RugbyRebels

Digby wrote:Wayne Smith isn't busy

Going on public utterances he wants to keep it that way.

Digby wrote:

Banquo wrote:

Digby wrote:
Robinson is that? I think longer term he would be poor, but for 1.5 seasons he could well be a decent option to build a pack that someone rather better can then actually make use of. I don't think even saying that I would hire Robinson, but it's an option if it's as a long term interim coach. And I'd be interested to see Johnson back in rugby, and if such a decision doesn't work out and costs Saints that doesn't bother me much so it's easy for me to say it.

so I'm not sure why you'd hire a short term fix like Robinson, and in fact you aren't really wanting to..so wibble. I think he's passed his sell by date as a forwards coach (c2003), and is a dubious quality head coach.

Johnson was ill served being offered and accepting a job that needs an experienced coach; and its clearly put him off/or he can't be bothered to do the hard yards.

I think Robinson did some good work with both the Edinburgh and Scotland packs, even if both those and of course Bristol again showed up his overall strategy and selection issues. If Saints can get in someone who can build up the basics and then add to that fine, but they mayn't be able to find that person, in which case I'd consider a two stage process of hiring someone to fix the pack, accept the team will not do much fr the next season and a half, and then replace someone like Robinson with a coach who can take advantage of the work that's been done with the pack

He’s a b grade head coach and think Saints should avoid a sticking plaster solution, particularly a retrograde one

I agree Robinson is not a good head coach, but I wouldn't hire him in the hope he would be. They've got two simple models to progress, the first to try and improve everything, the second to sort the pack first and then build from that. The second model as well as being easier gives them more time to spend the money on making changes to the squad. Of course Saints could do us all a big favour and hire Sir Clive to remove him from the 6N analyst role.

Digby wrote:I agree Robinson is not a good head coach, but I wouldn't hire him in the hope he would be. They've got two simple models to progress, the first to try and improve everything, the second to sort the pack first and then build from that. The second model as well as being easier gives them more time to spend the money on making changes to the squad. Of course Saints could do us all a big favour and hire Sir Clive to remove him from the 6N analyst role.

No reason why you can't hire a good head coach AND a good forwards coach, how about that for a revolution. That way the forwards coach can re-build/improve the pack, whilst the head coach goes about longer term fixes. Novel I know, and I accept availability mid season is a limiting factor.

Banquo wrote:

Digby wrote:I agree Robinson is not a good head coach, but I wouldn't hire him in the hope he would be. They've got two simple models to progress, the first to try and improve everything, the second to sort the pack first and then build from that. The second model as well as being easier gives them more time to spend the money on making changes to the squad. Of course Saints could do us all a big favour and hire Sir Clive to remove him from the 6N analyst role.

No reason why you can't hire a good head coach AND a good forwards coach, how about that for a revolution. That way the forwards coach can re-build/improve the pack, whilst the head coach goes about longer term fixes. Novel I know, and I accept availability mid season is a limiting factor.

Robinson like Diamond has for me on repeat basis shown himself to be more than a good forwards coach. And if you start working on more than the pack it might see more rotation of the squad and cost more. That said if you can find a good head coach then the style the forwards are working toward can perhaps be a better fit for long term aims of the backline and gmeplan which will accompany

Also history isn't littered with sides who've improved across the board and sustained that improvement, it's normally a disjointed process across a number of coaches

Digby wrote:

Banquo wrote:

Digby wrote:I agree Robinson is not a good head coach, but I wouldn't hire him in the hope he would be. They've got two simple models to progress, the first to try and improve everything, the second to sort the pack first and then build from that. The second model as well as being easier gives them more time to spend the money on making changes to the squad. Of course Saints could do us all a big favour and hire Sir Clive to remove him from the 6N analyst role.

No reason why you can't hire a good head coach AND a good forwards coach, how about that for a revolution. That way the forwards coach can re-build/improve the pack, whilst the head coach goes about longer term fixes. Novel I know, and I accept availability mid season is a limiting factor.

Robinson like Diamond has for me on repeat basis shown himself to be more than a good forwards coach. And if you start working on more than the pack it might see more rotation of the squad and cost more. That said if you can find a good head coach then the style the forwards are working toward can perhaps be a better fit for long term aims of the backline and gmeplan which will accompany

Also history isn't littered with sides who've improved across the board and sustained that improvement, it's normally a disjointed process across a number of coaches

Have to say its a bit ar5e about face to start coaching the pack in one style and then hope the long term head coach is ok with it. My proposition is simple- get a good head coach in, who appoints/brings a forward coach with him.

Banquo wrote:

Digby wrote:

Banquo wrote: No reason why you can't hire a good head coach AND a good forwards coach, how about that for a revolution. That way the forwards coach can re-build/improve the pack, whilst the head coach goes about longer term fixes. Novel I know, and I accept availability mid season is a limiting factor.

Robinson like Diamond has for me on repeat basis shown himself to be more than a good forwards coach. And if you start working on more than the pack it might see more rotation of the squad and cost more. That said if you can find a good head coach then the style the forwards are working toward can perhaps be a better fit for long term aims of the backline and gmeplan which will accompany

Also history isn't littered with sides who've improved across the board and sustained that improvement, it's normally a disjointed process across a number of coaches

Have to say its a bit ar5e about face to start coaching the pack in one style and then hope the long term head coach is ok with it. My proposition is simple- get a good head coach in, who appoints/brings a forward coach with him.

Both plans have issues, that the style of the interim coach suits another coach down the line, or that a head coach trying to improve multiple areas from the off ever gets as far as chasing their own tail

Digby wrote:

Banquo wrote:

Digby wrote:
Robinson like Diamond has for me on repeat basis shown himself to be more than a good forwards coach. And if you start working on more than the pack it might see more rotation of the squad and cost more. That said if you can find a good head coach then the style the forwards are working toward can perhaps be a better fit for long term aims of the backline and gmeplan which will accompany

Also history isn't littered with sides who've improved across the board and sustained that improvement, it's normally a disjointed process across a number of coaches

Have to say its a bit ar5e about face to start coaching the pack in one style and then hope the long term head coach is ok with it. My proposition is simple- get a good head coach in, who appoints/brings a forward coach with him.

Both plans have issues, that the style of the interim coach suits another coach down the line, or that a head coach trying to improve multiple areas from the off ever gets as far as chasing their own tail

ah, but I didnt say that; head coach might actually come in, identify key area as forwards and let that settle down. A good head coach with a plan, there you go. I'm not understanding the objection to simply appointing a head coach as a long term fixture, save crowbarring Robinson into a job.

Banquo wrote:

Digby wrote:

Banquo wrote: Have to say its a bit ar5e about face to start coaching the pack in one style and then hope the long term head coach is ok with it. My proposition is simple- get a good head coach in, who appoints/brings a forward coach with him.

Both plans have issues, that the style of the interim coach suits another coach down the line, or that a head coach trying to improve multiple areas from the off ever gets as far as chasing their own tail

ah, but I didnt say that; head coach might actually come in, identify key area as forwards and let that settle down. A good head coach with a plan, there you go. I'm not understanding the objection to simply appointing a head coach as a long term fixture, save crowbarring Robinson into a job.

I don't have an objection to any approach in advance. I only think the board should have a clear understanding of who they're hiring and why, and what the trigger points for the next steps will be

Digby wrote:

Banquo wrote:

Digby wrote:
Both plans have issues, that the style of the interim coach suits another coach down the line, or that a head coach trying to improve multiple areas from the off ever gets as far as chasing their own tail

ah, but I didnt say that; head coach might actually come in, identify key area as forwards and let that settle down. A good head coach with a plan, there you go. I'm not understanding the objection to simply appointing a head coach as a long term fixture, save crowbarring Robinson into a job.

I don't have an objection to any approach in advance. I only think the board should have a clear understanding of who they're hiring and why, and what the trigger points for the next steps will be

Ok, well that's not clear from the way you were pushing Robinsons case and decrying a head coach on the grounds they'd fiddle with everything (which tbh is pretty much their ongoing job, continuous improvement).

I didn't bring Robinson up, I'm only saying if you wanted to phase improvements and were happy in the first instance to see a pack built and then progress again that Robinson is a pretty good choice. Given they've already allowed the coach they sacked to hire backs like Horne and Biggar I can't see it being a plan that suits Saints unless they embrace a monstrous turnover of players

Digby wrote:I didn't bring Robinson up, I'm only saying if you wanted to phase improvements and were happy in the first instance to see a pack built and then progress again that Robinson is a pretty good choice. Given they've already allowed the coach they sacked to hire backs like Horne and Biggar I can't see it being a plan that suits Saints unless they embrace a monstrous turnover of players

Robinson was brought up as a joke, clearly, but you ran with it, in extremis in my view

Banquo wrote:

Digby wrote:I didn't bring Robinson up, I'm only saying if you wanted to phase improvements and were happy in the first instance to see a pack built and then progress again that Robinson is a pretty good choice. Given they've already allowed the coach they sacked to hire backs like Horne and Biggar I can't see it being a plan that suits Saints unless they embrace a monstrous turnover of players

Robinson was brought up as a joke, clearly, but you ran with it, in extremis in my view

Possible he was brought up as a joke, and yet for all I'll deride some of his competencies I see no reason not to retain a lot of respect for his work as a forwards coach

Digby wrote:

Banquo wrote:

Digby wrote:I didn't bring Robinson up, I'm only saying if you wanted to phase improvements and were happy in the first instance to see a pack built and then progress again that Robinson is a pretty good choice. Given they've already allowed the coach they sacked to hire backs like Horne and Biggar I can't see it being a plan that suits Saints unless they embrace a monstrous turnover of players

Robinson was brought up as a joke, clearly, but you ran with it, in extremis in my view

Possible he was brought up as a joke, and yet for all I'll deride some of his competencies I see no reason not to retain a lot of respect for his work as a forwards coach

Good for you. I hope Saints don't agree with your stop gap solution.

Banquo wrote:

Digby wrote:

Banquo wrote: Robinson was brought up as a joke, clearly, but you ran with it, in extremis in my view

Possible he was brought up as a joke, and yet for all I'll deride some of his competencies I see no reason not to retain a lot of respect for his work as a forwards coach

Good for you. I hope Saints don't agree with your stop gap solution.

A stop gap or that stop gap? Gary Gold would be another of recent times who's shown he can offer improvement in the pack, and still look like you'd then need to replace him to see the team develop as one would hopefully want. The ideal of course is to improve everything from the off, but the ideal isn't always available

Digby wrote:

Banquo wrote:

Digby wrote:
Possible he was brought up as a joke, and yet for all I'll deride some of his competencies I see no reason not to retain a lot of respect for his work as a forwards coach

Good for you. I hope Saints don't agree with your stop gap solution.

A stop gap or that stop gap? Gary Gold would be another of recent times who's shown he can offer improvement in the pack, and still look like you'd then need to replace him to see the team develop as one would hopefully want. The ideal of course is to improve everything from the off, but the ideal isn't always available

Both, tbh. And round we go.

twitchy wrote:https://www.therugbypaper.co.uk/feature ... on-saints/

Ouch

I read that last night, and parts of it certainly confirm the huge number of rumours surrounding Dorian West. I had heard about Matfield's offer of help with coaching the younger forwards being knocked back before, but this is the first direct quote from an ex-player I have seen about it. Absolute madness that situation.

Interestingly I see Paul Gustard has been in this week helping to coach the defence. At least we're seeing that Dickens is open and encouraging outside involvement, rather than keeping a closed court of people who have been involved only with Saints recently.

“If we’d beateb Worcester and Newcastle we’d be in fourth.” Blimey, that sums it all up in one sentence.

Also, who the hell hires Matfield just to hit rucks and the like.

Doesnt mention that the squad is an absolute shadow of what it was 4 years ago, but that's ultimately down to Mallinder too.

I rather thought they were heading down post the European final loss to Leinster. I know they won the AP more recently but that papered over some cracks and allowed Mallinder to continue in a role he wasn't delivering on. So the squad is less than it was 4 years back, but even that was down from 6-7 seasons back.

Digby wrote:I rather thought they were heading down post the European final loss to Leinster. I know they won the AP more recently but that papered over some cracks and allowed Mallinder to continue in a role he wasn't delivering on. So the squad is less than it was 4 years back, but even that was down from 6-7 seasons back.

tru enuff. Somewhat less than a shadow of 2011 then

nothing in the article comes as a great shock but it is quite damning about the coaches and the management generally.

really something should have happened well before now.

Is there any fresh speculation on a new coach?