Ulster squad additions

First topic message reminder :

You did not imagine that - it was said. A few weeks ago too.

rodders wrote:Leinster were poor at the start of the season Aukster. Most teams were because of the RWC.

Based on what do you say the players forced McLaughlins hand regarding Jackson?

Leinster lost 2 of their first 11 games, Ulster lost 6 of their first 11 games.

The players complained about Humphreys defensive frailty and he had to go.

rodders wrote:No Notch my point is that Ulster didn't try and keep our existing coaching team, Muller included.

The descision was made to replace them otherwise we wouldn't need a succession plan.

If our current coaching team can get us to the HEC final what do we need a new coaching set up for?

Confused

Doak, Bell and Muller are here next year and Terblanche made it clear he wanted to go home.

The only person going is McLaughlin.
The new coach has made it clear he wants to see what the current coaching staff can do before making a decision on them.

For what it is worth I think - Muller and Terblanche have been the key this year not the locals.
As I say McLaughlin has pulled the strings from the rear. Anscombe needs to be able to handle the role once Muller has gone I am not convinced that McLaughlin has the presence to do that.

On a point of clarifcation Bell and Doak are on contracts they are not permanent employees like McLaughlin.

I think we have a fair amount of stability in the coaching set up. It looks as though doak and bell may be retained. McLaughlin will be in and around the squad and will surely be working with anscombe regarding the youngsters. Then we still have muller, humph and Logan about as well. Stable enough if you ask me.

I do sincerely hope muller sticks around the year after next. Given his friendship with Pienaar I think they might want to leave together if that isn't too sentimental. I would be delirious if johann could be persuaded to stay on in some capacity after is playing career. He has such presence and is a phenomenal ambassador for ulster rugby.

I was so saddened by the way the news of the change of coach came about. So unfair to treat a fine man like Brian McLaughlin in such a fashion.

However, it seems clear that the suits had absolutely no intention of the news breaking in such a horrendous fashion.

I know BM is hugely disappointed not to be coaching the senior side next year and I can not help but feel his pain.

However, let's look at this in a different way.

Can anyone think of a man better suited or equipped to take on our academy?

It is very clear that the IRFU are insisting that all the provinces head towards the situation where we only require a few NIQ players and our teams are sucessful by developing our home grown talent. I think the academy is probably the most important part of the whole operation and I don't think it is functioning to anywhere near it's full potential. When you have players 6 weeks before their first international senior call telling us they have just learned to "transfer and fend" it's clear there is much work to do in schools and clubs.

I have absolutely no idea whether Anscombe will be any good but I will bet my last dollar that our academy will be better for BM's involvement. I am willing to bet also that Ulster will be in a better place 3, 5, 10 years time because of this move.

Now, let's send him to the academy with a big shiney cup for his new office!

SUFTUM!!!!!

I think MrsP has pretty much nailed it!

MrsP wrote:I was so saddened by the way the news of the change of coach came about. So unfair to treat a fine man like Brian McLaughlin in such a fashion.

However, it seems clear that the suits had absolutely no intention of the news breaking in such a horrendous fashion.

I know BM is hugely disappointed not to be coaching the senior side next year and I can not help but feel his pain.

However, let's look at this in a different way.

Can anyone think of a man better suited or equipped to take on our academy?

It is very clear that the IRFU are insisting that all the provinces head towards the situation where we only require a few NIQ players and our teams are sucessful by developing our home grown talent. I think the academy is probably the most important part of the whole operation and I don't think it is functioning to anywhere near it's full potential. When you have players 6 weeks before their first international senior call telling us they have just learned to "transfer and fend" it's clear there is much work to do in schools and clubs.

I have absolutely no idea whether Anscombe will be any good but I will bet my last dollar that our academy will be better for BM's involvement. I am willing to bet also that Ulster will be in a better place 3, 5, 10 years time because of this move.

Now, let's send him to the academy with a big shiney cup for his new office!

SUFTUM!!!!!

MrsP wrote:I was so saddened by the way the news of the change of coach came about. So unfair to treat a fine man like Brian McLaughlin in such a fashion.

However, it seems clear that the suits had absolutely no intention of the news breaking in such a horrendous fashion.

I know BM is hugely disappointed not to be coaching the senior side next year and I can not help but feel his pain.

However, let's look at this in a different way.

Can anyone think of a man better suited or equipped to take on our academy?

It is very clear that the IRFU are insisting that all the provinces head towards the situation where we only require a few NIQ players and our teams are sucessful by developing our home grown talent. I think the academy is probably the most important part of the whole operation and I don't think it is functioning to anywhere near it's full potential. When you have players 6 weeks before their first international senior call telling us they have just learned to "transfer and fend" it's clear there is much work to do in schools and clubs.

I have absolutely no idea whether Anscombe will be any good but I will bet my last dollar that our academy will be better for BM's involvement. I am willing to bet also that Ulster will be in a better place 3, 5, 10 years time because of this move.

Now, let's send him to the academy with a big shiney cup for his new office!

SUFTUM!!!!!

Feicin right! SUFTUM!

Been confirmed the Cronin is off to Rotherham for 2 years

geoff999rugby wrote:

rodders wrote:No Notch my point is that Ulster didn't try and keep our existing coaching team, Muller included.

The descision was made to replace them otherwise we wouldn't need a succession plan.

If our current coaching team can get us to the HEC final what do we need a new coaching set up for?

Confused

Doak, Bell and Muller are here next year and Terblanche made it clear he wanted to go home.

The only person going is McLaughlin.

Thats the point Geoff. Its seems McLaughlin, who is supposedly in charge is the one person who is not getting the credit for what we have achieved over the last 2 seasons.

I find it unbelievable that everything is down to Humphreys, Muller and Terblanche which is what people are suggesting.

My opinion, and I don't have inside info like yourself, echos that of Paul Wallace... that Ulster rugby have made a big mistake and aren't prepared to back down.

They didn't expect us to go so well post christmas and thought we would be able to bring in a top experienced coach and have been wrong on both accounts.

We've shifted McLaughlin down to the academy and brought in someone with less experience to replace him.

If we win on Saturday then Humphreys and Logan will have to eat a big load of humble pie.

rodders wrote:

geoff999rugby wrote:The only person going is McLaughlin.

Thats the point Geoff. Its seem McLaughlin, who is supposedly in charge is the one person who is not getting the credit for what we have achieved over the last 2 seasons.

I find it unbelievable that everything is down to Humphreys, Muller and Terblanche which is what people are suggesting.

That's not what I'm suggesting. I'm suggesting he wouldn't have been able to succeed without their input not that he hasn't played a role. It's also untrue that Anscombe has less experience on his CV.

If we win on Saturday, I'm delighted to be validated in everything I said about McLaughlin when he got the job and people were moaning about that and I'm delighted for him. He's not a bad coach and he's not doing a bad job. I just think we can get slightly more out of the team with another coach while at the same time moving him to Academy strengthens us considerably. McLaughlin is such a massive part of what's going to make Ulster successful in the next few years, but I do believe he can do that better in the Academy than as Head Coach.

And I am not disputing that. There is nothing unusual about that.

Joe Schmidt probably wouldn't have succeeded without the input of Greg Feek or Brian O'Driscoll so should he be moved to the academy as well?

No one is saying it is all down to Terblanche, Muller etc.

What is being said is we have seen a team effort this year with McLaughlin playing the role of Committee chairman.

the judgement has been made that he hasn't got what it takes to run the show without the props.

I understand why that judgement has been made

Schmidt has a level of authority in the Leinster dressing room that McLaughlin doesn't come close to

rodders wrote:And I am not disputing that. There is nothing unusual about that.

Joe Schmidt probably wouldn't have succeeded without the input of Greg Feek or Brian O'Driscoll so should he be moved to the academy as well?

You do yourself no credit there. Ridiculous straw man argument

It is pretty normal but I think Schmidt has worked wonders for Leinsters back play, Gibbes has been great for their forwards. If O'Driscoll and Cullen were the guys who were deserved credit for the improvement then it would be worrying. There's a sense that the senior players have inout but most of the improvements are down to the coaches. Ulster is the opposite. Not to mention Leinster look a better coached unit.

Again, I don't think people would be saying this if we'd been knocked out of Europe earlier. That may sound glib, but it could easily have happened without a bit of luck against Clermont in the first round. Small margins but one isolated Cup run is never indicative of a sides ability to continuously return to Cup Finals every single year. I also think Ulster will find it easier to find a guy who can bring more to the Head Coach role than find a better Academy coach than McLaughs.

Fair enough we'll agree to disagree.

Any head coach is only as good as his team so I think to say he's been proped up by Muller is not only unfair its irrelevent.

I'll be 100% behind Anscombe next season but I am convinced Humphreys has made a huge mistake but it seems some people will back Humphreys to the hilt no matter what he does.

I can't agree with a descision to move our most successful coach of the pro era, a homegrown coach at that, down to the academy and replace him with and overseas underage coach. Its a terrible call. Disgraceful.

I hope the players can win the trophy for McLaughlin on Saturday and give him the send off he deserves.

Notch wrote:Again, I don't think people would be saying this if we'd been knocked out of Europe earlier.

If that's not a straw man argument I don't know what is......

And another point is that if McLaughlin is so reliant on the senior players input then what use is going to be in the academy?

According to some of you he's just a puppet who couldn't organise a pi$$ up in a brewery without Muller and Humphreys to lean on.

Doesn't sound like someone who'll be much use at developing the next gerneration of talent to me.

rodders wrote:I'll be 100% behind Anscombe next season but I am convinced Humphreys has made a huge mistake but it seems some people will back Humphreys to the hilt no matter what he does.

Again, thats just unfair. I judge people by how things work out- not speculation on how things are going to go. You say it's a terrible call but we don't know whether it is or not yet. Humphreys record will show whether or not it is successful- a year or two down the tracks. If we improve in terms of how creatively we use the ball, our continuity play, our work at the breakdown and rely less on a few talismanic players to get us through games next season we'll have made the right choice regardless of whether we win the Heineken Cup or not. Do these things better and bring through the youth and success will inevitably follow.

I want a guy as passionate and devoted to Ulster as McLaughlin to succeed too. But I can't let my emotions get in the way of trying to judge whether it's the right thing or not.

Humphreys and Logan are hugely invested in Anscombe being a success, they want it as much as any of us if not more

They are on the inside know the full inner workings and have a plan if we don't fully understand their decision we at least have to believe and trust that they do know what they are knowing because as it's been said Humphreys has had something of a Midas touch when it comes to who he has brought in

I'm not letting my emotions run away with me.

Objectively speaking I think it is a bad decision.

As an Ulster fan I think it is still a bad decision.

No one is bigger than the club. I want Ulster to succeed... not Anscombe, not Humphreys and not Mclaughlin.

I just happen to believe we had a formula that was helping us grow and succeed and we've dismantled it for no good reason.

Regardless of what happens next season I believe it was the wrong decision, because we are already on an upward curve, so it isn't speculation.

rodders wrote:And another point is that if McLaughlin is so reliant on the senior players input then what use is going to be in the academy?

According to some of you he's just a puppet who couldn't organise a pi$$ up in a brewery without Muller and Humphreys to lean on.

Look, rodders, if you want to continually misrepresent what I'm saying thats fine. But it doesn't reflect well on you. I'm debating in a respectful, rational fashion and I don't like having my words twisted to some meaning that is far removed from my opinion of the man.

McLaughlin is a cracking coach, I've already said a) why I think he's essential to the future of Ulster Rugby and b) why I think someone else can kick this team out of fourth gear and into fifth or sixth. As a long time defender of McLaughlins record with Ulster I can't help but find your post ironic. The knee-jerk crowd were queuing up to put the boot into him for a lack of experience when he was appointed and I pointed to the esteem he's held in as a skills coach and his no-nonsense attitude. Now we've reached a Heineken Cup final and he's suddenly the best coach ever; like I've been saying since day one he's a good coach and he's done well for Ulster. But if there are guys who can get more out of this team and these players then we can look at using him elsewhere in the organisation.

McLaughlin is a good technical coach. He is thorough, pays attention to details, has an eye for talent and doesn't take any shoite. He is a massive asset to Ulster now and will be for the rest of his time at the club. If I thought he was a crap coach I wouldn't have been championing him as the ideal man to head up our Academy since before the news broke he was going to be doing that.

Notch my words are being twisted too.

This is becoming a circular argument. It comes down to personal opinion as to how a rugby team/organisation should be run and how much faith a person is willing to put in Humphreys and Logan and their decisions.

I stand by my opinon that it is a bad call by Humphreys/Logan but the decision has been made now so its irrelevent.

The thing is, the decision has been made as has the appointment with a view to the way forward and not simply maintaining the status quo. Anscombe may not be the high profile coach that a lot of people dreamt we would sign but then again neither was McLaughlin and he hasn't done too badly. Although at the start of the season his head was being called for by many posters on other forums.....eejits.

If we don't get even get out of our group next year I can see doom merchants furiously posting about what a terrible appointment Anscombe was only to claim he's a demi-god the following season if we were to win the Pro12 title and also do well in the HC. I mean do you remember how the posts looked at the start of St Ruan's time with Ulster and according to those posters he was a terrible signing. Look what happens if you give a man the chance and the time to prove his worth.
So lets just wait and see what we have before we wail and gnash our teeth, it saves on the dental bills.

rodders wrote:And another point is that if McLaughlin is so reliant on the senior players input then what use is going to be in the academy?

According to some of you he's just a puppet who couldn't organise a pi$$ up in a brewery without Muller and Humphreys to lean on.

Doesn't sound like someone who'll be much use at developing the next gerneration of talent to me.

You do yourself no credit with this post Rodders - it is a stupid misrepresentation of the counter argument.

I think you are letting your emotions run away with you.

The appalling form and lack of direction shown during the World Cup seems to have been forgotten by many.
I was told, from a 1st XV player, that confidence in the team was in melt down at the time.

Pete330v2 wrote:
If we don't get even get out of our group next year I can see doom merchants furiously posting about what a terrible appointment Anscombe was only to claim he's a demi-god the following season if we were to win the Pro12 title and also do well in the HC.

You see thats where I disagree. Anscombe is in a lose-lose situation.

If he doesn't do well then people will be calling for his head and if he's successful then many people will put it down to the foundations layed in the past 2 seasons by McLaughlin.

That may not be fair or accurate but that is how things will be percieved by the majority of supporters and neutrals. Tyrone Howe, Stuart Barnes and Paul Wallace have all alluded to this and I have to agree.

geoff998rugby wrote:
You do yourself no credit with this post Rodders - it is a stupid misrepresentation of the counter argument.

I think you are letting your emotions run away with you.

The appalling form and lack of direction shown during the World Cup seems to have been forgotten by many. I was told, from a 1st XV player, that confidence in the team was in melt down at the time.

I haven't forgotten that at all but I believe the coach and team should be judged over the entire season not just a section of it. How we finish is more important than how we started in my opinion.

Most teams struggled early in the season. A lot of our early performances were down to our pack getting smashed and at the time we had no Afoa, Muller, Best, Court or Ferris and no forwards coach.

geoff998rugby wrote:
You do yourself no credit with this post Rodders - it is a stupid misrepresentation of the counter argument.

I think you are letting your emotions run away with you.

I apologise for the choice of words. Clearly this is an exaggeration and misrepresentation of what was said.

However I feel there have been some very unfair and disrespectful comments made here with regards McLaughlin's coaching ability and contribution to Ulster. Maybe not deliberately so but that is how they come across.

Rodders to quote you, "regardless of what happens next season I believe it was the wrong decision"


Do you not see that as being a tad inflexible. You are also putting weds in peoples mouths regarding their opinion on McL. Best for everyone to leave this topic alone asnit has been done to death.

Well you're reading too much into them then.

As a long term and current McLaughlin fan, I don't much appreciate you trying to put that spin on things.

The matter is closed for me.

I apologise for any offence caused to Notch and Geoff in particular. I did twist their words in one particular post and I regret that.

I still disagree with some of the comments but clearly the lines are drawn in the sand over this.

I'll admit that I was one of the ones wishing McLaughlin to be replaced, many were doesn't make me an eejit.

I think the same now even after he's got us to a H-cup final, as I did then that McLaughlin is a good coach. However I think that he has limitations and while he's had a good year in future I don't think he'll achieve the same level required as this year.

While I agree we are on an upward curve under him, the upward curve could be steeper, with the players we have, and a new coach is the catalysist to achieve that.

No worries rodders

Kingshu, you're no more wrong for wanting him replaced after the start we had than wanting him anointed for our run to the Heineken Cup final. Judge him on the whole season. For me it's been a season where we've been successful with our strongest team on the pitch but we've struggled to come up with the gameplan and individual and collective progress to deal with the loss of 3 or 4 key players. Mainly positive with some negatives.

I agree with you but I think it's time to just wait and see what happens next.

God help Mark Anscombe if he doesn't start well! The attack dogs will be unleashed right from the word go.

But come on guys, you are really trying super hard to explain this away. Truth is, crap coaches do not get their teams to HC finals, do they?

I'm more than happy to welcome Anscombe and hope he does a job. But I am getting a little irritated by how desperate some of you seem to try an excuse the decision. It seems to me theres a lot of talking BML down and not a lot of talking Ancombe up.

If Muller and Best play such a big part in the team confidence and coaching, then if we find ourselves in the Final again next year. How will you be able to give Anscombe that credit? and not these key players again.

If, as you say there are aspects of BML which are below par for a coach. Are they things that can't be worked on? If Humph knows what he wants, and goes to get it. Could he not just have said. Look Brian, you need to be more..., you need to get up to speed with... etc...

Don't get me wrong, I'm not kicking up the same stink as Rodders. But i do think some of you guys are simply refusing to criticise or at least question what has happened.

I asked before, does the acadamy coach have anything to do with the main squad? Will anscombe and BML work together at all? I just wonder if Anscombe will be humble enough to realise BML has some sort of effect on the squad, and call on him to fulfill some sort of support role even if its unofficial.

PMs for Notch and Geoff..I'm away to cool off.... ....

"If he doesn't do well then people will be calling for his head and if he's successful then many people will put it down to the foundations layed in the past 2 seasons by McLaughlin."

That's one pretty decent crystal ball you have there Rodders, can you tell me the lottery numbers for this weekend too while you're at it.
Apart from putting furture words into the mouths of future pundits it's just like saying the 2009 grand slam was nothing to do with Kidney and more to do with the legacy left my O'Sullivan.........no wait, that's the truth

....oh and the 2009 GS was down to O'Sullivan .....

Kingshu wrote:I'll admit that I was one of the ones wishing McLaughlin to be replaced, many were doesn't make me an eejit.

I think the same now even after he's got us to a H-cup final, as I did then that McLaughlin is a good coach. However I think that he has limitations and while he's had a good year in future I don't think he'll achieve the same level required as this year.

While I agree we are on an upward curve under him, the upward curve could be steeper, with the players we have, and a new coach is the catalysist to achieve that.

Kingshu, sorry, I really meant that the knee-jerk enthusiasts are eejits, the ones that see more than 2 losses in a row and scream for a replacement despite having spat on the idea only two games previously.
I too wanted change since the season started although I was hoping for it before a ball was passed in anger.

rodders wrote:....oh and the 2009 GS was down to O'Sullivan .....

That's what I meant Rod......duhhh

Jeez guys theres more barney on this thread than there is on the HC Final thread. Leave this for another day.

Monday even

No problem Rodders reply sent

I bloody hate it when people ignore your post to talk sho1te!

There are a few things I find very odd about the debate here on this. McLaughlin is being moved on to the academy, and a few fans are suggesting that the senior players and the coaches should take as much, if not more praise than McLaughlin. I think that is a perfectly reasonable point of view. However, some of the same posters suggest that Ireland's woes are entirely down to Declan Kidney. Why, in the Irish side is the same argument not put towards the senior players and his coaches? Is it because Kidney is ultimately responsible for the team tactics, training etc and that it is implemented by his coaches? Then what on earth has McLaughlin been doing? His coaches implement his tactics, his coaching pattern. The long and short of it here is some posters do not want to criticise Humphries and Logan.

They have done a magnificent job of turning around Ulster's fortunes. Imagine where we would be without Logan, or without the signings that Humphries has helped to bring along. But from start to finish the coaching saga has been an utter debacle. Obviously they were not helped by a leak to the press and that is unfortunate. Geoff has said on another thread that behind the scenes the goal was not to appoint a 'big name coach' and that we shouldn't listen to the press when they stated Ulster rugby were. He is quiet right, part from the fact that BBC NI ran an interview during half time with Logan the first home match after the news broke and he said on television for all to hear that they were going for a big man, experienced coach. Then they appointed Anscombe. Those arguments do not square.

The other side though is that the decision was made when Ulster were going through a very poor run of form which I think makes the decision process easier to understand. If we had not got as far as we had in the EC then the decision would have probably been correct. However, we are in the final of Europe's premier competition. Hindsight or not, the decision to replace McLaughlin is to my mind a very poor one at present. The decision also puts immense pressure on Anscombe. Even if we do not win on Saturday, for him to be considered a success next season he will have to at least match what we have done this season. Anything less then he will be branded a failure by the fans, a majority of whom I would argue, do not think McLaughlin should be going in the first place.

And I know Geoff is talking about the reality of the situation behind the scenes. That is all very well for the handful of Ulster fans that are on this site. The perception amongst the majority of fans I know, the press, RTE, Sky, and particularly the English media (and one French paper my mate in Toulouse sent me a link for- I'll try and get it up for you guys to read) do not understand this decision. Their perception is that Ulster is run by imbeciles, even if we all know that is patently untrue.

Anyway, to conclude this post which is probably filled with millions of grammar errors. When this decision was initially made it was understandable. Now it looks like a shocker. This time next year hindsight will tell us if Logan and Humphries got it right- pretty much like appointing any coach in the history of any sport.

Finally, SUFTUM!

I'm for the final win lose I'll applaud McL he has gone a good job with Ulster. Don't think anyone has ever said he's a bad coach.

Only thing is will a coach who has won/got to a H-cup final be in demand by English clubs, or will he be happy as acamady coach???

I accept that not all agree with the decision but I do think it is only fair the rational is understood.

McLaughlin has proven himself to an excellent head of a coaching team and in Muller, by design, and Terblanche, by luck, he has two perfect assistants.

However when left without those props cracks have appeared i.e. during the World Cup. We were missing lots of players, but so was everyone else and as I reported there was a lack of confidence that wasn't addressed. It only returned when Muller returned.


That is not in amy way decry McLaughlin's achievements and contribution which have both been excellent but at the same time we need to be honest in terms of what this means.

At the end of the year one of those assistance - Terblanche will go.
It is possible that the other - Muller - could go as soon as the end of next season.

Now you could say we need to replace them but people like Muller and Terblanche are very few and far between and in addition the number of NIQ is going to be squeezed further in future years. Before anyone asks it is my assessment that there are no players in our squad capable of filling Mullers' or Terblanches' shoes with respect fulfilling a coaching role - not even close.

With this in mind the management were looking for a coach who could run the show with less assistance than McLaughlin currently gets.
They made an assessment that Anscombe was better suited to this elevated role than McLaughlin. Time will tell but given McLaughlin's history the decision does have a level of comprehension that should be acknowledged.

Kingshu wrote:I'm for the final win lose I'll applaud McL he has gone a good job with Ulster. Don't think anyone has ever said he's a bad coach.

Only thing is will a coach who has won/got to a H-cup final be in demand by English clubs, or will he be happy as acamady coach???

McLaughlin wants job security so that he could finally end his ludicrous sabbaticals from Belfast Inst. Also, his wife suffers from ill health from time to time and I really doubt he'd be too keen to move away to England. I'm not sure how she is now, perhaps she's absolutely fine with no recurrences.

I would love us to win this for Paddy Wallace, Nigel Brady, Rory Best etc. The guys with long-service medals

http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/sport/rugby/heineken-cup/heineken-cup-this-is-the-best-ulster-squad-irsquove-played-in-says-paddy-wallace-16158918.html?r=RSS

Hookisms and Hyperbole wrote: However, some of the same posters suggest that Ireland's woes are entirely down to Declan Kidney.

The set up for Ireland is very different from the set up in Ulster. Kidney is very much the man in charge in a way McLaughlin isn't. McLaughlin works best with a collegiate approach rather than as a supremo - different strokes.

Hookisms and Hyperbole wrote: The long and short of it here is some posters do not want to criticise Humphries and Logan.

Well with one exception (see below) I dont think they have done much wrong to be honest. In 3 years we have gone from fighting with Connacht for last place to HC finalist - impressive by any measure. We have got lucky with certain players
Wannenberg not Rush, Pienaer not Peel, Afoa not Botha but even so progress by any measure.

Hookisms and Hyperbole wrote:Geoff has said on another thread that behind the scenes the goal was not to appoint a 'big name coach' and that we shouldn't listen to the press when they stated Ulster rugby were.

I think I said we were not appointing a big name coach rather thay saying the goal was not to sign a big name coach - important difference.

Hookisms and Hyperbole wrote:He is quiet right, part from the fact that BBC NI ran an interview during half time with Logan the first home match after the news broke and he said on television for all to hear that they were going for a big man, experienced coach. Then they appointed Anscombe. Those arguments do not square.

We offered it to Chieka. He said no. The belief is he didn't want the restrict nature of the role of coaching at Ulster. As has been shown already no one is too big for Ulster and we will walk away rather than compromise our long term goals e.g. the departure of Botha.

Hookisms and Hyperbole wrote:And I know Geoff is talking about the reality of the situation behind the scenes. That is all very well for the handful of Ulster fans that are on this site. The perception amongst the majority of fans I know, the press, RTE, Sky, and particularly the English media (and one French paper my mate in Toulouse sent me a link for- I'll try and get it up for you guys to read) do not understand this decision. Their perception is that Ulster is run by imbeciles, even if we all know that is patently untrue.

I agree the handling of the change of coach was appalling and is the one blot on an otherwise very impressive 3 years by the new management.

Hookisms and Hyperbole wrote:There are a few things I find very odd about the debate here on this. McLaughlin is being moved on to the academy, and a few fans are suggesting that the senior players and the coaches should take as much, if not more praise than McLaughlin. I think that is a perfectly reasonable point of view. However, some of the same posters suggest that Ireland's woes are entirely down to Declan Kidney. Why, in the Irish side is the same argument not put towards the senior players and his coaches? Is it because Kidney is ultimately responsible for the team tactics, training etc and that it is implemented by his coaches? Then what on earth has McLaughlin been doing? His coaches implement his tactics, his coaching pattern. The long and short of it here is some posters do not want to criticise Humphries and Logan.

They have done a magnificent job of turning around Ulster's fortunes. Imagine where we would be without Logan, or without the signings that Humphries has helped to bring along. But from start to finish the coaching saga has been an utter debacle. Obviously they were not helped by a leak to the press and that is unfortunate. Geoff has said on another thread that behind the scenes the goal was not to appoint a 'big name coach' and that we shouldn't listen to the press when they stated Ulster rugby were. He is quiet right, part from the fact that BBC NI ran an interview during half time with Logan the first home match after the news broke and he said on television for all to hear that they were going for a big man, experienced coach. Then they appointed Anscombe. Those arguments do not square.

The other side though is that the decision was made when Ulster were going through a very poor run of form which I think makes the decision process easier to understand. If we had not got as far as we had in the EC then the decision would have probably been correct. However, we are in the final of Europe's premier competition. Hindsight or not, the decision to replace McLaughlin is to my mind a very poor one at present. The decision also puts immense pressure on Anscombe. Even if we do not win on Saturday, for him to be considered a success next season he will have to at least match what we have done this season. Anything less then he will be branded a failure by the fans, a majority of whom I would argue, do not think McLaughlin should be going in the first place.

And I know Geoff is talking about the reality of the situation behind the scenes. That is all very well for the handful of Ulster fans that are on this site. The perception amongst the majority of fans I know, the press, RTE, Sky, and particularly the English media (and one French paper my mate in Toulouse sent me a link for- I'll try and get it up for you guys to read) do not understand this decision. Their perception is that Ulster is run by imbeciles, even if we all know that is patently untrue.

Anyway, to conclude this post which is probably filled with millions of grammar errors. When this decision was initially made it was understandable. Now it looks like a shocker. This time next year hindsight will tell us if Logan and Humphries got it right- pretty much like appointing any coach in the history of any sport.

Finally, SUFTUM!

Having wtched logans interview at no stage did he mention they were going for a big name or anything about experience. The "right fit" and "ulster way" were all that was mentioned

Geoff you could have quoted the bit where I said directly where we might be if it wasn't for Logan. I don't think it would be hyperbole to say we were a shambles. But thanks for affirming most of the points I made myself in my own post. I think you might be right about what you said about the coaching appointment. I suppose my question is if you want a big name coach, why do you even interview Anscombe? Perhaps at that stage when Logan said that they were sure they were getting Cheika anyway.
My understanding of Kidney as both Ireland and Munster coach is that he operates in a similar way to how McLaughlin works, according to interviews with other coaches he has previously worked with. Wasn't one of the reasons so many fans looked forward to him after O'Sullivan was the fact he worked in a more 'collegiate' way? (to use your term) Anyway, I was merely resentful of some fans approach, shifting their arguments depending on the subject at hand.

Stand, do you have a video of it somewhere or know of a link? My memory might be deceiving me. There is a short clip on the BBC website but not the whole thing. I thought that the interviewer (was it Stephen Watson) pressed him and he said they were appointing a 'big man' (those weren't his words but something similar) and someone of experience. If I'm wrong (I'm married, so I'm used to it) then I'm wrong!