HM's real record

NZ 1/7Oz 4/3Eng 4/0Wales 4/1Ireland 1/1France 1/0
A pretty decent record except for NZ, particularly against England and Oz who we played at home only 3 times. For the rest we had a clear winning record except for Ireland who we never played at home. De facto a winning record against all teams except the AB
Yes the Japanese debacle is still used to beat up the coach,  and it was stunningly embarrassing but also a very unlikely event.....like throwing six sixes in a throw, it happens, but not often. 
HM's failure was not finding a way to beat the most complete team in modern times. But after some initial losses we came close, winning 1 out 4 in 2014/2015 and losing by 2/7/4 points in a series of games in which we were very much in the hunt. 
So while the coach is being crucified by every cowardly journalist who never said much for 4 years, I thought I'd make the point....it was a winning record against all serious countries except NZ. I hope the new team will do better, but they have to prove it on the field of battle.

 As is usually the case with stats, they don't really tell you the whole story.
You forgot to mention our loss to Argentina and Scotland and how we struggled against lesser teams.

Meyer had the opportunity to select from a vast talent pool and had he done so we could very well have presented New Zealand with a stiffer challenge ... for that matter every opponent.
He didn't and because of it, and his foolish coaching style, we always found ourselves on the wrong side of the scoreboard. 
Almost isn't good enough. Coming "close" still means we lost. Again and again. A miss by an inch is as good as a mile. 
Also one must remember that under his guidance we seesawed up and down the rankings and at one stage plummeted to 6th.
I am not sure whether you"re defending the man or your support of him. Either way he failed us all and brought us shame.
Coetzee has selected a better core of players and seems to have visions of building for the future. Sadly he's spoilt it all by being as racist as he is ... by leaving a lot of class out merely because their race didn't fit in with his plans.
Even so ... I suspect he'll do better in his term as Bok coach than Meyer did.





 

What counts is the record during 2014 and 2015 after Meyer was in charge for two years,   During the first two years Meyer had quite a decent record - during the final two years it was a disaster.   The question is why did it happen that way?

The answer is fairly easy to arrive at.   By 2014 Meyer’s old guard - the core of his test teams - ran out of steam and he then decided to bring in Matfield as well.   The latter decision was seriously problematic – since it disrupted the forwards and reduced the Tight 5 to a Tight 4 situation.  

Meyer did not consider performance as a norm for selection – he repeatedly said he knows what individual players were capable of – but forgot that that capability was nearly a decade ago.   It was according to Meyer’s own statements clear that he selected players purely on the basis  of reputation and that deficiency was the main problem in team selection.  

The worst result in any game played by the Springboks – the infamous Japan test – resulted from the selection for the test of the “most experienced Springbok team” who ever took the field in a test.   The comedy of errors in that game was that Meyer used a game plan  – ignored by his favourite Matfield - that was guaranteed to be predictable and easily contained by opposition teams causing the team to lose its ability to score tries.    The main component of that plan was to turn the forwards into first receivers of the ball and not the flyhalf – thus destroying the performance ability of the backline.   In a way the reason for that game plan was that the core of the players selected by Meyer was so set in their ways that they could be taught anything new. 

The wreck of the game plan the core players were taught in their earlier career – made life impossible for the younger players – who was getting into the team where their careers was damaged because they could not be taught in the very few games they played in prior to the WC how to be part of that plan. 

Meyer’s WC squad included a list of unusable players that was never really used in the WC.  That resulted in serious over-playing of the reliable players that had to produce the goods after the Japan disaster.  

Be it as it may – Meyer never ever commenced with the building of a decent WC squad from the time he took over the coaching role in 2012.   He was set in playing the reputation players he identified in 2012 based on reputation and never really cared how they performed subsequently.   Two of the reputation players (Bakkies Botha and Gurthro Steenkamp) opted out after stating that they could not perform  on the required level.  Jacque Fourie indicated in November 2014 that he did not wish to be considered for international selection – but Meyer insisted he stayed on.  Fourie  turned up in the June 2015 training camp in such a disgusting physical condition that even Meyer’s medical team gave up on him.

The end result was that Meyer really had no reliable WC squad.   The older players had experience without regard to performance and the younger player had virtually no real experience in test rugby.

There is no way that Meyer’s negative approach – namely selection based on reputation and not performance – as well as his disastrous game plan – could ever be regarded as a coaching success.

Mozart is also wrong – there were strings of criticism of Meyer and his selections and game plan constantly in evidence in the media and  by ex-players and commentators.  Those were ignored by Meyer who carried on regardless using the phrase “I know what players are capable of” repeatedly.  The end result was that Meyer’s contract was based on the above not renewed.   That decision of SARU  was fully justified – another 4 years of Meyer would have landed SA as the tenth rated team in world rugby.       

    

 "What counts is the record during 2014 and 2015 after Meyer was in charge for two years,   During the first two years Meyer had quite a decent record - during the final two years it was a disaster.   The question is why did it happen that way?"
This is the strange part. When some of us broke down Nick Mallett's tenure into a first and a second part, we were told to p!ss off and look at his overall record. 

 Mallett was a different kettle of fish altogether.  He inherited a team from his predecessor to which he made minimal changes and for 18 months were basically undefeatable.  When he started to make changes after firing the captain (Teichmann) he was incapable of properly identified players properly ad got lost in the process,   Irrespective of how we view the situation then - Mallett was not "married" to reputation players and picked new players based on what he believes as being their performance.  That was in direct contrast with Meyer - who never considered performance as a norm and used reputation as a selection norm.   When the reputation players let him down he ended up with a squad containing players with very limited test experience.  Both made mistakes - but Meyer's mistakes were far worse, because what he picked players with limited capacity and no  future in rugby.  

 @clever

In Mallett s defense...
He did inherit a team. But the team that he inherited hardly had a decent record at all!
So one could argue that he took an ordinary side and turned them in to a winning side with some clever, modern (at the time) tactics that blew teams apart.

So I'd say Kudos to Mallett in that instance.

 No they did not have a decent record on your say-so - but they posted a record score against the British and Irish Lions, as well as a record score against the Wallabies.  Both records still stands.   Sorry - but his predecessor had a very limited time to get a workable squad, but he did change the playing style and brought in a functioning backline - which made a huge difference.   If Du Plessis had a longer period as a coach the team he brought to the fore would have lasted longer with a better winning record than anything Mallett came up subsequently.     

 That is true, Chippo, but there is more to it. His assistants were....... yes, that's right. Heyneke Meyer, Alan Solomons, while Jake White was his technical a.nalyst. His downward spiral started when he listened to two-faced Solomons and got rid of Jake White. In the end, there is hardly anybody, outside of SA who rate Mallett, while Jake White is still rated by many and has achieved more than Mallett ever will. 
All in all, while one could argue that Mallett turned an average side into a wining side, you can equally argue that he then went on to turn that same winning side into a bunch of losers.

Nick Mallett has more rugby knowledge in his little toe than Joke White will ever accumulate in a lifetime of coaching.

Apart from being vastly superior to Joke White in every facet of rugby knowledge, Nick Mallett is also a principled man with excellent people skills while Joke White is a thoroughly unlikeable and self-serving person who will renege on any contract or agreement for more money or any opportunity that better serves his own interests.

Meyer was a huge disappointment. I had such high expectations but his years in the coaching wilderness before getting the Bok job told.
He was out of touch with the players and how the modern game is to be played. His reliance on all the old players he was familiar with ultimately cost him.
By the time he woke up to the talented youngsters we had on board, it was too late. That WC semi loss to NZ and narrow RC loss where NZ cheated showed what could have been achieved had Meyer invested in the best players 2 or 3 years earlier.
The old farts in the side cost him as they were not even the 3rd best in their respective positions.

 Ceradunce cannot read English otherwise he would not come up with the BS that only he can dream up.   The problem was that Mallett took over a side that matured under Du Plessis as a record winning side against the British Lions and Wallabies - where for the first time the backline started functioning.   His praise song about White Is also funny - White never knew anything about backline play and under him the backline went backwa rds badly  - so much so that he had to get Eddie Jones in to try and get a functional backline capable of scoring tries.   But then our Ceradunce is an admirer of aimless kicking and stampkar rugby - same as White and his hero Meyer - so one could never ever get him to realise that a rugby team consists of 15 players - with 5 only to be used to defend.   What a moron.     . 

Nick Mallett.Sides he coached (in chronological order):

1. False Bay RC 1994/95
   
2. Boland Cavaliers 1995/96
   
3. Asst Bok coach 1996
   
4. Bok coach 1997-2002. Winning ratio 71%. Lost in the 1999 RWC to Aus. He managed to not alienate SARFU during his reign, but also the SA rugby supporters when he rubbished them. He likes to believe that it is true that he was fired because of the ticket price debacle but the truth is that he was fired by the string of poor performances in the latter half of his tenure.
   
5. Stade Francais coach (2002-2004) where he did well to win the Top14 twice in a row. He returned to SA and there were rumours that he could coach SA again but then Jake White got the job after the first favourite, Markgraaff pulled out and then the second favourite, Heyneke Meyer also pulled out. Eventually it was between Jake and Chester Williams. That goes to show that Mallett was actually fifth in line at best, behind Markgraaff, Meyer, White and Williams. 
   
6. Italy coach 2007/11. He was only beaten by Brad Johnstone and Massimo Macioletti, as wort coaches Italy has had. At the end of his tenure he tried everything to be re-signed by Italy, but they showed him the middle finger. That was despite the fact that he publicly said that he wanted to remain the Italian coach.
   

So. All in all, he can show two Top14 titles for all his efforts.
Jake White:- Started coaching at Jeppe High School where he took Jeppe from bottom of the log to consecutive title winners.- His involvement with Transvaal/Lions rugby were the following:

1. Fitness coach and technical advisor.
2. U/20 team manager.
3. Director of coaching.

- He was asst coach with the Sharks in 2000.- National level:

1. U/21 Coach. Won the U/21 RWC
2. Asst coach. U/23 side.
3. Asst coach SA "A" side
4. SA National side 2004/07. Won the RWC

Post RWC 2007:

1. Brumbies Head coach. Took them from bottom of the log to Super Rugby finalists
2. Sharks. He took the flack for the Sharks poor run. Interestingly, some of the same players who he supposedly alienated at the Sharks are among his key players at Montpellier.
3. Tonga. He joined Tonga in October 2014 and they won two out of three tests on their NH EOYT tour.
4. Montpellier. He joined Montpellier on the back of their two consecutive poor runs in the Top14. They are, at this stage in second place and depending on what happen in their last round game against Racing Metro, they could be assured of a semi-final. RM have to beat them and score a try bonus point try to have a shot at a guaranteed semi-final spot. If, on the other hand, Montpellier lose but still manages a losing bonus point, they will still have a guaranteed semi-final spot.

So......, "Nick Mallett has more rugby knowledge in his little toe than Joke White will ever ac[removed]ulate in a lifetime of coaching."
Really?

 I have no problem with Jake  White - bar the absence of ability iro backline coaching.  That was the reason why the Sharks asked him to go.     

"That was the reason why the Sharks asked him to go.     " 
Really? And we can read up on that, where again?
Same with Rooinek's remark that White is someone  ".............who will renege on any contract or agreement for more money or any opportunity that better serves his own interests."
All of that because he p!ssed off at the Brumbies? He has had 11 coaching positions and he pulled out of one of them because it "served his own interest". 

 So why was White  asked to resign from the Sharks - dimwit?  There were numerous issues raised in the media - dofdoos.   These include the attitude of spectators who stayed away from games because of the poor rugby played as a result of none-use of the backline - the favouritism displayed by certain players (especially Fat Fransie) - the fact that he alienated players who refused to renew their contracts if White is the coach.   He was asked to leave because he was unacceptable to both the public, the management and the players, end of story . 

 There we go again. Dimwit. Dofdoos. Why? "Because I cannot counter your argument. That is why."
You and your "media sources". I am talking solid evidence. Not unsubstantiated BS opinion by some dodgy "reporter". Hard facts.
For sure there would have been reasons. People do funny sh!t and they always have a reason for doing so. Bakkies headbutted Jimmy Cowan.. He had good reason to do so, but was it the right and sensible reason to do it? Never in your life, mate.
The Sharks may have had a list of reasons from London to Cape Town for getting rid of Jake White. Was it the right or the wrong reason? We wouldn't know.
Be that as it may. None of the above addresses your claim that he was fired because of: ".... the absence of ability iro backline coaching...."
That, my friend is what I wanted find out from you. Where did you get that? The same sources where you got all your other dodgy fables from?

 This is really funny from a dud who quote certain reports as authentic when it fits his BS arguments - but reports he does not like come from "dodgy" reporters.  However, he knows that White was virtually fired by the Sharks - but the reasons mentioned in the media is according to the moron not issues, because he does not want to know the reasons - it would put his constant theories in doubt.   Just to add - if a team fail to score tries and have such a few to their credit as the Shark had in 2014 - it is because the backlines are malfunctiong or not functioning at all and the game plan is accordingly predictable.  White's teams had a history of inability to score tries and that is why he brought Eddie Jones on board in 2007.  At the Brumbies he had Larkham as backline coach - at the Sharks nobody of note.   Enough proof to state that his coaching iro backline play is seriously deficient or even absent.             

So if the last 2 years of a coach's tenure define things....let's compare Mallett and White.

White started with a poor 2006, when the team lost Schalk. But he pulled out of the slump in 2007 winning the WC and compiling a record of 18 wins and 10 losses over 2006/2007.
Mallett was supposedly burdened by a team that wasn't his in 1998. But that team won pretty much everything. In 1999 and 2000 Mallett had his own team. Lost the WC where we were booed at Twickenham, because all we had was de Beer drops....and then imploded in 2000.
In all Mallett's record in his last 2 years was 11 won/10 lost. No frigging comparison.
Mallett benefited from one of our best teams and imploded with his own selections. White inherited a disaster from Destroyli and put together a team the core of which was still competing strongly in the 2015 WC semi.
Objectively there is no comparison, White's last two years were vastly superior.

Mallett had a better record than White and in my opinion was a far better coach and a far nicer person.
Mallett wins on all levels 

 

Mozart

“Mallett benefited from one of our best teams and imploded with his own selections. White inherited a disaster from Destroyli and put together a team the core of which was still competing strongly in the 2015 WC semi.”

I nearly laughed myself into delirium – the core players should not have been in the 2015 WC – that was the reason for the Japan disaster and the lot you said was competitive was anything but.  They in fact ruined their reputations and will be remembered for their poor performances of most of them in the 2015 WC  and the test disasters in 2014 and 2015.   They should have skipped out of sight in 2011 – when most of them were already over the hill or approaching the hill top rapidly.     

Lets face facts all of the coaches we had had deficiencies and of the three mentioned in this thread – Meyer was by some distance the worst coach.   White never had any idea of backline play coaching and was a difficult person who was self-opinionated with many enemies on and off the field.  Mallet had problems with player identification and caused a serious mess for himself when he fired Teichmann as captain.  I would put the two of them on par insofar as coaching is concerned.

Meyer was the worst though – he never ever learned the lesson that reputation selections have disastrous consequences.  

HMs record for his last two years 15/9. So by your own measuring stick Mike, we have:
1 Jake White 18 wins/ 10 losses
2 HM 15 wins /9 losses
3 By a long way.....Mallet 11wins/10 losses.
As for Mallet being a nice person, ask Teichman who was knifed by Mallet. This from Gavin Rich:

Of course, Nick Mallett's unceremonious axing of longserving Natal based skipper Gary Teichmann shortly before the 1999 World Cup was the most infamous recent incident to invoke the ire of Durbanites.

The treatment dished out to Teichmann exceeded even the shoddy treatment accorded to some of his predecessors.

Neither White nor Mallet were involved in the coaching of a team that lost to a minnow like Japan - Meyer was.   Meyer also coached teams that froze up in matches  like happened a number of times.   Shocking really - but that resulted from dud selections of way past their sell-by date players.   I never said Mallet is a nice person - I personally think he was nearly as big a twit as White .   

 Mallet was the first Bok coach to lose against Wales. Snorre managed a loss against Scotland. Meyer lost to both and raised them Argie and Japan. Worst Bok coach in this regard since....forever.

 Oops, he never lost against the Scots,  still no redemption for him. Fckn Japan?

 Jaaaaaaa but Snorre lost to two under strength English club sides.

 Hahaha.....I forgot those calamities, worse than Japan
By the way Mallett against the top teams in his last two years:
England 2/2
Oz 1/5 !!!!
NZ 2/3
Wales 1/1
Ireland 1/0 
A winning record against only one of the top 5 teams. Imagine taking only 1 game off Oz in 6 attempts.

All this concern about past win/loss records. Clearly you are missing:
Beeno the accountant
Is he still claiming the scoreboard doesn't count?

 Not hard to add up 5 losses and one win....the hard part is for the Boks to do that badl y against Oz.

 There were some really mediocre games by the Springboks against Australia.   I went to watch 2 tests played in Perth - both lost by the Springboks.   In one case White was the coach - in the second one De Villiers was the coach.  Both were mediocre games - but never reached the lows of the Perth debacle of 2014 - comprehensively buggered up and effectively lost by Morne Steyn.    The latter was a typical Meyer fiasco.     

clevermike
 
Status: Hall Of Fame 
Posts: 23114RE: HM's real record
May 31, 2016, 19:58:33

Meyer also coached teams that froze up in matches like happened a number of times. Shocking really
Care to elaborate on this statement Mike
Or is it another lie, just like the Jake White statements you are making above regarding why the Sharks asked him to leave 

 DA three examples - the Argentina test last year in June - the Japan test in the WC - the Perth test in 2014.   Probably the result of a dud game plan.   So if what was in the media were lies - why was White asked to resign by the Sharks?    

Mike
Ok, so in your opinion those teams froze up..... what criteria are you using to justify that claim.... simply because they lost?
Also, please point me in the direction of the articles where the media stipulated this about Jake White 
That should be enough proof 

"Also, please point me in the direction of . . ."
I'd be more than happy to point you in a direction, Dumb Ass . . . the direction of the Exit Door.

 No not simply because they lost - but virtually all the players under-performed all in the same games.   It was mentioned in the media and they could not identify a reason - the image was that they just did not perform up to standard.   Part of it was the playes - the other part an exceedingly stupid and predictable game plan. 

 Mike, agree on those tests the Boks "froze". Really no other way of explaining the performances. ...not trying to excuse it, just saying that everything just imploded.

 Let me give you a few reasons Draad.
1 The Perth test we led the test throughout and Morne missed touch with a penalty with almost nothing on the clock, a silly mistake....no freezing involved
2 The Bargie test last year Koch was destroyed by Ayerza....no freezing involved our scrum imploded
3 The Japanese test saw horrible mistakes by Coenie and ultimately Kriel give the game away. That was an example of freezing by the young guns. The tackle attempt by  Kriel was positively pathetic.

Mallett was better than Jake end of.....Jake was better than Meyer

Rooinek
 
Status: Senior player 
Posts: 3606RE: HM's real record
June 01, 2016, 17:47:18

"Also, please point me in the direction of . . ."

I'd be more than happy to point you in a direction, Dumb Ass . . . the direction of the Exit Door.

Ag Rooi Rooi
Stop yapping at my heels
Go and put your wife's on instead and take a walk around your shack to calm down 

Just ask yourself the question...if you were a promising player who would you prefer to coach you or even better who would you trust and have more confidence in...White or Mallet?

I think Mallet would be the choice of most.

Stats in this context over look the reality of the question.

There's no doubt that Jake is calculating and clever but very manipulative...sure he has results in flashes but in longer term things turn sour.

Mallet also made mistakes in the past...the Gary Teichmann axing at a crucial period was one but I believe it's one he sadly regrets but since has proven to be a knowledgeable coach and brave...takes up a difficult challenges like Italy and planted seeds in Italian rugby that Brunel inherited and although never a contender managed to defeat France twice.

He appears to be a very decent and likeable man and talks rugby sense.

HM is history but he was a decent, sincere and good man and I believe his only failings were to his conservative approach which has now been confirmed, was not the way to go.

I'm hoping my take on Alistair is wrong too and that he turns out better than I speculate but he has a chance.

Ackerman would have my confidence but coaching the "A" team is the next best and might well the cornerstone of the future...indeed a foot in the door to prove his coaching prowess. Good luck to them both.

Mozart

It  is always easy to describe a situation by singling out individual players when the while team actually under-perform.  

Perth test

Missed tackles             =     25

Penalties given away  =     12

Ball possession losses =      15

So who was real the culprits in the above cases : -

Missed tackles            =      Morne Steyn 7, Matfield 4,  Vermeulen 4,  De Villiers 2,  Rest 8

Penaties given away  =      De Villiers 2,  Habana 2, Jannie du Plessis 2, Rest 6

Ball possession losses =     Pienaar 3, Serfontein 2, Le Roux 2, Rest 8

 Argentina test

 Missed tackles             =    11

Penalties given away  =     17

Ball possession losses =     17

So who was real the culprits in the above cases : -

Missed tackles            =      De Allende 3, Brussow 3, Cetzee 2, Rest 3

Penaties given away  =      Koch 2, Mtawarire 2, De Villiers 2, Rest 3

Ball possession losses =    Pollard 6, Le  Roux 2, Burger 2, Coetzee 2, Rest 5

 Japan test

 Missed tackles             =    16

Penalties given away  =     11

Ball possession losses =     11

So who was real the culprits in the above cases : -

Missed tackles            =      Jannie du Plessis 3, De Villiers 2, Louw 2,  Kolisi 2,  Rest 7

Penaties given away  =      Bismarck du Plessis 4, Kolisi 2, Rest 5

Ball possession losses =     Burger 4,  De Jager 2, Rest 5

The above info provides too wide a range of players who under-performed and to blame single players for the mess is unrealistic.    In all cases it were very poor shows by a wide range of players.