RugbyRebels

If anyone needed further proof of Woodward's twattishness, this is a good read: http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/40069682

Puja

There's a lot to pick at in there!

I thought it might be impossible to dislike Woodward less. I was wrong.

You've got to admire his self belief. Even in the face of overwhelming evidence he still thinks he got it right. Idiot.

Ah Clive, all that was required for success was even more of your ideas. Must be nice to live with no self doubt. Don't let the scoreline or the opinions of pretty much everyone else involved cloud your vision

Wow. Those last few paragraphs read like the unravelling of his remaining sanity.

Eugene Wrayburn wrote:I thought it might be impossible to dislike Woodward less. I was wrong.

Having just read his words of wisdom, I completely agree. From a guy who brought the Lions brand into serious question to comment that the South African tour 4 years later failed also is taking the piss.

His comments about a great England side were 2 years out of date. If the Lions had toured in2003, I think the English team would have been there, justifiably, en masse. But by 2005, it was clear that too many were on borrowed time and were only there on reputation.

As for splitting the squad into 2; that was totally insane. Thanks for coming Shanks, you're just here to make up the numbers in a pointless mid week game that I'd rather not play in at all, and here comes a bollocking from Alastair Campbell. Great motivation.

Shame POC didn't knock out Campbell; that would have been a great story for the media.

canta_brian wrote:Ah Clive, all that was required for success was even more of your ideas. Must be nice to live with no self doubt. Don't let the scoreline or the opinions of pretty much everyone else involved cloud your vision

Confidence and self belief are important for success, but so too the ability to learn from mistakes. This guy is in the Lord Melchett class of delusion.

Sandydragon wrote:

Eugene Wrayburn wrote:I thought it might be impossible to dislike Woodward less. I was wrong.

Having just read his words of wisdom, I completely agree. From a guy who brought the Lions brand into serious question to comment that the South African tour 4 years later failed also is taking the piss.

His comments about a great England side were 2 years out of date. If the Lions had toured in2003, I think the English team would have been there, justifiably, en masse. But by 2005, it was clear that too many were on borrowed time and were only there on reputation.

As for splitting the squad into 2; that was totally insane. Thanks for coming Shanks, you're just here to make up the numbers in a pointless mid week game that I'd rather not play in at all, and here comes a bollocking from Alastair Campbell. Great motivation.

Shame POC didn't knock out Campbell; that would have been a great story for the media.

Indeed. I'm a big Back fan, but to claim he was world class in 2005 at the age of 36 is taking the piss. Plus Dallaglio was a year retired and 33 at the time of that tour. Great players, but not in their prime in the slightest.

Puja

Is he really that dug in on such a ridiculously one-eyed opinion of his handling of that tour?

I never realised Campbell made a speech to the team. This is quite wonderful.

morepork wrote:Is he really that dug in on such a ridiculously one-eyed opinion of his handling of that tour?

Clive is never wrong - it is the universe that is incorrect when it differs from him.

Were you aware that he won a world cup? He, as a world cup winner, very rarely mentions his world cup winning world cup win, so it's understandable that you might not have known about his world cup win from when he won the world cup.

Puja

skidger wrote:I never realised Campbell made a speech to the team. This is quite wonderful.

Went down like a cup of stale yak cum by all accounts.

What's really disheartening is how much of the Woodward template Gats seems to be intent on replicating. Massive squad? Check. Too many of his own players when they finished mid-table? Check, albeit not Woodward levels of mental. At least he hasn't got 2 entirely separate coaching teams.

Eugene Wrayburn wrote:What's really disheartening is how much of the Woodward template Gats seems to be intent on replicating. Massive squad? Check. Too many of his own players when they finished mid-table? Check, albeit not Woodward levels of mental. At least he hasn't got 2 entirely separate coaching teams.

Gats has made a few disputable selections, but he is a long way off the insanity of Woodhead. Worryingly, I think a Kiwi has a better feeling for the importance of the Lions than a former England and Lions player and coach.

Clive was mental to think that England 2005 were anything like England 2003 even if many names were the same. In 2003, England had been undefeated for 3 years in 12 matches against the SH big 3. From RWC2003 until the 2005 Lions tour, they went 1 from 5 against those teams and also lost to Ireland twice, France twice and Wales.

Lizard wrote:Clive was mental to think that England 2005 were anything like England 2003 even if many names were the same. In 2003, England had been undefeated for 3 years in 12 matches against the SH big 3. From RWC2003 until the 2005 Lions tour, they went 1 from 5 against those teams and also lost to Ireland twice, France twice and Wales.

Yeah, but for some of that time Clive had stopped coaching England which will explain why they lost.

He quit shortly after the English got their shit ruined by the All Blacks and the Wallabies across 3 test matches, after which it was Andy Robinson, IIRC.

I assumed he finished after his World Cup win. Now I see he stayed long enough to lose the 6N and get tonked down south (average score 10-41).

The man is deluded.

I wonder how much of it is him doubling down in an act of defensiveness. There must be quite a few people who ask him what the fuck he was thinking in 2005.

canta_brian wrote:

Lizard wrote:Clive was mental to think that England 2005 were anything like England 2003 even if many names were the same. In 2003, England had been undefeated for 3 years in 12 matches against the SH big 3. From RWC2003 until the 2005 Lions tour, they went 1 from 5 against those teams and also lost to Ireland twice, France twice and Wales.

Yeah, but for some of that time Clive had stopped coaching England which will explain why they lost.

This. In Clive's opinion he difference will have been his leadership, at least that's what I'd suspect given his recent comments.

cashead wrote:I wonder how much of it is him doubling down in an act of defensiveness. There must be quite a few people who ask him what the fuck he was thinking in 2005.

No, that's just him. The losses in 2004 were because of the RFU not supporting him well enough, his failed venture at Southampton was because he didn't get sufficient buy-in from the players, the Lions was because... well, see that article. Self-confidence? 10/10. Self-awareness and ability to learn from his mistakes? 1/10 and that's being generous.

He has achieved entelechy as a pundit sniping from the sidelines and demanding gonzo selections like Andy Saull and Cipriani at 12. There's two very good reasons why he's never returned to coaching: clubs and unions have realised that the RWC win was probably more to do with an outstanding group of players that had innate natural leadership (and could ignore some of the wackier ideas) and secondly, I think he's aware that if he tries to interact with real rugby again it will damage his mystique and aura because it would be a f*cking disaster.

Puja

Eugene Wrayburn wrote:What's really disheartening is how much of the Woodward template Gats seems to be intent on replicating. Massive squad? Check. Too many of his own players when they finished mid-table? Check, albeit not Woodward levels of mental. At least he hasn't got 2 entirely separate coaching teams.

To be fair Eug, with regards to the squad size I think WG has taken on lessons from the last tour to Oz where they were running a bit thin in the last mid week game and used something like 43 players plus Shane Williams and Tom Court who were in and out quickly around the brumbies game. And it is still 3 less than SCW's squad. He is taking 4 more than the Australia tour and as far as I can be arsed to look it is an extra back row, a 3rd 10 rather than relying on Hogg as a 3rd 10, an extra centre/full back in Payne, and an extra back 3 player. They had to call up 5 extra centre or back 3 players so I think the additional 4 isn't that bad.

Puja wrote:

cashead wrote:I wonder how much of it is him doubling down in an act of defensiveness. There must be quite a few people who ask him what the fuck he was thinking in 2005.

No, that's just him. The losses in 2004 were because of the RFU not supporting him well enough, his failed venture at Southampton was because he didn't get sufficient buy-in from the players, the Lions was because... well, see that article. Self-confidence? 10/10. Self-awareness and ability to learn from his mistakes? 1/10 and that's being generous.

He has achieved entelechy as a pundit sniping from the sidelines and demanding gonzo selections like Andy Saull and Cipriani at 12. There's two very good reasons why he's never returned to coaching: clubs and unions have realised that the RWC win was probably more to do with an outstanding group of players that had innate natural leadership (and could ignore some of the wackier ideas) and secondly, I think he's aware that if he tries to interact with real rugby again it will damage his mystique and aura because it would be a f*cking disaster.

Puja

How the fuck did he get the England gig in the first place?

morepork wrote:

Puja wrote:

cashead wrote:I wonder how much of it is him doubling down in an act of defensiveness. There must be quite a few people who ask him what the fuck he was thinking in 2005.

No, that's just him. The losses in 2004 were because of the RFU not supporting him well enough, his failed venture at Southampton was because he didn't get sufficient buy-in from the players, the Lions was because... well, see that article. Self-confidence? 10/10. Self-awareness and ability to learn from his mistakes? 1/10 and that's being generous.

He has achieved entelechy as a pundit sniping from the sidelines and demanding gonzo selections like Andy Saull and Cipriani at 12. There's two very good reasons why he's never returned to coaching: clubs and unions have realised that the RWC win was probably more to do with an outstanding group of players that had innate natural leadership (and could ignore some of the wackier ideas) and secondly, I think he's aware that if he tries to interact with real rugby again it will damage his mystique and aura because it would be a f*cking disaster.

Puja

How the fuck did he get the England gig in the first place?

If memory serves, there were literally no other options. The RFU had been toying with getting rid of Jack Rowell for a while and had fannied about with committees and leaks to the press and calling him in for meetings and openly discussing alternatives to him, so they were understandably taken aback when Rowell decided he'd had enough and announced his retirement with a very loud unspoken "Fuck you!" All the names in the sport who'd been linked with the job made a beeline in the other direction as none of them wanted to work with the 57 old farts, and the only semi-legitimate option was Woodward, who of course *believed* in himself, despite only having had two jobs as London Irish manager and then as Bath assistant coach.

He did have some good moments and was what we needed in a lot of ways in terms of shaking things up and breaking the mould, as the entire English rugby structure was amateur, blazer run, and resistant to change. We did need a rock thrown in the lake and he did achieve a lot of good things, but there's no doubt that he was tempered by having good assistants and leadership like Johnson, Leonard, Back, Hill, Dallaglio, Dawson, Wilkinson, etc who could rein him in when the mad outweighed the genius.

Puja