www.rugby-talk.com/2012/11/super-rugby-mooar-will-be-southern-kings-attack-coach/
please take note meyer and co if even the queens can have better coaching structures then surely the boks anc bulls can do alot better than matfield and van graan ?????
Give credit where due Carpet, The Kings have put alot of affort into this, as can be seen by there rapid rise from nearly last place in the First Division not more than 4 years back.
that is the thing i am giving them credit. Mooar and sexton are world class coaches but i find it rather funny that the new kids on the block has better coaching roles than the boks and the bulls. mooar is a attacking coach by nature where by van graan and matfield can only attack a bottle of brandy over the weekend.
I am not sure where Mooar Coached but If I am not Mistaken Sexton had something to do with the Caterbury Structures in the IPC. Maybe the New Zealanders can Help. But It seems the Kings are planning to play an attacking brand of rugby, should be interesting to watch.
I went and Did a bit of research:
Sexton ran the academy at Canterbury, Head coach of the Canterbury Kights as well as the Crusaders Development Squad.
Mooar was headcoach of the Canterbury colts (u19)
So seems both staying with red and black moving from Canterbury to EP.
sexton i know from word of mouth is a epic coach from his cv and his vision for the game. mooar was the skills coach and had a decent amount of success.
i have to hand it to the kings there making decent appointments. meyer and the bulls can learn something from them in that aspect. they dont have the depth in players but at least they have some decent coaches which is a great start.
If the Kings show any sign of life in Super 15 next year - it will show one thing more than anything else - how outrageously bad SA coaching structures really are.
it worse than you think really its not so much from a technical side that SA coaching is bad but rather the approach and mindset that is the real problem. i coach myself and i hear and see alot of things that would make you sit up and make you worry. the conservative one eyed approach is so indoctrinated in our local coaches that we will never reach the level that the AB are at and the only way to change that is to employ AB coaches and allow for skills to be transfered. when i was at the murry mexted rugby clinic it blew my mind how far behind SA coaches are really
up to club level our systems are decent but from there upwards there is a lot of old guard that dont wont to change with the times.
On that note then Muncher, maybe we should really root for Sexton and his team to do well next year so the other unions can catch on woth regard to the coaching structures.
I also have to give some credit here to Alan Solomons who brought these guys in, Maybe then not all of our "old Guard" seem so stagnant as you would like to think.
those that have the vision and the foresight to change are by far in the minority. small things like attention ot detail ext is not skill that every coach has but it tends to be more ingrained into the NZ coaching way of thinking.
we are getting there very slowly indead but our local based coaches really need to make a mindshift and get the help from the support structures to enable that change. that is where the biggest problem is.
we will see how things pan out at least they are thinking correctly. we will see what brand of rugby they produce on the day.
Carpet, to me the "brand" of rugby is less important than the excecution. Your playing style or Gameplan as such is much dependant on your personel, no use trying to play a tactical game from 9 for instance if you have a brilliant sniping scrumhalf etc...
So I really don't mind the "brand" as such, as long as it works and your thinking is such that you play to your strengths. However basic things do come into play here, and that includes basic skills like running into space and off loading. That does not mean that you need to play an expansive running style however if it doesn't suite your players, It does however mean that you teach skills that are needed at a very early age. And this is I think where we need to adjust. So If these guys can bring a mindset in of teaching skills and not just picking the big guy at age group level rugby in the province then it really is a good thing.
Ek
You have never written anything truer - it is not the game plan and style of play that matters - it is whether the players can perform to fit into the plan. I think there are preent indications that Meyer wants better execution and even a different brand of play. That is where he has some selection problems - and sometimes make mistakes and select players with a quetionable performance record ot basic problems in certain aspects of play.
I have often criticized Meyer - because at times he make statements wide open to misinterprrtation - such as him telling Lambie to play his natutal game in London - raising questions about what else he tolf Lambie before the other tests - that SA is not capable of fast-moving backline play, etc. I think it could have been the result of skewed questions asked - but his statements on the whole indicate a much wider approach to his perceived game plan than some members will admit.
However, as you say the players hold the key to perfromance and implementation of any plan - and Meyer himself admitted that he made selection errors. There were signs of improvement - but some serious problems came to the fore again in the latest squad. However, I think that since Meyer recognized that he did make selection errors - he may be able to be improving in future in that respect as well. I still believe expereience is valuable - but I also believe that if experience is in evidence - it must be accompaied by sustained top performances.
That is why I say that players coming back from injury - as well as certain incumbents have a lot to prove in Super 15 next year. If Meyer than select the players who had sustained good performances throughout the season - he may find that game plan implmentation is not such a major problem. Lets hope for the best in that regard.
@mike and ek great points
one thing that one needs to understand is that a brand of rugby not just a type of game pattern just as much as its a mindset and players should be picked to that vision/game pattern. the overall framework should be such a nature that players can play there game but still function within a team enviroment and compliment each others strengths. the brand of rugby that a coach wants to play will reflect in the player selections and not the overway around. if one has a few resources to your disposal then offcourse one has to due with what is on offer. that being said if one has the level of talent to choose from like meyer has then surely one can play any style and still be effective.
in terms of your execution argument that will only come over time as players gel and fine tune there relevant roles. that does take time but that is dependent in view of the game pattern that you want to play. the more one plays a certain style the more that style or way of thinking becomes second nature.
the blatant lacking areas like our backline and attacking skills and vision is by far the biggest worry and yet meyer and co seem rather content just to brush it off and focus on other areas. i for one am a big pundit for playing to your strong points but there surely needs to be coaching or coaching structures in place to rectify the problem areas and nulify them.
that was my orginal argument. execution will only come after extensive exposure and practice. that does not come overnight
the queens have better coaching structures in place it seems so that to me just shows that the boks and the bulls are behind the 8 ball in that regard.
Mike as you said, I don't think Meyer is blind to this, after all this is what he did at the bulls, they focused on what resources they had and the players that compliment each other to play winning rugby. If a player leaves he is replaced by the same type of player.
This is also what is evident in the whole New Zealnd rugby phenomenon, if I can call it that. Most teams play the same brand fof rugby and focus toward that so when they make the step up there is not such a huge adjustment to the style and players around you. Comfort breads confidence, If that is the riht way to put it.
So yes Central contracticg might help but that wont cure the issue.
The cures will be Skills development of coaches from the bottom up as well as a homogenious idea of how the game should be played to be implemented at all levels. This will be very dificult if not impossible as Historically south African unions are not known for working together.
But we can only dream.
And if that dream comes true a True GIANT will emerge.
central contacting will only aid man management and maybe also help SARU making sure that there is a even spread of talent across our super teams. teams like the cheetahs and lions/queens can really benefit from the likes of the stormers and bulls next in line players. it makes no sense to have one union to have all the player depth when they can really just spread those players to other areas. that in the end will just makes sure that the best are always playing and at the end of the day that will filter to the national side
interms of game plan trying to play a attacking brand should surely be a universal idea for all in SA rugby seeing as the most of us want to see and be part of that brand of game.
the NZ model is not all the same but the areas that every team is great in doing is the ruck the backline and decision making. the off the ball running in the backline is nothing short of amazing. a ball carrier has almost 9/10 times at least 2 to 3 offloading or passing options. that type of game breeds better thinkers and decision makers. 80 of the game is should be played when you dont have the ball in your hands as campo always said.
they focus on skills development and playing the game with speed and precision. within that framework they use certain players like the SBW of the world to use there own unique abiltys to either create space and score points. at the end is about one thing and one thing only playing to a certain level and keep that level. if they play to there ablitys then the score line looks after itself. in south africa we think winning rugby means playing % conservative rugby. this is only been a post isolation school of thought prior to that that was not the case.
they type of rugby i saw the sharks (super rugby and cc) and wp played against the bulls in there CC cup round game to me should really be the template that everyone follows. not this retarted forward obsessed slow lacklustre game the boks are playing. the attack needs to develop to another level or else we should be content in being the has never beens.
rassie and co need to sit down with the unions coaches and they all should follow a blue print of how the nation should play its game. there needs to be a standard on how a coaching support structure should look like attacking coaches and skills coaches ext. proper placement needs to be done not some off the shelf buddy buddy that has no credabilty at the level like derick hougaard ext.
its not rocket science really
