Stuart Lancaster & the England Job

First topic message reminder :

 
I think that this aspect of the fallout from last night's titanic match deserves a thread of its own.

As a neutral, I am probably the person to start it as I have no truck with England's current head coach either way.

Some numbers first. The figures for Lancaster are only correct to the end of the 6N this year, so that's worth bearing in mind:

Geoff Cooke
Tenure: 16 January 1988 – 19 March 1994
Tests: 50
Won: 36
Drawn: 1
Lost: 13
Win Percentage: 72

Jack Rowell
Tenure: 4 June 1994 – 12 July 1997
Tests: 29
Won: 21
Drawn: 0
Lost: 8
Win Percentage: 72

Sir Clive Woodward
Tenure: 15 November 1997 – 2 September 2004
Tests: 83
Won: 59
Drawn: 2
Lost: 22
Win Percentage: 71

Andy Robinson
Tenure: 15 October 2004 – 29 November 2006
Tests: 22
Won: 9
Drawn: 0
Lost: 13
Win Percentage: 41

Brian Ashton
Tenure: 20 December 2006 – 1 June 2008
Tests: 22
Won: 12
Drawn: 0
Lost: 10
Win Percentage: 55

Rob Andrew
Tenure: 1 June 2008 – 30 June 2008
Tests: 2
Won: 0
Drawn: 0
Lost: 2
Win Percentage: 0

Martin Johnson
Tenure: 1 July 2008 – 16 November 2011
Tests: 38
Won: 21
Drawn: 1
Lost: 16
Win Percentage: 55

Stuart Lancaster
Tenure: 8 December 2011 – present
Tests: 42
Won: 26
Drawn: 1
Lost: 15
Win Percentage: 62

SL was in charge of his first game in March 2012.

Many regard England's failure to beat Wales as attributable directly to the head coach's tactical decisions in selection and to the apparent lack of a clear and consistent game plan which England is playing to.

My questions for the group:

1. What results are needed in this Rugby World Cup for Lancaster to keep his job? Would he still have to go if England exit in the quarters?

2. With reference to his peers above, what win ratio is expected from an England coach and is this reasonable?

3. What are the key areas in which Lancaster can be validly criticised?

4. The RFU is the most profitable union in the sport. Apart from perhaps the NZ head coach's job, there is a fair argument that being England's head coach is the most prestigious coaching appointment in rugby union football. But is it in fact something of a poisoned chalice given the overwhelming expectation to constantly be successful?

SecretFly wrote:I feel for Lancaster, really do.  A nice man who has had the bottom fall out of his universe in a Nation so alive to signs of weakness.  Not saying the Nation is wrong in demanding a degree of success from handsomely paid coaches.  But simply sad for the person in the spotlight this time.

I hated too those shots of him leaving a building and walking into a car park with the person who will be his Executioner when the time comes by his side.  He looked hollow.  Had I been him I'd have suggested to Ian Ritchie that they leave the building separately, each on their own.

I would have plenty of sympathy for Lancaster if, upon his appointment, he had drawn a line in the sand, moved on from the past and concentrated on what he would do. Instead he took every available opportunity to cover up his many deficiencies by trashing the previous regime, talking about how he started from nothing*, had to build a squad with no foundations and how he had to restore pride in the shirt. I would love to have seen him tell any of the players, or the coaches for that matter, to their faces that they had no pride in the shirt. They might have shoved his management books up his arse

He was a terrible appointment - as was MJ - under qualified and over promoted. Experienced manager with proven success this time please, no more learning on the job.

*If reigning 6-Nations champions and WC quater-finalists counts as nothing, I don't even know what you could say his successor is starting with.

I'm interested to know why people would want Eddie Jones rather than the coach who beat him at a World Cup.

Rugby fan SCW hasn't done anything of note as a coach since 2003. Been dining off 2003 since.

Eddie Jones is the present, SCW is the past.

Same reason I wouldn't pick Jake White.

As Fuzzy Dunlop says we need an experienced coach now.

beshocked wrote:fa0019 I wouldn't want either of those coaches. Neither are the best.

Mallett hasn't won anything of note as coach since he was at Stade Francais, his run with Italy was uninspiring.

Dean Ryan's coaching resume isn't very impressive.

The standout candidate for me is Wayne Smith.

Rugby Fan wrote:I'm interested to know why people would want Eddie Jones rather than the coach who beat him at a World Cup.

Em... I suppose because stealing from one of your nearest neighbours would be Bad show.....

George Carlin agreed I would be happy with Wayne Smith or Eddie Jones

Then English coaches - Baxter, King, Gustard/Borthwick.

The issue is who would actually take the job.

Dean Ryan did rather well at Gloucester no? He hardly had the resources of the big teams but built a very respectable side which challenged for the title for a number of years. Always been a good tactican too from memory. Still coaching right but at a poor side???

Compared to Lancaster he did very well in club rugby.

Not saying he should be next England coach, he shouldn't.... they need to get a proven global coach of tier 1 rugby but the AC's should be chaps like Ryan, Cockerill... with one eye on the future.

The only top coaches I really can see are

John Plumtree
Nick Mallett

The best coach without a role is Rassie Erasmus. Whatever he touches turns to gold. An excellent coach. Currently the director of rugby at the boks overlooking all rugby in SA. However he's probably going to be in the next bok coach after Heyneke.

Rugby Fan wrote:I'm interested to know why people would want Eddie Jones rather than the coach who beat him at a World Cup.

Probably the same reason that Danny Cipriani doesn't want to get on the Number 6 to Holt Park any time soon.

The issue is who would actually take the job.

beshocked. Totaly agree with you.

"WHO" would want the job?

majesticimperialman wrote:The issue is who would actually take the job.

beshocked. Totaly agree with you.

"WHO" would want the job?

Farrell Snr. He wouldn't say No.

All right. There's only thing for it.

I will take the job.

But just know that I'm only doing it for you guys.

fa0019 wrote:Dean Ryan did rather well at Gloucester no? He hardly had the resources of the big teams but built a very respectable side which challenged for the title for a number of years. Always been a good tactican too from memory. Still coaching right but at a poor side???

Compared to Lancaster he did very well in club rugby.

Not saying he should be next England coach, he shouldn't.... they need to get a proven global coach of tier 1 rugby but the AC's should be chaps like Ryan, Cockerill... with one eye on the future.

The only top coaches I really can see are

John Plumtree
Nick Mallett

The best coach without a role is Rassie Erasmus. Whatever he touches turns to gold. An excellent coach. Currently the director of rugby at the boks overlooking all rugby in SA. However he's probably going to be in the next bok coach after Heyneke.

Dean Ryan had a large budget with Glaws (well over the cap at the time) and still couldn't deliver silverware despite leading the table for many years. Personally I really hope there is someone else in the running. Someone with top level experience and some good English coaches underneath would be my preference.

majesticimperialman wrote:The issue is who would actually take the job.

beshocked. Totaly agree with you.

"WHO" would want the job?

Plenty of young talent to build a quality team around, loadsamoney and starting from such a low-point that it wouldn't take much at all to be viewed as a success..

I think the job is rather appealing tbh. Only real negative is the overwhelmingly venomous media they would have to get into bed with.

Dear God...a guy who'd pick a bunch of ladies put's his hand up.

What's the world coming to when the masculine world of rugby is being dragged through the mire by the influx of buxom bunnies.......

Fuzzy Dunlop wrote:

majesticimperialman wrote:The issue is who would actually take the job.

beshocked. Totaly agree with you.

"WHO" would want the job?

Plenty of young talent to build a quality team around, loadsamoney and starting from such a low-point that it wouldn't take much at all to be viewed as a success..

I think the job is rather appealing tbh. Only real negative is the overwhelmingly venomous media they would have to get into bed with.

True. And it never impeded Blatter.

I would think there will be a fair bit of musical chairs of coaches after the WC. surely someone with a good record will want the job?

The only positive is that the last two appointments have shown that the RFU don't care about experience., meaning one of our very fine posters here could get the job.

Get your CVs in early gents, I promise when I get the job I'll pick my coaching team from this thread. Beshocked, are you happy to coach the wingers?

PSA might want to take the job - we didnt extend his contract after the world cup at least who knows after all, he might be a highly seeked commodity once we steal the ellis cup

Is Jake White avalible?

Maybe...............................................
wait for it, wait for it............................


Maybe Gatland would be in a mood for a change of scenery after the World Cup, and maybe a nice offer (with trimmings) might bring about the seismic storyline: "Gat's Wallops Wales and hitches his Wagon to Arch Enemy No.1"

I don't think he'd actually bat an eyelid in doing something like that.  Gat's is all about his own reputation and legacy. Maybe he'd be lured to try and create a new chapter.

Fuzzy Dunlop wrote:The only positive is that the last two appointments have shown that the RFU don't care about experience., meaning one of our very fine posters here could get the job.

Get your CVs in early gents, I promise when I get the job I'll pick my coaching team from this thread. Beshocked, are you happy to coach the wingers?

Surely he'd be the ideal candidate to coach the breakdown?

Clamping on to minute details and refusing to budge while slowing down the rest of the thread?

Old 'shocked sounds like an ideal guru for the next generation of fetching 7s

Only joking beshocked

Fuzzy Dunlop wrote:The only positive is that the last two appointments have shown that the RFU don't care about experience., meaning one of our very fine posters here could get the job.

Get your CVs in early gents, I promise when I get the job I'll pick my coaching team from this thread. Beshocked, are you happy to coach the wingers?

If you need a specialist to coach the nonplussed "who me?" face that players need to make when they give away a penalty to sew the seeds of doubt into the referee's mind, then I'm your guy.

majesticimperialman wrote:Is Jake White avalible?

he's always available! he's a glory/money hunter.

think he has odds at around 1/7

whocares wrote:

majesticimperialman wrote:Is Jake White avalible?

he's always available! he's a glory/money hunter.

think he has odds at around 1/7

Jake White's Facebook status is always 'single'.

When there's something stinks,
In your neighbourhood,
Who you gonna call?
Jake White's Number!

When you wanna look good,
Attracting a coach that you should,
You better just call
Jake White's Number!

He ain't 'fraid of no fans.
Well, maybe beshocked when the schidt hits the fan.

If we are going for a new coaching team, I hope we don't just go for flavour of the month.

I mentioned before that no-one was singing the praises of Cheika, Cotter or Schmidt when we were looking for coaches in 2012, and yet here we are now thinking they are probably better than Lancaster.

Rather than look at Jake White, Eddie Jones and Nick Mallet, why don't we spend some time thinking about who might be a Cheika, Cotter or Schmidt today?

Actually I think all three were mentioned, discussed and wanted to different extents. But none of them wanted the job at the time due to all the negative PR.

Cotter and Schmidt in particular were two names that kept cropping up but were tied to their clubs at the time.

fa0019 wrote:Dean Ryan did rather well at Gloucester no? He hardly had the resources of the big teams but built a very respectable side which challenged for the title for a number of years. Always been a good tactican too from memory. Still coaching right but at a poor side???

Compared to Lancaster he did very well in club rugby.

Not saying he should be next England coach, he shouldn't.... they need to get a proven global coach of tier 1 rugby but the AC's should be chaps like Ryan, Cockerill... with one eye on the future.

The only top coaches I really can see are

John Plumtree
Nick Mallett

The best coach without a role is Rassie Erasmus. Whatever he touches turns to gold. An excellent coach. Currently the director of rugby at the boks overlooking all rugby in SA. However he's probably going to be in the next bok coach after Heyneke.

seriously hope he get nowhere near the job. He's been in the media already saying how Lancaster has to go. I want any successor to have kept his trap shut.

Don't worry Nathan. Fa is a WUM and he'll disappear soon.

Surely there won't be any stigma in appointing a non-English coach? That would be unbelievably stupid and one-eyed of the RFU if being English is some sort of pre-requisite for the job. 

Surely the success of Gatland and Schmidt have opened the door for any good coach to be considered. Vern Cotter could have been from Narnia and the SRU correctly could not have given a cr@p.

Is it just me or is there something weasely about SL for all the talk of him being a good guy? He is always so quick to throw someone else other bus. Players decision making (that he selected), past coaches failings, lack of leadership in the dressing room, lack of discipline etc

It seemed like every game the message was always the same - "rebuilding", "positives", "potential". Seemed like he was perpetually stuck in the rebuilding phase without ever really getting past it.

A lot of his regime seemed to be about the branding of English rugby rather than enough focus on the field. Maybe that came from the suits as a part of the job description. But it was all a bit phoney and full of buzz words - "fortress HQ" and that kind of crap. He wouldnt pick overseas players we needed and he axed some of the key fighters in the squad that we needed in favour of a squeeky clean English rugby brand. Ah well, its all bit him on the arse now.

I smiled at all that catchweight. When all the guff is talked - and yes, when we've all talked about how nice Lancaster seems (at a certain level) - you've probably delivered the most succinct overview of the whole thing in just three short paragraphs.

Nice might have turned out to be too buzzwordy and affected 'nice'. Image obsession might very well have toppled another attempt on the WC.

catchweight wrote:Is it just me or is there something weasely about SL for all the talk of him being a good guy? He is always so quick to throw someone else other bus. Players decision making (that he selected), past coaches failings, lack of leadership in the dressing room, lack of discipline etc

It seemed like every game the message was always the same - "rebuilding", "positives", "potential". Seemed like he was perpetually stuck in the rebuilding phase without ever really getting past it.

A lot of his regime seemed to be about the branding of English rugby rather than enough focus on the field. Maybe that came from the suits as a part of the job description. But it was all a bit phoney and full of buzz words - "fortress HQ" and that kind of crap. He wouldnt pick overseas players we needed and he axed some of the key fighters in the squad that we needed in favour of a squeeky clean English rugby brand. Ah well, its all bit him on the arse now.

it's just you....

Players have a responsibility too, if you chucked every player under the bus that made a wrong decision you wouldn't have any players left. even for a union as big as ours.
Teams are constantly rebuilding, so he isn't wrong but this isn't an excuse.
Not picking overseas players is still absolutely the correct decision, people think Armitage is some sort of savour, has anyone seen him play in a team where his team mates are all world class players? he'll probably be average playing for england and where will that leave the domestic game once the rule is allowed? up Poopie creek because all english players will be heading over the channel.

SecretFly wrote:I smiled at all that catchweight.  When all the guff is talked - and yes, when we've all talked about how nice Lancaster seems (at a certain level) - you've probably delivered the most succinct overview of the whole thing in just three short paragraphs.

Nice might have turned out to be too buzzwordy and affected 'nice'.  Image obsession might very well have toppled another attempt on the WC.

to be honest, i think his comments are the sort of thing a soccer fan would come out with. "it's all the managers fault"

Also, how can a coaching team not have instilled pre-determined responses to to end game scenarios like the Wales game? How can a coach blame the decision making for not going for a kick yet not take accountability for never having a plan in place for this scenario? The players after said a draw was only an extra point, seemingly oblivious that it would have kept them in pole position by denying Wales extra points. And another player was not even aware that four tries earned a bonus point. Its sounds pretty clueless.

catchweight wrote:Also, how can a coaching team not have instilled pre-determined responses to to end game scenarios like the Wales game? How can a coach blame the decision making for not going for a kick yet not take accountability for never having a plan in place for this scenario? The players after said a draw was only an extra point, seemingly oblivious that it would have kept them in pole position by denying Wales extra points. And another player was not even aware that four tries earned a bonus point. Its sounds pretty clueless.

should a player really need to be told about the bonus points, there bloody adults not children!

Also haven't we been here before where fans were moaning that the players were being over coached? that they were robotic and needed more freedom.

People are taking aim at the coaching team (which i do agree needs replacing) but the players need to be held accountable too - theres not alot of folks on here mentioning this.

looks like 606v2 needs to ban again.

nathan wrote:

SecretFly wrote:I smiled at all that catchweight.  When all the guff is talked - and yes, when we've all talked about how nice Lancaster seems (at a certain level) - you've probably delivered the most succinct overview of the whole thing in just three short paragraphs.

Nice might have turned out to be too buzzwordy and affected 'nice'.  Image obsession might very well have toppled another attempt on the WC.

to be honest, i think his comments are the sort of thing a soccer fan would come out with. "it's all the managers fault"

Oh I think he might have a real point about the corporatisation of the 'new image' of English Rugby. I don't actually think that was probably the duty of a coach that had a job to do on the field. But it seems he was given that as a brief of kinds OR he himself brought that concept to his interview and felt compelled to keep it on the agenda then when he actually did get the job.
Image reclamation was probably the job of a different guy within the RFU. Lancaster, like any coach, must be given the simple job of building a team and not designing a brand of niceness around them. Maybe catchweight is right in that the sub-plot of Lancaster's tenure Did omit players that probably weren't the most gentlemanly but would have a warriors edge for rugby combat?

Cyril wrote:looks like 606v2 needs to ban again.

Oh I'm getting the vibes now that catchweight has history in these English thread parts?

Apologies to all. I'll move along.

nathan wrote:

catchweight wrote:Also, how can a coaching team not have instilled pre-determined responses to to end game scenarios like the Wales game? How can a coach blame the decision making for not going for a kick yet not take accountability for never having a plan in place for this scenario? The players after said a draw was only an extra point, seemingly oblivious that it would have kept them in pole position by denying Wales extra points. And another player was not even aware that four tries earned a bonus point. Its sounds pretty clueless.

should a player really need to be told about the bonus points, there bloody adults not children!

Also haven't we been here before where fans were moaning that the players were being over coached? that they were robotic and needed more freedom.

Over coaching doesnt really have anything to do with preparing for crucial match scenario and understanding the dynamics of the how the group system works. Ridiculous that a coach can come out and blame bad decision making in that scenario when all they had to do was ensure players were suitably informed on what to do. For a world cup in that sort of group I would expect the coaching team to have covered these kind of situations from all bases. It smacks of lack of preparation.

catchweight wrote:

nathan wrote:

catchweight wrote:Also, how can a coaching team not have instilled pre-determined responses to to end game scenarios like the Wales game? How can a coach blame the decision making for not going for a kick yet not take accountability for never having a plan in place for this scenario? The players after said a draw was only an extra point, seemingly oblivious that it would have kept them in pole position by denying Wales extra points. And another player was not even aware that four tries earned a bonus point. Its sounds pretty clueless.

should a player really need to be told about the bonus points, there bloody adults not children!

Also haven't we been here before where fans were moaning that the players were being over coached? that they were robotic and needed more freedom.

Over coaching doesnt really have anything to do with preparing for crucial match scenario and understanding the dynamics of the how the group system works. Ridiculous that a coach can come out and blame bad decision making in that scenario when all they had to do was ensure players were suitably informed on what to do. For a world cup in that sort of group I would expect the coaching team to have covered these kind of situations from all bases.

they are professional players paid a lot of money... he can't hold their hand whilst on the pitch. The players should know how the group works, i bloody well do!

SecretFly wrote:

Cyril wrote:looks like 606v2 needs to ban again.

Oh I'm getting the vibes now that catchweight has history in these English thread parts?

Apologies to all.  I'll move along.

Do what you think, Fly,

There's nastiness about.

The coaches are also paid, to prepare the players. Clearly the Wales finish was an example of a coaching failure. There should have been a plan in place rather than leaving the call to chance (and then blaming it afterwards in the interview)

If the coaches didnt want that to happen, they should have enusred the players knew to kick for goal. It is as simple as that really. If their policy was to leave all decisions to the captain on the field then they should have backed that in the interview, instead of blaming a bad decision.

In fairness he took them on when many a coach tried to do a job for England.  As an outsider looking in to be fair I think SL takes a fair bit of stick all things considered.  I feel pretty bad for the guy to be fair.  I actually think it's a bit of a Poison chalice of a job.  Some of the names being bandied about as his replacement, I just cant see accepting the job.  Not if they have any other international aspirations like coaching New Zealand for example.  

For me if I am brutally honest it wont matter who they get into coach because the truth of the matter lies far deeper than just selection or who is coaching the side.  The setup with the Aviva Premiership really needs looking at.  The RFU and PRL are totally working their own agendas all the time. The fact premiership squads have to have 60% English qualified players just isn't specific enough.  There are some positions England just seriously lacks talent partly because the clubs go out and get the best available player in those positions regardless of nationality.  Openside for example is one such position.  

I'd agree with Graham Henry's sentiment that England cannot maintain 12 pro teams (even the All Blacks couldn't do this without seriously affecting playing standards).  Bottom line is for England to truly become a world force again they would need to rethink the entire professional game in England.  The goal should have been to limit games, game time & other nationalities playing within their system and to limit this to no more than 5 or 6 teams.  There are some English clubs who add absolutely no benefit to English rugby.

That's just my view though and granted while this will never happen and plenty will disagree, it's still my view.

I think Scott Johnson is available, just a thought

Eddie Jones has said he would be open to the idea of taking the England job, go and get him or Wayne Smith RFU!!

catchweight wrote:The coaches are also paid, to prepare the players. Clearly the Wales finish was an example of a coaching failure. There should have been a plan in place rather than leaving the call to chance (and then blaming it afterwards in the interview)

If the coaches didnt want that to happen, they should have enusred the players knew to kick for goal. It is as simple as that really. If their policy was to leave all decisions to the captain on the field then they should have backed that in the interview, instead of blaming a bad decision.

Agree the Welsh game was a coaching failure.  Not just the lack of proper situational planning but also the way the team seemed out of puff at the end.  This is a team which contained many of the same players who seemed in excellent game shape when playing Wales in the 6 Nations.  Clearly something was wrong.

The Australia match was clearly something else. They seemed a whole level ahead, a step faster, a bit stronger, and on and on.

I thought it strange what Cipriani said before the English game regarding wallabies players. Did he make such a claim out of spite? To give the wallabies some ammo as Cheika loves that kind of stuff. What do people think of Cipriani? If I was English, I'd be furious. He comes across as a spoilt little pompous school girl.

"Most of the key papers carried coverage of a supposed bust-up between the unwanted Danny Cipriaini and backs coach Mike Catt.

"England presented a united front throughout the build up to the World Cup, but a flashpoint between Danny Cipriani and attacking skills coach Mike Catt occurred the day before the final 31-man squad was announced," a PA report alleged.

"Shortly after being informed he was to be cut, a disappointed Cipriani was told to resume training and when his effort level was perceived to be below that required, he received a dressing down from Catt.

"A row erupted and Cipriani received support from the players, who deemed Catt's response to be too personal."

http://i.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby/international/72729395/Stuart-Lancasters-dirty-laundry-aired-in-public-with-allegations-of-infighting-in-England-camp

BamBam wrote:

Fuzzy Dunlop wrote:The only positive is that the last two appointments have shown that the RFU don't care about experience., meaning one of our very fine posters here could get the job.

Get your CVs in early gents, I promise when I get the job I'll pick my coaching team from this thread. Beshocked, are you happy to coach the wingers?

Surely he'd be the ideal candidate to coach the breakdown?

Clamping on to minute details and refusing to budge while slowing down the rest of the thread?

Old 'shocked sounds like an ideal guru for the next generation of fetching 7s

Only joking beshocked

I would love to be manager of England but if I was I would try and encourage Paul Gustard and Alex Sanderson to be the main forwards and defence coaches. If I wanted specialist help in areas like the breakdown and lineout I would see if I could call upon Richard Hill and Steve Borthwick as advisors on the breakdown and lineout respectively. See if Jonny Wilkinson could come in as a kicking and psychology coach because Jonny is probably itching to be involved in rugby again. As for backs coach I would try and get Alex King or Wayne Smith.

I don't claim to be an expert on the technical areas but bringing IMO some of the best in their areas would strengthen these areas. I don't know more about these pros on their specialist areas. It's about delegation.

I would deal with the media, selection, the strategy, the bigger picture and of course motivating the players! Would look to learn from any mistakes and try and listen to any criticism and act accordingly. Something of course I have less responsibility to do on a forum!

What England need is a clear strategy and gameplan and picking the personnel accordingly.

1st rule : Don't pick players out of position if you can avoid it.
2nd rule: Pick a bench that covers as many positions as possible.
3rd rule: Pick a balanced team with a clear purpose
4th rule: Nail the basics
5th rule: Justify selection.