Geekzone Rugby (Union) Discussion Thread

Forums › Sports › Geekzone Rugby (Union) Discussion Thread

1 | ... | 657 | 658 | 659 | 660 | 661 | 662 | 663 | 664 | 665 | 666 | 667 | ... | 677

Networkn
32873 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 15475

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#3454844 21-Jan-2026 12:42

This is a pretty decent video. Squidge isn't someone I am in love with, however, his observations, esp in the first 15 minutes seem on the money.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z-jgFdhs908

Some comments specifically. The 2025 AB's weren't signifcantly better at the end of that year. I think there had been some significant progress, our exits were on the whole very good after being terrible in 2024, and I think our set peice had improved.

Our defence just wasn't good enough. There were times it was titanic, and other times, swiss cheese, and that had to be addressed.

Kicking was a major problem for us, and in my view, the issue with why our backs weren't firing, was we were going wide too early.

Overall though, as others and myself have commented, the messaging from the coaches wasn't simple and straightforward enough. People didn't have a clear enough understanding of when and where they were supposed to be, and in those games, our defence was lacking too.

networkn

Networkn
32873 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 15475

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#3454993 22-Jan-2026 09:40

https://www.newstalkzb.co.nz/on-air/mike-hosking-breakfast/audio/tony-brown-springboks-assistant-coach-on-the-all-blacks-coaching-saga-scott-robertsons-departure/

Brown confirms he will honor his contract with the Boks. Never say never, but his messaging has been very consistent.

I wonder where that leaves JJ. One might conclude it's now or never for JJ, MacMillan would likely be a strong contender to take over post 2027 I'd imagine. It's not infeasible that JJ skips this time around and plans for 2028 with TB.

Increasingly I am wondering if a caretaker like Wayne Smith, if Joe Schmidt wants to take over.

JPNZ

1717 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 842

#3455941 26-Jan-2026 09:47

Joe Schmidt is out of the race as well.

"Outgoing Wallabies coach Joe Schmidt has ruled himself out of contention for the vacant All Blacks job after informing NZ Rugby he will remain loyal to the Wallabies and Australian rugby through to the 2027 World Cup.

Schmidt, who will finish up as Wallabies coach in July, was sounded out by NZ Rugby about his interest in making a return to the All Blacks following Scott Robertson’s sacking on January 15, according to sources with knowledge of the matter who cannot comment publicly.

Schmidt has been one of the leading figures being touted in New Zealand as a potential replacement for Robertson, along with Jamie Joseph and Dave Rennie."

Panasonic 65GZ1000, Onkyo RZ730, Atmos 5.1.2, AppleTV 4K, Nest Mini's, PS5, PS3, MacbookPro, iPad Pro, Apple watch SE2, iPhone 15+

networkn

Networkn
32873 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 15475

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#3455946 26-Jan-2026 10:00

So, it's been a week and all that appears to have happened, is more and more of the choices most people would have made for a replacement are no longer. Schmidt has ruled himself out of the job, saying it wouldn't be right to change allegencies half way through a cycle despite no longer going to be in charge of the Wallabies. Tony Brown has said, nope, I won't be helping out Jamie Joseph, and now Wayne Smith has said he is heading overseas to a (likely European) Club and won't be assisting the AB's. The Wayne Smith thing isn't to do with the departure of Robertson, but he has been highly critical of NZR for the decision, more or less saying he was blindsided and disappointed by the decision given what he saw inside the coaching setup of the AB's during him time most recently. Clayton MacMillan has ruled himself out, as happy to finish his stint under contract.

That leaves JJ (who apparently has said he woudn't take the role without Brown but will likely do it anyway, and for whom he will be leaving the Highlanders, or doing both jobs (lol) ), and God help us, Dave Rennie, whos teams displinary records and recent coaching record is absolutely abysmall.

Of course, I guess Steve Hansen or Foster could still be in the mix though quite frankly why Foster would do the NZ Public or NZR any favours after the way they treated him the first time, is beyond me. Michael Chieka is more or less available. John Mitchell. Kevn Rouet is a name tossed out, but that's a big jump up. Robbie Deans? He's been out of top tier Rugby for so long now... Gatland? LOL.

It's hard to believe that they would have let Robertson leave without having a really strong couple of options at least who they sounded out first who had said they would be likely contenders.

LookingUp

440 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 88

#3455952 26-Jan-2026 10:26

Well done NZRFU! It was a GREAT piece of strategy to let your current coach go before you had a replacement plan in place, unless they have someone locked in in the background, which we can only hope, as it seems that the options are thinning. I guess they need to "go through the process" before they make their predetermined appointment, but are they even doing that at the moment? If they don't have Plan B already well underway and something announced shortly then THEY need to be the ones to go, and someone needs to do some serious grovelling to get Razor back before he signs elsewhere.

That said, even if they could get Razor back if things aren't resolved soon, if I was him I'd want full disclosure of who said what if it was a player issue (versus a Board issue), so that conversations could be had with those who are unhappy, and resolutions found if possible. I would be very interesting to know why Leon McDonald left so early in the piece - was it Razor, or was it constraints that were put on Razor that trickled down and caused the issue?

Things are LookingUp.... A photo from my back yard :-)

networkn

Networkn
32873 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 15475

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#3455970 26-Jan-2026 11:35

LookingUp:

Well done NZRFU! It was a GREAT piece of strategy to let your current coach go before you had a replacement plan in place, unless they have someone locked in in the background, which we can only hope, as it seems that the options are thinning. I guess they need to "go through the process" before they make their predetermined appointment, but are they even doing that at the moment? If they don't have Plan B already well underway and something announced shortly then THEY need to be the ones to go, and someone needs to do some serious grovelling to get Razor back before he signs elsewhere.

That said, even if they could get Razor back if things aren't resolved soon, if I was him I'd want full disclosure of who said what if it was a player issue (versus a Board issue), so that conversations could be had with those who are unhappy, and resolutions found if possible. I would be very interesting to know why Leon McDonald left so early in the piece - was it Razor, or was it constraints that were put on Razor that trickled down and caused the issue?

That would be some turn around, and would need to happen with the resignation of perhaps Kirk (Who initally I was happy with the appointment of, but now believe has made his first massive decision and it's looking like it's going to be a cluster).

I alluded to the fact that I think Razor offered his resignation, believing he could fix the issues, but probably not fast enough to satisfy NZR. I have wild respect for Foster who stayed, despite the clear lack of buy in from the public, and I said most coaches would have walked. Razer, I think, decided to walk (and perhaps his ego tripped him up here).

I disagree about the needing to know who said what. There would probably need to be 1:1 meetings with Razor and Ardie potentially, but the rest, their feedback should/could remain anonymous and instead get the entire coaching group and player group together and have a pretty honest talk.

If I was Razor, I wouldn't have resigned before hearing the feedback, getting everyone together, putting the feedback up on a big screen, asking if players wanted to own it, or just have a general discussion around it. At the end of that, then he could decide if it was feasible to get the locker room back.

The concept would be people were free to speak their minds without fear of consequences, and at the end the players could decide who stayed and went. There is a balance to be had though, because the players should have a say, but not be in control.

Obviously, none of us have real insight into the actual feedback, what was said, and what was done. I know I have lost respect for Ardie for making his opinion public. On that alone, it would rule him out of captaincy contention. I think he is an incredible athlete, and rugby player, and what he has achiveved in his career, however, no-one is bigger than the team and quite frankly, this is how Australia went down the gurgler, letting players have the power over the coaches, and interference in selections from the board and other influencal parties. I'd attribute similar issues with the decline of the Blues and Warriors.

Regardless of everything else, Razor was incredible at getting more and more from his Crusaders players, and for being able to turn around players struggling in other teams to perform in his environment. The Crusaders during his tenure achieved incredible things, including one of the heaviest injury crisis of any super rugby season, to win a title again, away from home.

It's quite hard to understand how it's gone from that to this. As a semi casual observer, it feels like potentially resentment built up and wasn't dealt with early enough, which caused bigger problems. As I like to say when managing my people, let's talk early when there is a problem, it's easier to catch a snowball than an avalanche.

HP

Shop now for HP laptops and other devices (affiliate link).

networkn

Networkn
32873 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 15475

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#3456289 27-Jan-2026 09:10

Vern Cotter is not an option any longer, he is leaving the Blues for the Queensland Reds at the end of this season!

LookingUp

440 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 88

#3456294 27-Jan-2026 09:39

networkn:

I disagree about the needing to know who said what. There would probably need to be 1:1 meetings with Razor and Ardie potentially, but the rest, their feedback should/could remain anonymous and instead get the entire coaching group and player group together and have a pretty honest talk.

I'm not so sure on that one. Definitely 1:1 meetings with each squad member, but one also needs to know who put the knife in. Some will answer 1:1 questions honestly, and they're keepers, but it's the cowards and stirrers who won't admit their accusations but will continue to fester and ferment in the background who have to be found and excluded from future squads.

I expect that the new coaching team, if they manage to assemble one, will have a brief honeymoon period before the wheels fall off again unless the underlying issue is found and addressed, unless it WAS all on Robertson, as hard as that is to believe given his long tenures of sustained success and admirable squad harmony with Canterbury and then the Crusaders.

Things are LookingUp.... A photo from my back yard :-)

networkn

Networkn
32873 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 15475

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#3456354 27-Jan-2026 10:12

LookingUp:

I'm not so sure on that one. Definitely 1:1 meetings with each squad member, but one also needs to know who put the knife in. Some will answer 1:1 questions honestly, and they're keepers, but it's the cowards and stirrers who won't admit their accusations but will continue to fester and ferment in the background who have to be found and excluded from future squads.

I expect that the new coaching team, if they manage to assemble one, will have a brief honeymoon period before the wheels fall off again unless the underlying issue is found and addressed, unless it WAS all on Robertson, as hard as that is to believe given his long tenures of sustained success and admirable squad harmony with Canterbury and then the Crusaders.

The problem is that if you punish people for their feedback, they stop offering it. People don't usually come to work to do a bad job. Communication and expectation have clearly not been aligned. Whomever is responsible for that (and it's likely more than one person or group) needs to find a better way. This is Robertsons job if he had kept it. In my view, you take your feedback, you work out what is valid and if the issues can be resolved (and you'll never keep everyone happy), you chart a course, it's communicated and stuck to consistently, and you do what you say you'll do and hold yourself and those around you accountable. This is the basic tenants of people management. Those who can't get onboard will move on or be naturally excluded from the group.

Simon Sinek does an awesome video you can find on youtube for 'start with why' and I believe this is how you fix a culture problem, if indeed one exists. In a group with a strong culture, it's less of a problem to manage people out. If the group believes in one thing and someone comes along who can't get onboard, they usually move on of their own accord.

In my view Robertson was overly niave and probably got overwhelmed by the job somewhat. The head coach of the AB's is a massive role and I suspect his ego and perhaps some lack of EQ, along with public pressure, has led to decisions and outcomes which have made the situation worse.

networkn

Networkn
32873 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 15475

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#3456356 27-Jan-2026 10:18

The more that I read about this review, and with what is going on in talent pool, it seems pretty clear they are setting the role up for JJ and are simply going through the motions of pretending it was a wide and thorough search. What an absolute clown show.

LookingUp

440 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 88

#3456369 27-Jan-2026 11:04

networkn:

LookingUp:

I'm not so sure on that one. Definitely 1:1 meetings with each squad member, but one also needs to know who put the knife in. Some will answer 1:1 questions honestly, and they're keepers, but it's the cowards and stirrers who won't admit their accusations but will continue to fester and ferment in the background who have to be found and excluded from future squads.

I expect that the new coaching team, if they manage to assemble one, will have a brief honeymoon period before the wheels fall off again unless the underlying issue is found and addressed, unless it WAS all on Robertson, as hard as that is to believe given his long tenures of sustained success and admirable squad harmony with Canterbury and then the Crusaders.

The problem is that if you punish people for their feedback, they stop offering it. People don't usually come to work to do a bad job. Communication and expectation have clearly not been aligned. Whomever is responsible for that (and it's likely more than one person or group) needs to find a better way. This is Robertsons job if he had kept it. In my view, you take your feedback, you work out what is valid and if the issues can be resolved (and you'll never keep everyone happy), you chart a course, it's communicated and stuck to consistently, and you do what you say you'll do and hold yourself and those around you accountable. This is the basic tenants of people management. Those who can't get onboard will move on or be naturally excluded from the group.

Simon Sinek does an awesome video you can find on youtube for 'start with why' and I believe this is how you fix a culture problem, if indeed one exists. In a group with a strong culture, it's less of a problem to manage people out. If the group believes in one thing and someone comes along who can't get onboard, they usually move on of their own accord.

In my view Robertson was overly niave and probably got overwhelmed by the job somewhat. The head coach of the AB's is a massive role and I suspect his ego and perhaps some lack of EQ, along with public pressure, has led to decisions and outcomes which have made the situation worse.

The issue is not the negative feedback, it's the way it was delivered. Unless Robertson was already aware of it, in which case there was no need for it to be anonymous, he should have the right to face his accusers to hear their grievances. If those with issues are too gutless to raise them directly, but are prepared to raise them behind the scenes, then they need to be found and either brought back into the fold or ejected from it. If you read the Gilbert Enoka book you'll see that processes and senior player leadership responsibilities were put in place in the 2010's to manage this sort of behaviour, and everyone was given ample opportunity to air their views in an open and supportive environment and NOT as background ferment. I was quite surprised at how seriously they took it - there was a strict code of conduct, including attitude, and ALL were held to it, including management. The result was a pretty tight group with a clear mission.

It would be very interesting to know whether these practices and processes continued into the Foster and Robertson eras, as Henry, and then Hanson, were absolutely committed to them. Strangely there's little mention of Foster in the book, but Gilbert was still involved with the ABs at that stage. I very occasionally bump into Gilbert - if I get a chance I'll ask him next time I see him...

Things are LookingUp.... A photo from my back yard :-)

Quic Broadband

Move to New Zealand's best fibre broadband service (affiliate link). Free setup code: R587125ERQ6VE. Note that to use Quic Broadband you must be comfortable with configuring your own router.

Earbanean

1111 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 377

#3456410 27-Jan-2026 14:41

Jeez this thread has descended into quite the conspiracy theory nonsense. Player revolt, Ardie lead instigator, people being knifed, Joseph being pre-planned, Razor coming back, Kirk standing down, clown show, blah, blah, blah.

By most reasonable accounts, there was a thorough, in-depth, fair process with many views canvassed and the result was the decision to remove Robertson. Kirk was asked point bank whether this was player revolt or if it was led by Savea. He categorically said no to both those questions.

Even if you think Kirk is a bare faced liar (he's not), there is no way Kevin Mealamu would be any part of a process that bowed to player revolt. He's a World Cup winning All Black centurion and it's hard to think of a player who embodies 'team first' more than Kevie. It's nonsense to say he would be anything but honest and fair.

I think some people need to step back, take a deep breath, listen to Queen Elsa and move on. I'm actually starting to get quite excited about the year ahead. New coaching team, possibly some new players, an awesome tour of SA. Maybe I'm glass half full, but some of this navel gazing dribble has been way OTT.

Moving on and thinking outside the box, what about Leon McDonald as assistant (attack) coach? Is Clark Laidlaw in the assistant frame? What about an AFL coach in as a technical consultant, focussing on the aerial game?

networkn

Networkn
32873 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 15475

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#3456421 27-Jan-2026 15:45

Earbanean:

Jeez this thread has descended into quite the conspiracy theory nonsense. Player revolt, Ardie lead instigator, people being knifed, Joseph being pre-planned, Razor coming back, Kirk standing down, clown show, blah, blah, blah.

No conspiracy theories, you have misread. Perhaps a little of your own hyperbole?

Do you think Ardie refusing to come back to the AB's was entirely fabricated by the press? Is this the sort of behaviour you expect from a senior AB? Let alone someone supposedly captain material? In all my years of following the AB's I've never seen those sort of 'rumors' come out from an end of year review.

How do you have an entirely fair and balanced review without involving one of the greatest rugby brains, someone who had oversight into the coaches and who has publically stated he thought the decision was harsh and he was blindsided and surprised not to have been included?

Kirk is generally well thought of, as is Kevin Mealamu, but that doesn't make them infallible. History is full of good people with good intentions and failed enterprise. What was Kirk supposed to say even if the players did revolt?

Perhaps Robertson being gone was the right decision, but given the number of top priority choices that have vanished from contention in the last week alone, not having someone mostly lined up as a backstop seems incredibly short sighted, but totally on brand for NZR.

I'm afraid I don't yet share your enthusiasm for the new year of Rugby. I'll feel better once the new coaches are appointed (depending on who they are), but it's a massive ask to get a team in place and performing to a decent standard in time for the tour of SA. I have fears the hiding we got in Wellington may seem like a fairy tale by comparison.

JPNZ

1717 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 842

#3456612 28-Jan-2026 08:13

Braydon Ennor off to France at the end of 2026. Obviously doesn't see any future in the AB's

Panasonic 65GZ1000, Onkyo RZ730, Atmos 5.1.2, AppleTV 4K, Nest Mini's, PS5, PS3, MacbookPro, iPad Pro, Apple watch SE2, iPhone 15+

Earbanean

1111 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 377

#3456618 28-Jan-2026 08:31

networkn:

How do you have an entirely fair and balanced review without involving one of the greatest rugby brains, someone who had oversight into the coaches and who has publically stated he thought the decision was harsh and he was blindsided and surprised not to have been included?

You've latched on to Scott Idiot Stevenson's' rant about this and gone on to state as fact here (an earlier) that Smith wasn't involved in the review. However, have you, or anyone, seen any actual evidence that he wasn't involved in any way? Yes, we all know he said he was blindsided by the OUTCOME of the review, but that doesn't necessarily mean he wasn't involved in it. I imagine a number of people involved in the review would have been blindsided by the result - Scott Barrett, Scott Hansen, etc.

Personally, I don't know whether or not he was involved - but you're making statements of fact about this. So, please feel free to back up your statements with some actual evidence (given this is Geekzone and all).

1 | ... | 657 | 658 | 659 | 660 | 661 | 662 | 663 | 664 | 665 | 666 | 667 | ... | 677