manager!

see my point?

two days ago PJ

mystiroakey wrote:

Taffineastbourne wrote:When you say "not true at all",do you really,really mean that?

100% if you are talking about the fans view overall! yes

I now understand you and will make allowances.I am sorry to have misjudged you.

Taffineastbourne wrote:

mystiroakey wrote:

Taffineastbourne wrote:When you say "not true at all",do you really,really mean that?

100% if you are talking about the fans view overall! yes

I now understand you and will make allowances.I am sorry to have misjudged you.

odd comment

biltongbek wrote:two days ago PJ

brown-nose.

PJHolybloke wrote:

biltongbek wrote:two days ago PJ

brown-nose.

biltongbek wrote:

PJHolybloke wrote:

biltongbek wrote:two days ago PJ

brown-nose.

Yeah? OK then, .

But only if I gets speshal treetment innit. Sniff.

mystiroakey wrote:

Taffineastbourne wrote:When you say "not true at all",do you really,really mean that?

100% if you are talking about the fans view overall! yes

its as if your making comparisons against what happens within our sporting associations and then a fans view of the situation.

i think most rugby fans would be happy to have a quality foriegn coach!

but most footie fans want an english manager!

see my point?

That's a stat Taff - don't do it son!

Old joke mystir.

Point one I agree an Englishman is the way to go,BUT who aside from SCW or Jack Rowell have the qualifications.NONE have ever Coached an international side Jack Rowell would be an excellent choice he has better win stats even than SCW.
The obvious point is EVERY Coach has to start somewhere,NZ and SA have or had exclusively home grown talent.You want a test team easy take your top 2
Supersides then add a few from the other franchises.
England IF there sides were`nt containing many non qualified players could do the same.Pick a squad from the top 3 Aviva sides as your basis and go from there.
Other teams do it,as to oversea coaches,Thanks but no thanks.

alan, I agree with your concept of picking your core from your two or three best sides. The problem however for England is that their best players are spread across 12 teams and not 5.

SA and NZ concentrate their top players into 5 teams, Hence natural selection has already taken effect before the national coaches start hand picking their players.

But de to the fact that Engalnd does not have that process of natural selection taking place at domestic level it makes it so much harder for the international coach.

Imagine a South African or New Zealand coach has to handpick from 12 similar strength teams, not impossible but a lot harder.

Just to add, the franchise system in SA and NZ is really the only place there is money, so there are only five franchises competing to offer contracts to players.

England has 12 professional clubs competing for the players, they will be more thinly spread.

I'm working on an article at the moment, it's a little bit of fun really, but it does include a suggestion that would cover the problem with players being spread so thinly.

You can all keep your mits of Deano.

He's coming to us to rebuild his career and re-establish us a the dominant team in the land....

Weirdo alert!

Why weirdo??

By all accounts the RFU are after Jake White...so we better get used to boring rugby!

It's the end of the world as we know it.

On a serious note...i think this is a bad move....hardly inspiring...i'd rather keep lancaster...

I am not so sure that Jake white would be bad for english rugby, he doesn't like fetchers, and england doesn't have any.

do they?

On the other hand, if Jake is not the coach and someone else wants a few fetchers, we can pass them along, sadly the Rand isn't what it once was.

oh feck, its on bbc now.

this could be a disaster.

I only hope Lancaster and Rowntree are kept on as at least they know the players etc

GeordieFalcon wrote:Why weirdo??

By all accounts the RFU are after Jake White...so we better get used to boring rugby!

Ah feck. At least he's coached a team to win a World Cup. But frankly he's not my first choice

Re: Jake White

It strikes me the process is getting a bit caught up in the concept of 'track record'. ie: If Graham Henry had applied then he would have been appointed no questions asked, which in my opinion would have been wholly the wrong choice to make.

It comes down to two things for me: 1. Vision 2. Ambition

If a candidate can demonstrate an understanding of where the game is heading (not just what method worked in the past) and elucidate a full plan and coaching composition and ethos to go with it then that's one crucial element fulfilled.

Now whilst Henry (or indeed White) unquestionably have the knowledge, I don't think they have the drive. Both have already won RWCs, can you really have the desire to go on and win another with a separate team?

Having read SCW's 'Winning' it took a monumental effort combined with all sorts of abstract ideas to finally win in 2003. What you need for that is a drive that goes beyond most other ambitions. A resolve to do literally whatever it takes to be the best in the world. Something we haven't heard from an England coach since SCW. That to me is the most crucial aspect.

My choice would be Mallet. I think he may have the desire to go out and seal himself into history as a great coach by winning a RWC. He also seems to have an idea and awareness of who else he needs on board.

Lancaster I think has done some good work, but whilst he may show the resolve I don't think he has enough knowledge or imagination to build a side that does things differently.

Surely the point is that the Aviva sides are NOT 12 equal sides,take the top 3 English sides in the last years Competition.Use it as the basis of a squad or two squads.THEN do the old fashioned test trials and go from there,just the basis
then you can add or discard as it goes on.

I don't like the idea of White. It screams of lazy decision-making: "he's done it before so he'll do it again". It's not that simple. The guy would no-doubt do a solid job, but we need an innovator with the drive and ambition to get to the very top.....a tried-and-tested formula will not be enough.

a). Is he an innovator? Nobody can detract from his achievements, but he took a team packed with world class individuals to the world cup title by playing straightforward rugby. Don't get me wrong: if you have talent like that then you don't mess around with it. But innovative? He also had Eddie Jones - a renowned innovator - by his side.

b). Does he have the drive and ambition? He's already won it, which is bound to impact his outlook. I'm sure he would like to become the first coach to win it twice, but it's not the burning 'point to prove' that you want. Also, I can't remember him ever showing any interest in English rugby in the past - he's certainly never been linked to English domestic rugby....I don't doubt that he is a model professional, but does he really have that desire to see English rugby back on top of the world?

The jury's still out on Lancaster, and we'll know more after the tournament, but I like the look of him so far. Whilst he may not have shown too much innovation in his attacking play so far, he has been innovative in the things he's done behind the scenes, and I think he has shown himself humble enough to extract the best out of those around him which - if he was allowed to assemble a good team - could negate his lack of international experience. Attitude-wise, he can't be faulted: open, humble, down-to-earth, massive faith in young talent. A couple of good performances this week and next and I could easily be convinced...

Adam, innovation set aside for a moment, he knows how to build a squad. When he started in 2004, most of his squad was new and the rest had but a handful of caps.


He will build england a squad of note. Talking about innovation of Eddie Jones, our gameplay didn't change much, but it is touted that Jones did bring something to the table, innovation is also knowing who to contract to add value to your existing system. There is no coach in the world that can do it all on his own. They all contract specialists either ona full time or part time basis.

As for hunger, that can only be speculated, nothing more.

Fair enough biltong; I did just say I admired Lancaster for his humbleness and seeming ability to extract the best from those around him - I suppose the Eddie Jones consultation thing with White shows the same....there's being innovative yourself, but there's also having the vision to know when innovation is necessary and bring it in from elsewhere.

As I said, I know White is a model professional and I'm sure he would do a solid job. But if he wasn't motivated to apply in the first place then I just worry about his hunger for it...

i dont really get any of these manager debates. i wanted johnson to stay on, now i want lancaster to stay- i understand he was only ever a temp apointment- however if he wins the next couple of games i dont want him going anywhere!

cant we all discuss this after the 6n's

Lancaster will be hungry in a different sense to any of the outside candidates.

You can't expect the outside professionals to claim that coaching England has always been their wish and dream. They can't say that and won't be saying it...but what they are is professionals who have a career and owe it to their career to give everything they can to the cause of England if chosen. Their professional reputation rests on hunger during the job if not actually hunger for it.

"But if he wasn't motivated to apply in the first place then I just worry about his hunger for it... "

why is it that rugby coaches apply for roles anyway- the RFU should go for the candidate they want- its like being picked for the side. i dont see any problem with not applying for the job- surely its more about being head hunted and approached

Biltong JakeWhites record was`nt anything flash for a Bok side,but I suppose a RWC changes everything.Setting the precedent for throwing a 3Ns in an attempt to win a RWC killed it for me.

Alan you will look hard to find a Bok coach who will have a "flash" record.

The political interferences as far as selection pressures doesn't go away, in fact it gets worse ever year. The politicians will tell you there is no quota system in place, but then in the same interview tell your transformation is a must.

I know you aren't a fan of Jake White, I am not a big fan of him either. But you have to respect what the man has been able to do within the restrictions and interferences he has been given.

He gets crdeit for building his own squad, he gets credit for targeting specific opponents to gain confidence for the world cup. I hate the fact that any coach would sacrafice matches for the "greater goal" to me that is pathetic and goes against every grain in my soul.

But inspite of everything he still had a 65% succes rate, was it not for the 6-8 tests he sacraficed with over the years during either the tri nations and autumn tours, he may well have had a 70% win rate.

biltongbek wrote:I know you aren't a fan of Jake White, I am not a big fan of him either. But you have to respect what the man has been able to do within the restrictions and interferences he has been given.

I think as rugby 'purists' we forget these things. Be interesting which side of the fence the new coach sits on in terms of how he handles restrictions such as quota's etc.

Personally, and its probably too big a task, I think the national coach needs to have an inclusive approach- to open doors that currently need to be pried open with quota's etc. I had thought that's what pdv's appointment was meant to achieve but he got bogged down in the teams performance and didn't have the skills for the wider task which is just as, if not more important for the development of Bok rugby.

This may explain why SA coaches like coaching abroad- they don't have the political drama's to deal with.

I am an old man,the Leopard does`nt change his spots nor I my opinions,I can be accused of many things.BUT not Hypocrisy or stupidity I was raised in a different era.When All Blacks v Boks was THE de facto World Championship,and the un forgiveable act was to throw a match against the other.
Any form of segragation on political,religous,or any other grounds is an anathema to me.BUT the Boks during Apartheid era for good or ill WERE better
by results anyway.
As you correctly point out Jake Whites record is as good as most Boks Coaches
an better than your winning average.As to targetting the RWC by fielding a weaker team and winning the RWC.
I`ve always wondered how much that was White and how much Eddie Jones.
For me there will always be the what if factor over AllBlack versus Bok matches
during the Apartheid period.Especially 1928 and 1949 tours ,1928 especially i think personally Nepia and Mill would have tipped the balance the All Blacks way.
BUT this is getting of topic,a coach is judged by his results Jake White against the
AllBlacks did`nt.3Ns winnners 2005,6,7,8 etc.like it or not I must except RWC is now THE measure.Jake White won an RWC and is in the IRB Hall of Fame.
I think Jake White could build England into a Good team,Mallett,Wayne Smith,and John Kirwan could too in my opinion.
BUT I feel that it should be a home grown Coach,given first Chance and a JIm Mallender/Ian McGeechan team[as an Anglo-Scot i feel Geech is part of the answer].
Would be a supreme combination as was at one time muted here,I don`t think 2015 is a viable target.BUT 2019 could well be but only if the team/coaches are settled and together for that time.
To be Honest I don`t care who holds the RWC,I DO care who is THE worlds best
{ALL BLACKS for me always}.
BUT I before I die I would like to see a different name on the RWC,and the cosy little cabal over the same teams hosting it ended.
I want to see a strong England,and for that matter Scotland again,give the Current setup a few matches to gel.Before throwing baby out with the bathwater.

alan, mate, you aren't that old. My old lady is 80. There is still some good years in you yet, if all goes well you may still see 2 or three world cups. As to whether you will see another name on the William Webb Ellis within that time, not so sure. Maybe France.

In my lifetime, and fortunately I am still relatively young, I hope to see the springbok dominate world rugby again, at least for a few years.

Biltong etc made the good point that working under the controversy of SA rugby might be the only preparation for working under the farcical English RFU, hence why the candidate coaches have worked with SA. That and the sense of National identity with our players, of course

Thanks to all for your comments and opinions, and apologies for my some what imploring manner. Its just as a fan it frustrates and saddens me to watch the rfu and powers of the english game fail when to me so so much can be and should be achieved.
Again I have to concede that this is indicitive of the malaise within the game brought on by the underlying war between the clubs and the union.
Surely it should be the ambition of every professional english coach to take the top job, however it is apparent that is nolonger the case.
Many things make rugby union different to other sports, chief amongst these are its international opportunities and competitions. I think All who have influence and power within the convoluted entrails of english rugby should beware.

you dont think your getting abit paracat on that one king, its allways a hard juggling act to protect the games interests but also increase interest and revenue

At the end of the RWC there was a lot of talk of big changes within the RFU,but
it seems it was all smoke and mirrors again!!!!
I understand the frustration of what could and should be acheived by England with all there resources.But for the self seeking SUITS who just want to hang on to there perks.

changes have happened. give it time, blimey

Changes will come to the RFU. Ian Ritchie was very successful running Wimbledon, and I expect him to be successful with the RFU. You have to remember he just started full time very recently. Like any good executive he will watch, wait and learn before making any dramatic changes. He will do this so he can assure himself the changes are the right ones, and not simply relying on the input of others. I would guess the biggest changes will be internal. Give it about 6 months. Be confident. I've met the man on a number of occasions and he is very smart and effective. I think he is an excellent choice. He is his own man and will make his own decisions. Unfortunately, he disagrees with me that the England coach should be English.

I do expect that Ritchie will aggressively go after the various factions within the RFU. This is killing England and the faster they are consigned to the dustbin of history, the better..

Yesterday's man brought a win over France to Italy. That wasn't too long ago.