Why does Gatland feel the need to publicise this?

First topic message reminder :

Warren Gatland asks for scrum "clarification"

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-union/2603990

I guess he wants to attempt to apply pressure on referees by leaking this sort of stuff to the media.

But it smacks of i) sour grapes (insofar as trying to create an excuse for mediocre scrummaging), and ii) yet more Gatland media/spin nonsense.

It really gets on my nerves when ANY coaches do this. They should switch to football if thats how they want to conduct their business.

Every year, the same from the Scots:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/rugbyunion/international/scotland/7407613/Six-Nations-2010-England-use-blocking-runners-says-Scotland-coach-Andy-Robinson.html


"I believe there are blockers in place," said Robinson firmly. "We'll need the referee to be very strong in how he referees the game. They have runners in place in front of the ball. It's vital that we don't get blocked and the referee picks that up.

"I will be speaking to the referee about that, particularly the way the two centres are trying to create space for their outside backs. They put a number of blockers in place to free up space for their runners. It's a bit like American football. Anybody who is in front of the ball is out of the game and should not have an influence on what is happening."

I have no problem with coaches seeking clarification from Refs, but I don't think it should be done in the public eye.

Maybe it was just his ugly face that the Ref didn't like, I'm sure if he had hair like Hibbard, Jones or Castro he'd be liked more.

Griff wrote:Every year, the same from the Scots:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/rugbyunion/international/scotland/7407613/Six-Nations-2010-England-use-blocking-runners-says-Scotland-coach-Andy-Robinson.html


"I believe there are blockers in place," said Robinson firmly. "We'll need the referee to be very strong in how he referees the game. They have runners in place in front of the ball. It's vital that we don't get blocked and the referee picks that up.

"I will be speaking to the referee about that, particularly the way the two centres are trying to create space for their outside backs. They put a number of blockers in place to free up space for their runners. It's a bit like American football. Anybody who is in front of the ball is out of the game and should not have an influence on what is happening."

I would love for you to find a post anywhere on the internet where I have said criticism of Ref's from coaches is acceptable.

I have criticised ref's in the past, but it's a bit diffeent coming from me as opposed to coming from a coach. Especially a winning coach.

Scrumpy wrote:I have no problem with coaches seeking clarification from Refs, but I don't think it should be done in the public eye.

Exactly.

Fairy nuff, but there's a difference between being asked a question and calling a conference to announce 'Ref 'z' was a bunch of ars3'

munkian wrote:Fairy nuff, but there's a difference between being asked a question and calling a conference to announce 'Ref  'z' was a bunch of ars3'

My point is Gatland is a pretty astute man when it comes to dealing with the media. I could list probably a dozen instances where he has dealt with controversy from the media and handled it brilliantly.

Point is he doesn't say things like this by accident. Everything he says is measured and normally he says exactly what he means and what he wants to be heard.

He could have avoided it in his usuall way of "Yeah sure there were some decisions that didn't go our way and we'll be discussing it with ref X."

He didn't which is what kind of annoys me. He wanted this to be aired in public.

I feel coaches and players have a responsibility to the game, no matter the club or country. We want to keep the respect for the men in the middle. Let the fans rant, but coaches have to uphold the standards, in public anyway.

I think the 'going public' aspect might have something to do with the idea that going public forces the issue to be more seriously considered.

You chat in private to a ref's committee/chief (or however they organise themselves) and they might be inclined to say "Yeah, we'll look into it Gat's and check if there were any errors".  

Going public means that the media are involved both in the query and in analysing just what Gatland was on about.  With the media casting eyes on the topic, the refs feel a tad more pressure to be seen to act on any concerns Gatland might have.

He ain't dumb. He knows the power of the media................... as we all know!

Point taken, though there does need to be alot more consistency with scrums etc Maybe airing it more in public will bring it around quicker ?

There's different ways of interpreting this. Insofar as it might be seen as a PR attempt to get the ref on board with Wales' approach to the scrum, I'd agree it's unsporting but completely typical of Gatland. After six years on the job people should know his style by now. Don't look to him to produce a commendable display of class towards the opposition on the day. In reality Gatland is quite a hard-nosed, stubborn individual who is not unknown to place considerable emphasis on the ref's interpretation and other subtle ways the game might be won or lost.

On the other hand, in his capacity as head coach he's perfectly entitled to clear the air with the ref and clarify the latter's outlook on certain aspects of the game so as to inform strategy on the day. Having said that though I find it hard to disagree with those who point out this would be more practically and professionally established behind closed doors.

Problem is also some refs will go on reputation or previous performances when awarding pens. If your player has (in your opinion) been unfairly pinged at the scrum then you are going to want to clear his name so to speak

Scrumpy wrote:I have no problem with coaches seeking clarification from Refs, but I don't think it should be done in the public eye.

Maybe it was just his ugly face that the Ref didn't like, I'm sure if he had hair like Hibbard, Jones or Castro he'd be liked more.

I have no problem with it as long as the clarifications are broken down and made public as well. I'm sure more people other than Gatland are curious as to why a player was penalised at the scrum when its not clear from replays.

the uproar from some of the welsh fans and media for rountree asking for clarification from the scrums in the wales/england game. Now Gatland does it and its perfectly normal....

The refs are now looking for clarification on just what he wants clarified. I think the note trail will be substantial on this one

If you can be bothered to watch the game again you'll see that Castro was havering a laugh at Scrum time spent the first half dropping it and the second half standing up.

Everones discussing Gats but no one discusses Parisse dis'ing the ref from the off - because everyone loves Serg but hates Gats.

slartibartfast wrote:If you can be bothered to watch the game again you'll see that Castro was havering a laugh at Scrum time spent the first half dropping it and the second half standing up.

Everones discussing Gats but no one discusses Parisse dis'ing the ref from the off - because everyone loves Serg but hates Gats.

Everyone is...having some fun with rugby topics during the Six Nations. Gatland is a big part of that - famous man in 6N terms. Natural he'd be a topic.

Now onto Sergio. I'm not all that fond of the man at all. A motormouth, a moan, and a tad bit of a hero too. We know he's probably been the best player for Italy for a good few years but do let some of the other players play now and then sergio - you don't have to try to be everywhere. I wouldn't mind, but often he can just get in the way.

RuggerRadge2611 wrote: Why does Gatland feel the need to publicise this?

Short answer : He is a naughty naughty boy.

He didn't do much complaining when the Welsh front row extracted the urine out of Craig Joubert for 80 minutes when Scotland played Wales last.

Oh YEAH   

flyhalffactory wrote:

RuggerRadge2611 wrote: Why does Gatland feel the need to publicise this?

Short answer : He is a naughty naughty boy.

He didn't do much complaining when the Welsh front row extracted the urine out of Craig Joubert for 80 minutes when Scotland played Wales last.

Oh YEAH   

HE didn't (Gatland), but your coach certainly did. Google is full to the gunnels of quotes from Scott Johnson moaning about the ref and his interpretations of the scrum. How is this different???

"If you are looking at any blueprints to play Ireland, I am looking at a club game," said Gatland.
"Northampton were embarrassed at home by Leinster. They turned it around the next week, being direct and physical. It's a reasonable blueprint for us to follow in terms of the way we need to play Ireland."

Did nobody ask think to ask him - "so then Warren, it'll be the usual gameplan will it?"   Some man.

Leinster were probably caught out being complacent. I doubt Ireland, coming from where they're coming from (2nd from the bottom last year) will be complacent against the Champions.
Wales will be direct and physical - as expected. We're familiar with Gatland. He, on the other hand, isn't familiar with Schmidt. Schmidt won't be as easy to plan for as Gatland obviously found Kidney to be.

SecretFly wrote:Leinster were probably caught out being complacent.  I doubt Ireland, coming from where they're coming from (2nd from the bottom last year) will be complacent against the Champions.
Wales will be direct and physical - as expected.  We're familiar with Gatland.  He, on the other hand, isn't familiar with Schmidt.  Schmidt won't be as easy to plan for as Gatland obviously found Kidney to be.

Er because Schmidt is going to radically change his approach from the way he coached Leinster over the last few years....   

Griff wrote:

flyhalffactory wrote:

RuggerRadge2611 wrote: Why does Gatland feel the need to publicise this?

Short answer : He is a naughty naughty boy.

He didn't do much complaining when the Welsh front row extracted the urine out of Craig Joubert for 80 minutes when Scotland played Wales last.

Oh YEAH   

HE didn't (Gatland), but your coach certainly did. Google is full to the gunnels of quotes from Scott Johnson moaning about the ref and his interpretations of the scrum. How is this different???

The difference is your front row delayed the scrum illegally and gained three pens out of it, but Joubert didn't do anything about the new laws.

But Gatland didn't mention a word about it.... suddenly he is concerned about the new laws.

ME-109 wrote:

SecretFly wrote:Leinster were probably caught out being complacent.  I doubt Ireland, coming from where they're coming from (2nd from the bottom last year) will be complacent against the Champions.
Wales will be direct and physical - as expected.  We're familiar with Gatland.  He, on the other hand, isn't familiar with Schmidt.  Schmidt won't be as easy to plan for as Gatland obviously found Kidney to be.

Er because Schmidt is going to radically change his approach from the way he coached Leinster over the last few years....   

Emm........... Schmidt wasn't coaching against Northampton on the fateful day Gatland chooses to mention is the pertinent point here ME

If he assumes Schmidt will allow his team to be complacent (given where we've come from) like O'Conner allowed Leinster to be...then I think that's wayward thinking. But away we go, we could be slaughtered too.... it's all up there with the Gods

Anything Gatland says will annoy a lot of people, they will try and extract everything he says and try and turn it bad.
I like what he does and so would any other team who has a coach  like him who isn't afraid to fight for their team by saying controversial things. He always has and it's paid of a lot
I'm not a big fan of Cockerill but I respect that he is a good coach and that everything he says is for the good of his team.
People need to stop being bitter and laugh it off if they don't like what he says. Some of the calls were bad and unfair against Paul and he will make that very clear. I mean of he wasn't our coach he would probably annoy me a bit. But it's tactical more than anything, Coaches express their opinion, it's not shocking news is it.
I have faith in Adam And Gethin and  know thy will give us a platform, this Adam isn't as good as we was in bullsssssh!te. He doesn't go from being the best scrummager in the world nothing.

SecretFly wrote:

ME-109 wrote:

SecretFly wrote:Leinster were probably caught out being complacent.  I doubt Ireland, coming from where they're coming from (2nd from the bottom last year) will be complacent against the Champions.
Wales will be direct and physical - as expected.  We're familiar with Gatland.  He, on the other hand, isn't familiar with Schmidt.  Schmidt won't be as easy to plan for as Gatland obviously found Kidney to be.

Er because Schmidt is going to radically change his approach from the way he coached Leinster over the last few years....   

Emm........... Schmidt wasn't coaching against Northampton on the fateful day Gatland chooses to mention is the pertinent point here ME

No but you say Schmidt wont be as easy to plan for as Gatland obviously found Kidney to be.....Schmidts game plan is simple (which is the beauty of it)...whether the players can execute and Wales can react to it is a different thing entirely.

flyhalffactory wrote:

Griff wrote:

flyhalffactory wrote:

RuggerRadge2611 wrote: Why does Gatland feel the need to publicise this?

Short answer : He is a naughty naughty boy.

He didn't do much complaining when the Welsh front row extracted the urine out of Craig Joubert for 80 minutes when Scotland played Wales last.

Oh YEAH   

HE didn't (Gatland), but your coach certainly did. Google is full to the gunnels of quotes from Scott Johnson moaning about the ref and his interpretations of the scrum. How is this different???

The difference is your front row delayed the scrum illegally and gained three pens out of it, but Joubert didn't do anything about the new laws.

But Gatland didn't mention a word about it.... suddenly he is concerned about the new laws.

No, he's concerned about the interpretation which can vary from ref to ref (hence 'interpretation'). Now that interpretation has led to some penalties against on this occasion he's trying to find out what he (as a coach) needs to know to put it right and not be on the receiving end again. Again, standard approach in the pro game. See my previous links to Andy Robinson stating, publicly, that he will be seeking clarification from refs on various decisions.

SecretFly wrote:If he assumes Schmidt will allow his team to be complacent (given where we've come from) like O'Conner allowed Leinster to be...then I think that's wayward thinking.  But away we go, we could be slaughtered too.... it's all up there with the Gods

Well you certainly won't be slaughtered. Wales have never slaughtered anyone, ever. At best a close win for Wales. But my prediction is a comfortable Ireland win.

ME-109 wrote:

SecretFly wrote:

ME-109 wrote:

SecretFly wrote:Leinster were probably caught out being complacent.  I doubt Ireland, coming from where they're coming from (2nd from the bottom last year) will be complacent against the Champions.
Wales will be direct and physical - as expected.  We're familiar with Gatland.  He, on the other hand, isn't familiar with Schmidt.  Schmidt won't be as easy to plan for as Gatland obviously found Kidney to be.

Er because Schmidt is going to radically change his approach from the way he coached Leinster over the last few years....   

Emm........... Schmidt wasn't coaching against Northampton on the fateful day Gatland chooses to mention is the pertinent point here ME

No but you say Schmidt wont be as easy to plan for as Gatland obviously found Kidney to be.....Schmidts game plan is simple (which is the beauty of it)...whether the players can execute and Wales can react to it is a different thing entirely.

I'm saying coaches only really get to know each other intimately when they actually have their teams play each other.  Ireland camp knows much more about Gatland and his ways with Wales than Wales camp know about Schmidt and his (as Irish coach).  He (Schmidt) is still only a relatively young coach - certainly inexperinced at the International end - he's still developing himself as a coach and I'm sure he himself will learn plenty (and might even be taught a few harsh lessons) about International rugby coaching during this 6N.

But simply put, Gatland can't be as familiar with Schmidt's plans as an International coach as we are all familiar with how Gatland likes to play his International boys.  International coaching itself will modify Schmidt's own ideas and until he developes his International identity/calling card gameplans, other coaches won't be sure about him.

Griff wrote:

SecretFly wrote:If he assumes Schmidt will allow his team to be complacent (given where we've come from) like O'Conner allowed Leinster to be...then I think that's wayward thinking.  But away we go, we could be slaughtered too.... it's all up there with the Gods

Well you certainly won't be slaughtered. Wales have never slaughtered anyone, ever. At best a close win for Wales. But my prediction is a comfortable Ireland win.

We're just about the only team in the top six or seven who can be slaughtered if we lose our nerve.  And Ireland is still a lot more fragile mentally than most people would perhaps think.  Wales do an "Ireland v Wales last year" on us in the first half, Irish confidence could simply collapse and that's when the madness infests our decisions and passing a simple ball from one player to another becomes as complex as trying to thread a needle whilst riding a galloping camel.  I think Ireland implode more beautifully than any NH side and it can happen at any moment.  All it needs is too much pressure.

SecretFly wrote:

ME-109 wrote:

SecretFly wrote:

ME-109 wrote:

SecretFly wrote:Leinster were probably caught out being complacent.  I doubt Ireland, coming from where they're coming from (2nd from the bottom last year) will be complacent against the Champions.
Wales will be direct and physical - as expected.  We're familiar with Gatland.  He, on the other hand, isn't familiar with Schmidt.  Schmidt won't be as easy to plan for as Gatland obviously found Kidney to be.

Er because Schmidt is going to radically change his approach from the way he coached Leinster over the last few years....   

Emm........... Schmidt wasn't coaching against Northampton on the fateful day Gatland chooses to mention is the pertinent point here ME

No but you say Schmidt wont be as easy to plan for as Gatland obviously found Kidney to be.....Schmidts game plan is simple (which is the beauty of it)...whether the players can execute and Wales can react to it is a different thing entirely.

I'm saying coaches only really get to know each other intimately when they actually have their teams play each other.  Ireland camp knows much more about Gatland and his ways with Wales than Wales camp know about Schmidt and his (as Irish coach).  He (Schmidt) is still only a relatively young coach - certainly inexperinced at the International end - he's still developing himself as a coach and I'm sure he himself will learn plenty (and might even be taught a few harsh lessons) about International rugby coaching during this 6N.

But simply put, Gatland can't be as familiar with Schmidt's plans as an International coach as we are all familiar with how Gatland likes to play his International boys.  International coaching itself will modify Schmidt's own ideas and until he developes his International identity/calling card gameplans, other coaches won't be sure about him.

All true to some extent. Yet it is clear how a Joe Schmidt team plays from his Leinster years and from the recent intl games (or at least i think it is clear that he is using the Leinster blueprint)

ME-109 wrote:

All true to some extent. Yet it is clear how a Joe Schmidt team plays from his Leinster years and from the recent intl games (or at least i think it is clear that he is using the Leinster blueprint)

A blip in that blueprint last week

Not really when you look at the second half. Although it is the dreaded half a game showing....

ME-109 wrote:Not really when you look at the second half. Although it is the dreaded half a game showing....

Second half more like it - but as you say, it only proves we're still a frustrating single-half team (won't be good enough against Wales) Plus, that was a rapidly falling apart Scotland that second half took place against. I'd worry about genuine penetrating power against a genuine 80 minute side.

Well we either win and its Grand Slam talking time...or we lose leading to some fun and games...

Oh there be fireworks if we lose!!!! Flak-jacket ready and hanging on the line to air it.

SecretFly wrote:Oh there be fireworks if we lose!!!!  Flak-jacket ready and hanging on the line to air it.

  

More like flying through the air....

I am off down Oliver Plunkett Street here in Cork in a moment. Just taking the old Windsurfer out for a run...you can tour the whole city centre on it at the moment....Might have a swim as well.

SecretFly wrote:Oh there be fireworks if we lose!!!!  Flak-jacket ready and hanging on the line to air it.

I wouldn't have thought there was so much pressure on Ireland, new coach, new players and all that?

Cork, the Venice of the South

SecretFly wrote:Cork, the Venice of the South

Venice of the North....do you know your lat's from your long's   

maestegmafia wrote:

SecretFly wrote:Oh there be fireworks if we lose!!!!  Flak-jacket ready and hanging on the line to air it.

I wouldn't have thought there was so much pressure on Ireland, new coach, new players and all that?

Players are pretty much the same. Some minor controversy over some of the selections, very heavy Leinster bias..a bad loss at the weekend will lead to some pressure...

maestegmafia wrote:

SecretFly wrote:Oh there be fireworks if we lose!!!!  Flak-jacket ready and hanging on the line to air it.

I wouldn't have thought there was so much pressure on Ireland, new coach, new players and all that?

There is always pressure.  A lot of folks have said the Scotland game was a fine and dandy performance.  If we lose big against Wales, those people will feel like gobshytes and they'll want to blame someone.  I think I might be one of the people for a lynchin'

No,I'm only kidding.  They all like me...they really *gulp* do.  The Irish will analyse any result to the death - good or bad....and there will always be a reason why Madigan should have been on the bench instead of Jackson....even if we beat you by 55!

BTW - new everything yes, but we still want to win.

ME-109 wrote:

SecretFly wrote:Cork, the Venice of the South

Venice of the North....do you know your lat's from your long's   

Wash your mouth out with soap for besmirching the great name of Cork by suggesting it is in the North!

SecretFly wrote:

ME-109 wrote:

SecretFly wrote:Cork, the Venice of the South

Venice of the North....do you know your lat's from your long's   

Wash your mouth out with soap for besmirching the great name of Cork by suggesting it is in the North!

Blub blub blub...

SecretFly wrote:

maestegmafia wrote:

SecretFly wrote:Oh there be fireworks if we lose!!!!  Flak-jacket ready and hanging on the line to air it.

I wouldn't have thought there was so much pressure on Ireland, new coach, new players and all that?

There is always pressure.  A lot of folks have said the Scotland game was a fine and dandy performance.  If we lose big against Wales, those people will feel like gobshytes and they'll want to blame someone.  I think I might be one of the people for a lynchin'

No,I'm only kidding.  They all like me...they really *gulp* do.  The Irish will analyse any result to the death - good or bad....and there will always be a reason why Madigan should have been on the bench instead of Jackson....even if we beat you by 55!

BTW - new everything yes, but we still want to win.

If we lose it will be Priestland and Hooks fault even if Priestland withdrew before the game and Hook doesn't take the field...!

I hope Hook doesn't come on... I rate him high on the erratic, freeform nuisance level - as in his ability to slip and slide like an eel through objects. I've never really understood how Gatland doesn't seem to be able to utilise him on the Welsh team

SecretFly wrote:I hope Hook doesn't come on... I rate him high on the erratic, freeform nuisance level - as in his ability to slip and slide like an eel through objects.  I've never really understood how Gatland doesn't seem to be able to utilise him on the Welsh team

He is utilised as a player who is great at covering four different positions from the bench.

As you say, Gatland concurs, Hook can be a nuisance to the opposition if he enters the match for the same reasons you mention. It is a huge level of respect from Gatland to select Hook ahead of Biggar and Jon Davies.

Didn't rowntree do the same last year after the last game? There was a thread about it and the England coaches were slated....

Yes..but last year is last year.  All bets are off at the beginning of each new year.  

Your player gouged one of our players this year...and that's disgusting.  
Our player gouged one of your players last year...and that's an unfortunate accident  

So it goes.

maestegmafia wrote:

SecretFly wrote:I hope Hook doesn't come on... I rate him high on the erratic, freeform nuisance level - as in his ability to slip and slide like an eel through objects.  I've never really understood how Gatland doesn't seem to be able to utilise him on the Welsh team

He is utilised as a player who is great at covering four different positions from the bench.

As you say, Gatland concurs, Hook can be a nuisance to the opposition if he enters the match for the same reasons you mention. It is a huge level of respect from Gatland to select Hook ahead of Biggar and Jon Davies.

I'd find a more permanent place for him than a utility bencher though was probably my point.

Engine#4 wrote:"If you are looking at any blueprints to play Ireland, I am looking at a club game," said Gatland.
"Northampton were embarrassed at home by Leinster. They turned it around the next week, being direct and physical. It's a reasonable blueprint for us to follow in terms of the way we need to play Ireland."

Did nobody ask think to ask him - "so then Warren, it'll be the usual gameplan will it?"   Some man.

How many Saints players and how many Ospreys are in the Wales side? Highlighting HEC games against Leinster might have a lot more negative psychological effects than positive ones. How daft is it to look at the club game for pointers when the Welsh regions have consistently shown it has zero bearing on the Test scene?

In the scrum clarification article Gatland comes across yet again as inept in front of a journalist. He is undoubtedly trying to put as much pressure on the referee as possible by publicly daring him to penalise the Welsh scrum under trial by television. Yet his own hypocrisy is such that rather than back Paul James by keeping him in the side, he effectively admits his scrummaging wasn't up to it by dropping him to the bench. Does Gatland really think everyone is so stupid as not to notice?