RugbyRebels

Eugene Wrayburn wrote:SoM, my apologies. I used his complete distortion of your reasonable point - which seems to say the complete reverse of what he says in his post - and blamed you for it.

Bullshit, don't blame me for your inability to read and understand a post.

Mikeyv wrote:

Eugene Wrayburn wrote:SoM, my apologies. I used his complete distortion of your reasonable point - which seems to say the complete reverse of what he says in his post - and blamed you for it.

Bullshit, don't blame me for your inability to read and understand a post.

Maybe you could then explain to me how you reconcile his point - that this year is an aberaation - with "it seems to me that you stand a better chance of doing well in this league if you don't have team Wales players, particularly with the way the season is structured, and that can't be a good thing." and maybe you could also explain why the Os have been the top Welsh team every year since 2008 if your quoted impression were even vaguely accurate.

What would the record be for the longest test coach tenure (for a single nation) before either losing the dressing room or failing to maintain results?

Even the best coaches go stale after a while, I reckon, without a change in environment

Eugene Wrayburn wrote:

Mikeyv wrote:

Eugene Wrayburn wrote:SoM, my apologies. I used his complete distortion of your reasonable point - which seems to say the complete reverse of what he says in his post - and blamed you for it.

Bullshit, don't blame me for your inability to read and understand a post.

Maybe you could then explain to me how you reconcile his point - that this year is an aberaation - with "it seems to me that you stand a better chance of doing well in this league if you don't have team Wales players, particularly with the way the season is structured, and that can't be a good thing." and maybe you could also explain why the Os have been the top Welsh team every year since 2008 if your quoted impression were even vaguely accurate.

He's obviously correct in saying that a WC season exacerbates the effect, but I maintain that having such a disproportionate number of the Welsh squad, can count against the Ospreys, over the course of any season.

Lizard wrote:What would the record be for the longest test coach tenure (for a single nation) before either losing the dressing room or failing to maintain results?

Even the best coaches go stale after a while, I reckon, without a change in environment

I can't join in with the sentiment that Gatland has always been shyte and got lucky somehow. Following the Jenkins era he brought a much needed dose of professionalism and at some points, his game plan has been effective and looked decent. The 2011 RWC saw us play some decent rugby. Barring the sending off of Sam, we would surely have made the final and that would have been a superb achievement.

But, the game evolves and we have been stuck in the mud for a while. One pundit made the point that Wales look uncomfortable in open play, which is a terrible accusation against us (I think it's a bit inaccurate as well) but we have certainly become predictable. All coaching groups have their shelf lives and ours has reached its use by date. If it's too expensive to sack Gatland then we need to look at the assistants. However I think Gatland is wedded to the current philosophy too much to tolerate change so it might have to be a cost worth paying to make us competitive for the next RWC. If change is going to happen, this is the time to do it.

Sandydragon wrote:

Lizard wrote:What would the record be for the longest test coach tenure (for a single nation) before either losing the dressing room or failing to maintain results?

Even the best coaches go stale after a while, I reckon, without a change in environment

I can't join in with the sentiment that Gatland has always been shyte and got lucky somehow. Following the Jenkins era he brought a much needed dose of professionalism and at some points, his game plan has been effective and looked decent. The 2011 RWC saw us play some decent rugby. Barring the sending off of Sam, we would surely have made the final and that would have been a superb achievement.

But, the game evolves and we have been stuck in the mud for a while. One pundit made the point that Wales look uncomfortable in open play, which is a terrible accusation against us (I think it's a bit inaccurate as well) but we have certainly become predictable. All coaching groups have their shelf lives and ours has reached its use by date. If it's too expensive to sack Gatland then we need to look at the assistants. However I think Gatland is wedded to the current philosophy too much to tolerate change so it might have to be a cost worth paying to make us competitive for the next RWC. If change is going to happen, this is the time to do it.

Great achievement, yes, but masking that you'd have lost to the same teams you always lose to playing the same brand of rugby you always play. I'd say he did get lucky in having Shane Williams who for a while made the style look more than it was - albeit he also had to have the sense to pick him and let him rove free. Without "give it to Shane" it looks as limited.

Eugene Wrayburn wrote:

Sandydragon wrote:

Lizard wrote:What would the record be for the longest test coach tenure (for a single nation) before either losing the dressing room or failing to maintain results?

Even the best coaches go stale after a while, I reckon, without a change in environment

I can't join in with the sentiment that Gatland has always been shyte and got lucky somehow. Following the Jenkins era he brought a much needed dose of professionalism and at some points, his game plan has been effective and looked decent. The 2011 RWC saw us play some decent rugby. Barring the sending off of Sam, we would surely have made the final and that would have been a superb achievement.

But, the game evolves and we have been stuck in the mud for a while. One pundit made the point that Wales look uncomfortable in open play, which is a terrible accusation against us (I think it's a bit inaccurate as well) but we have certainly become predictable. All coaching groups have their shelf lives and ours has reached its use by date. If it's too expensive to sack Gatland then we need to look at the assistants. However I think Gatland is wedded to the current philosophy too much to tolerate change so it might have to be a cost worth paying to make us competitive for the next RWC. If change is going to happen, this is the time to do it.

Great achievement, yes, but masking that you'd have lost to the same teams you always lose to playing the same brand of rugby you always play. I'd say he did get lucky in having Shane Williams who for a while made the style look more than it was - albeit he also had to have the sense to pick him and let him rove free. Without "give it to Shane" it looks as limited.

Credit to Priestland as well who added a lot to our back line when on top form. Gatlandball was good enough for three six nations championships and a winning lions tour, plus that semi appearance,but the same moves on and wended a shake up. I think we can acknowledge the successes of this Welsh team without losing sight of the current situation.

Sandydragon wrote:

Eugene Wrayburn wrote:

Sandydragon wrote: I can't join in with the sentiment that Gatland has always been shyte and got lucky somehow. Following the Jenkins era he brought a much needed dose of professionalism and at some points, his game plan has been effective and looked decent. The 2011 RWC saw us play some decent rugby. Barring the sending off of Sam, we would surely have made the final and that would have been a superb achievement.

But, the game evolves and we have been stuck in the mud for a while. One pundit made the point that Wales look uncomfortable in open play, which is a terrible accusation against us (I think it's a bit inaccurate as well) but we have certainly become predictable. All coaching groups have their shelf lives and ours has reached its use by date. If it's too expensive to sack Gatland then we need to look at the assistants. However I think Gatland is wedded to the current philosophy too much to tolerate change so it might have to be a cost worth paying to make us competitive for the next RWC. If change is going to happen, this is the time to do it.

Great achievement, yes, but masking that you'd have lost to the same teams you always lose to playing the same brand of rugby you always play. I'd say he did get lucky in having Shane Williams who for a while made the style look more than it was - albeit he also had to have the sense to pick him and let him rove free. Without "give it to Shane" it looks as limited.

Credit to Priestland as well who added a lot to our back line when on top form. Gatlandball was good enough for three six nations championships and a winning lions tour, plus that semi appearance,but the same moves on and wended a shake up. I think we can acknowledge the successes of this Welsh team without losing sight of the current situation.

It's good enough to beat 6N teams or the Wallabies (just) at their lowest ebb, with the assistance of the best players from 4 nations. If you're happy with that then grand. However the results against the SH sides are worse than any other 6N side save Italy.

Eugene Wrayburn wrote:

Sandydragon wrote:

Eugene Wrayburn wrote:Great achievement, yes, but masking that you'd have lost to the same teams you always lose to playing the same brand of rugby you always play. I'd say he did get lucky in having Shane Williams who for a while made the style look more than it was - albeit he also had to have the sense to pick him and let him rove free. Without "give it to Shane" it looks as limited.

Credit to Priestland as well who added a lot to our back line when on top form. Gatlandball was good enough for three six nations championships and a winning lions tour, plus that semi appearance,but the same moves on and wended a shake up. I think we can acknowledge the successes of this Welsh team without losing sight of the current situation.

It's good enough to beat 6N teams or the Wallabies (just) at their lowest ebb, with the assistance of the best players from 4 nations. If you're happy with that then grand. However the results against the SH sides are worse than any other 6N side save Italy.

Of course Im not happy at losing to the SH sides. But equally, I don't subscribe to this digital view of Gatland where he is either brilliant or shyte. His NH record is very good. For many traditional Welsh supporters, the only thing that matters is the Six Nations and in that we have done very well. I would have like to see play evolve and for us to take some SH scalps, but that hasn't happened and its becoming increasingly obvious that a shake up is needed. But whilst acknowledging that changes are needed, Im not going to ignore the positive contribution he has made, compared to the previous reign.

Equally, whilst the series was 2-1, the final test demolition of Australia using a largely Welsh team employing Gatlands tactics was hardly an accident and he remains one of the few Lions coaches to have actually won anything. The fact that he did so by annoying so many irish fans by dropping BOD is largely irrelevant to anyone outside of Ireland.

Sandydragon wrote: Credit to Priestland as well who added a lot to our back line when on top form. Gatlandball was good enough for three six nations championships and a winning lions tour, plus that semi appearance,but the same moves on and wended a shake up. I think we can acknowledge the successes of this Welsh team without losing sight of the current situation.

It was Biggar who missed two penalty touchfinders? That's not acceptable, 'specially as you scored from a penalty/line-out in the first half. At least Ford found touch with his kicks, dscounting the mare at goal.
BTW - wrt the Cole "knockon". Happy to see the try awarded as an Eng supporter, but it was confused by the TMO. You couldnt really see what happened from the TV feed and I suppose the TMO could not overrule? In the old days the ref would have blown for a knock-on?

loudnconfident wrote:

Sandydragon wrote: Credit to Priestland as well who added a lot to our back line when on top form. Gatlandball was good enough for three six nations championships and a winning lions tour, plus that semi appearance,but the same moves on and wended a shake up. I think we can acknowledge the successes of this Welsh team without losing sight of the current situation.

It was Biggar who missed two penalty touchfinders? That's not acceptable, 'specially as you scored from a penalty/line-out in the first half. At least Ford found touch with his kicks, dscounting the mare at goal.
BTW - wrt the Cole "knockon". Happy to see the try awarded as an Eng supporter, but it was confused by the TMO. You couldnt really see what happened from the TV feed and I suppose the TMO could not overrule? In the old days the ref would have blown for a knock-on?

I didn't hear the referees question. if it was "is there any reason why I cannot award a try?' then I can see how we cane to the conclusion as there was no clear (from the angles shown at the time) example of the kick on. I thought the spider cam gave a better angle but its not clear if he looked at that.

I disagree with the decision as I was, and still am, convinced that it was a knock on. But sometimes decisions go against you and we have suffered from worse over the years. I was disappointed that it seemed to affect us immediately afterwards.

Sandydragon wrote:

loudnconfident wrote:

Sandydragon wrote: Credit to Priestland as well who added a lot to our back line when on top form. Gatlandball was good enough for three six nations championships and a winning lions tour, plus that semi appearance,but the same moves on and wended a shake up. I think we can acknowledge the successes of this Welsh team without losing sight of the current situation.

It was Biggar who missed two penalty touchfinders? That's not acceptable, 'specially as you scored from a penalty/line-out in the first half. At least Ford found touch with his kicks, dscounting the mare at goal.
BTW - wrt the Cole "knockon". Happy to see the try awarded as an Eng supporter, but it was confused by the TMO. You couldnt really see what happened from the TV feed and I suppose the TMO could not overrule? In the old days the ref would have blown for a knock-on?

I didn't hear the referees question. if it was "is there any reason why I cannot award a try?' then I can see how we cane to the conclusion as there was no clear (from the angles shown at the time) example of the kick on. I thought the spider cam gave a better angle but its not clear if he looked at that.

I disagree with the decision as I was, and still am, convinced that it was a knock on. But sometimes decisions go against you and we have suffered from worse over the years. I was disappointed that it seemed to affect us immediately afterwards.

We were very unlucky with this one, but given the video available I think the TMO made the right call.

What I find worrying is that Gatland apparently doesn't understand the laws of the game: ie a knock on is only a knock on if the ball goes forward.

Sandydragon wrote:

Eugene Wrayburn wrote:

Sandydragon wrote: Credit to Priestland as well who added a lot to our back line when on top form. Gatlandball was good enough for three six nations championships and a winning lions tour, plus that semi appearance,but the same moves on and wended a shake up. I think we can acknowledge the successes of this Welsh team without losing sight of the current situation.

It's good enough to beat 6N teams or the Wallabies (just) at their lowest ebb, with the assistance of the best players from 4 nations. If you're happy with that then grand. However the results against the SH sides are worse than any other 6N side save Italy.

Of course Im not happy at losing to the SH sides. But equally, I don't subscribe to this digital view of Gatland where he is either brilliant or shyte. His NH record is very good. For many traditional Welsh supporters, the only thing that matters is the Six Nations and in that we have done very well. I would have like to see play evolve and for us to take some SH scalps, but that hasn't happened and its becoming increasingly obvious that a shake up is needed. But whilst acknowledging that changes are needed, Im not going to ignore the positive contribution he has made, compared to the previous reign.

Equally, whilst the series was 2-1, the final test demolition of Australia using a largely Welsh team employing Gatlands tactics was hardly an accident and he remains one of the few Lions coaches to have actually won anything. The fact that he did so by annoying so many irish fans by dropping BOD is largely irrelevant to anyone outside of Ireland.

Gatland is a good coach. He's very solid - his arrival tightened things up and made us more consistent and effective, especially against similar or weaker teams (eg he still has a clean sheet against Scotland and Italy, whereas previously we could be expected to trip up over those teams every few years).

BUT there's a real lack of effective attack (ie the ability to turn possession into points) when faced with an organised defence. Against weaker teams this is fine, we break them down over the course of 80 minutes (and I think this was true of the last Lions match against AUS - we really were the stronger team). Against good defences we are relying on a moment of luck or genius to get points. That was reasonable when we had Shane, he really did make us look multidimensional, but now such moments are very rare (eg Scott Williams vs ENG 2012, Lloyd Williams and Gareth Davies vs ENG 2015). And against NZ or AUS (when not at a low ebb) we have no answers, no way to score the multiple tries to keep in touch with them.

So either Gatland needs to find (and select) at least a couple of creative geniuses or he needs to change his tactics and/or attack coach or he needs to go. He's not going to make any changes OR go, so I'm left hoping that we can find or develop some creative players who can make something out of nothing. Which is why I like to see the likes of Tipuric, Nipper, (at one time, Hook) playing (not that I'm claiming these guys are without their flaws). If I was in charge of the WRU I would be pressing Gatland to justify his tactics and retention of his coaching team, and if the answers were not satisfactory, he'd be shown the door (assuming Gatland's contract gives the WRU any options) or forced to ditch Howley.

Of course, if last Sunday's game is an indication, we have much greater problems - ie our defence is no longer effective. Let's hope this was a blip. Alternatively (and a hate to think this, but...) it could be that England under Jones have stepped up to a higher level (comparable to SA & AUS), and the Gatland's Wales - although no worse than 2015 - just doesn't cut it any more against England. Yikes.

I see that Gatland has given up tossing hand grenades into opposition dressing rooms these days . He's either lost his mojo or his copy of Military Weapons Are Us magazine .

For me, Gatland needs a strong pack. He's had one throughout his regime. Jenkins, AJones, AWJ was a world class backbone for any pack. But now I look at that front row and it just does not seem anywhere near the standard required to play how Gatland wants to. And he doesn't seem to adapt.

I feel like I watched a different match to some of you guys. Your back line wasn't the problem. The problem is it pretty much never got to attack near the English posts and that's because every time the ball went in your half, one of three things happened

1) Your attack would make a great break but run out of support. Only time it didn't happen, Rhys Webb passed away from the support.
2) You turn the ball over and England score a try (at least twice).
3) England would concede a dumb penalty, you'd kick for touch, and it would all go horribly wrong. Biggar misses touch twice. Three line out steals. One lineout won, but given to Joe Launchbury. Two mauls end with an England player running away with the ball. One ends in a Kvesic turnover. That's 8 attacking platforms that go wrong without anyone outside 10 having the slightest involvement and you can't win matches like that. Can't and won't.

That was Wales big problem. They couldn't establish a platform to save their lives. That's the pack's fault, that's Biggar's fault, that Webb's fault for some poor box kicking... it's a bit the back three's fault as they didn't always deal too well with England's tactical kicking, but they're pretty far down the blame list here.

Given how you scored in your one non-aborted attempt in our 22, and that your back line made 6 clean breaks... not the problem. As long as someone supports them.


I'm not sure whether Gatland is the man but those were the problems as I saw them.

Son of Mathonwy wrote:

Sandydragon wrote:

Eugene Wrayburn wrote:
It's good enough to beat 6N teams or the Wallabies (just) at their lowest ebb, with the assistance of the best players from 4 nations. If you're happy with that then grand. However the results against the SH sides are worse than any other 6N side save Italy.

Of course Im not happy at losing to the SH sides. But equally, I don't subscribe to this digital view of Gatland where he is either brilliant or shyte. His NH record is very good. For many traditional Welsh supporters, the only thing that matters is the Six Nations and in that we have done very well. I would have like to see play evolve and for us to take some SH scalps, but that hasn't happened and its becoming increasingly obvious that a shake up is needed. But whilst acknowledging that changes are needed, Im not going to ignore the positive contribution he has made, compared to the previous reign.

Equally, whilst the series was 2-1, the final test demolition of Australia using a largely Welsh team employing Gatlands tactics was hardly an accident and he remains one of the few Lions coaches to have actually won anything. The fact that he did so by annoying so many irish fans by dropping BOD is largely irrelevant to anyone outside of Ireland.

Gatland is a good coach. He's very solid - his arrival tightened things up and made us more consistent and effective, especially against similar or weaker teams (eg he still has a clean sheet against Scotland and Italy, whereas previously we could be expected to trip up over those teams every few years).

BUT there's a real lack of effective attack (ie the ability to turn possession into points) when faced with an organised defence. Against weaker teams this is fine, we break them down over the course of 80 minutes (and I think this was true of the last Lions match against AUS - we really were the stronger team). Against good defences we are relying on a moment of luck or genius to get points. That was reasonable when we had Shane, he really did make us look multidimensional, but now such moments are very rare (eg Scott Williams vs ENG 2012, Lloyd Williams and Gareth Davies vs ENG 2015). And against NZ or AUS (when not at a low ebb) we have no answers, no way to score the multiple tries to keep in touch with them.

So either Gatland needs to find (and select) at least a couple of creative geniuses or he needs to change his tactics and/or attack coach or he needs to go. He's not going to make any changes OR go, so I'm left hoping that we can find or develop some creative players who can make something out of nothing. Which is why I like to see the likes of Tipuric, Nipper, (at one time, Hook) playing (not that I'm claiming these guys are without their flaws). If I was in charge of the WRU I would be pressing Gatland to justify his tactics and retention of his coaching team, and if the answers were not satisfactory, he'd be shown the door (assuming Gatland's contract gives the WRU any options) or forced to ditch Howley.

Of course, if last Sunday's game is an indication, we have much greater problems - ie our defence is no longer effective. Let's hope this was a blip. Alternatively (and a hate to think this, but...) it could be that England under Jones have stepped up to a higher level (comparable to SA & AUS), and the Gatland's Wales - although no worse than 2015 - just doesn't cut it any more against England. Yikes.

Agreed that we have much bigger problems. If we had played Gatlandball effectively and still lost by 5 tries to one, it would have been an utter failure of that system and tactic, but Gatlanball doesn't call for missing 20+ tackles or losing the ball that many times. In fact, no system can survive that.

Before we look at the tactics, and even at our best we have struggled to unlock the best defenses (without Shane), what the hell is wrong with our players? Are they confused by the apparent change in tactics and struggling to adapt, or, has Gatland lost the dressing room?

Get rid.

We've then got plenty of time for a new coach to bed in and start getting results.

He's got to go. I'm bored of watching Wales. That never happened, even in the darkest of days.

To be honest we've had some decent success with Gatland and co interspersed with predictable disappointment against Southern Hemisphere opposition. If he goes now he would go with good will, even if it should really have been a couple of years ago.