RugbyRebels

Dear Warren,

It's fair to say that before this tour I thought you were a useles wanker who promoted anti-rugby simply not good enough to get near winning even a single Test on this tour. I thought you'd got spectacularly lucky to beat the Aussies last time out whn they were at there lowest ebb. I dwelt on your shockingly poor record against SH sides.

Happily I have to revise that opinion. I'm not likely to become your biggest fan. i still don't like your brand of rugby. I still don't like some of the things you did on the Lions tour. However I have to accept that you have been effective. Keeping the ABs tryless in a Test is not to be sniffed it. Nor is wrestling them to a draw at Eden Park. The drawn series is beyond what I had hoped for even with everything going well, even if we'd had a coach who in my view was superior to you. I'm not entirely sure how you've managed it but at some point I've got to concede that it's not just luck and this is that point.

So Gats, well done. You may even get to coach the ABs at some point now and to be fair you probably deserve it, even if I think you'd probably be a terrible fit.

Regards,

EW

I don't think he will get that chance, but I think he will be lions coach again in 4 years.

Eugene Wrayburn wrote:I'm not entirely sure how you've managed it but at some point I've got to concede that it's not just luck and this is that point.

Pretty much exactly where I am.

Puja

He exceeded my expectations but if I could go back I still wouldn't pick him again or want him as my national coach. I completely lost interest in the Lions and he was a pretty massive factor in that.

Mikey Brown wrote:He exceeded my expectations but if I could go back I still wouldn't pick him again or want him as my national coach. I completely lost interest in the Lions and he was a pretty massive factor in that.

+1

2013: If he'd beaten the aussies by coaching a well drilled team that set out to play rugby but only scraped home against a good team then you could give eugene his point, but Gats fluked a win against the worst Oz team in living memory.

2017: I cant remember seeing NZ play as badly with as many mistakes or bad decisions as they did against the Lions. And they still woulda/coulda/shoulda won if they had a place-kicker. NZ are never there for the taking but this last series was as close as they'll get, and Gats' team still nearly gave it away.

If the lions played better than expected, Eug would have a point, but the last 2 series have been all about how crap the opposition were rather than how good the lions were.

Sent from my HUAWEI VNS-L31 using Tapatalk

I'm looking forward to Gatland's open letter thanking SBW, Julian Savea and B Barrett's right foot.
He did better than we all expected but the cards fell for him during the test series.

Mikey Brown wrote:He exceeded my expectations but if I could go back I still wouldn't pick him again or want him as my national coach. I completely lost interest in the Lions and he was a pretty massive factor in that.

why?

Hard to put it in short terms. Everything just seemed to be about Gatland from start to finish. The media drivel was excruciating but that wasn't his fault to be fair. Stuff like Jones being given Lions tests as game-time to try and play himself in to form was fucking ridiculous though. How many times did he get hammered backwards?

Howley? Fecking Howley? Townsend being asked to assist him? Rowntree was pretty much the only coach I didn't think was a dick, but reading about the Ryan Grant episode last time out he's gone down in my estimation massively as well. The whole Scottish side of it pissed me off. The entire callups debacle, then seemingly throwing a hissy fit (for getting criticised about it) and caning the midweek guys for 80 minutes. I could go on and on. I'm boring myself here to be honest.

None of those things really matter too much in isolation, and I don't begrudge anyone for enjoying it, I just found it hard to get pumped up about.

Continuing with the 2005 strategy Gats ended up going with two 10s when he'd avoided trying to do just that, though things worked out better than for Jones and Wilkinson with NZ making more mistakes than has been the case of recent times (really for a long time)

So all in all it's a case of he fluked it?

Humility in short supply other than from Eugene.

I don't see how humility comes in to it.

He didn't fluke it, the Lions players stood up. I think some of the worst elements of the game plan, like constant box kicks and a baffling use of the bench, Gatland is responsible for. Maybe Gatland had the changing room and ranked them up properly, but I still don't rate him, as a coach. How many games has he overseen that he should have won but hasn't? It's easier being feisty as the under dog.

Numbers wrote:So all in all it's a case of he fluked it?

Humility in short supply other than from Eugene.

Whether one flukes a draw or over achieves to make a draw it's still not a win, it's a draw. So I don't know anyone would claim he 'fluked' it as who gives a shit about a draw?

I think Gats has achieved his best efforts with bringing up the fitness and physicality levels at both Wasps and then Wales, but in both instances he's been unable to add much if anything to that. The rugby tends at best to be dreary, and he clearly doesn't see any need to change, and leaves him as a coach I doubt NZ would want, and I can only hope England wouldn't want (and we have worryingly flirted with the idea at times it would seem)

It's quite possible given there almost isn't any attack plan in place beyond some very simple principles that Gats is the sort of coach suited to a short term jamboree tour.

morepork wrote:He didn't fluke it, the Lions players stood up. I think some of the worst elements of the game plan, like constant box kicks and a baffling use of the bench, Gatland is responsible for. Maybe Gatland had the changing room and ranked them up properly, but I still don't rate him, as a coach. How many games has he overseen that he should have won but hasn't? It's easier being feisty as the under dog.

Though the worst use of the bench maybe came in the 3rd test with Smith being removed at 9, so even good coaches can louse up in this area.

Digby wrote:

Numbers wrote:So all in all it's a case of he fluked it?

Humility in short supply other than from Eugene.

Whether one flukes a draw or over achieves to make a draw it's still not a win, it's a draw. So I don't know anyone would claim he 'fluked' it as who gives a shit about a draw?

I think Gats has achieved his best efforts with bringing up the fitness and physicality levels at both Wasps and then Wales, but in both instances he's been unable to add much if anything to that. The rugby tends at best to be dreary, and he clearly doesn't see any need to change, and leaves him as a coach I doubt NZ would want, and I can only hope England wouldn't want (and we have worryingly flirted with the idea at times it would seem)

It's quite possible given there almost isn't any attack plan in place beyond some very simple principles that Gats is the sort of coach suited to a short term jamboree tour.

This pretty much. If Garland got the ab gig at some point it could be the death of worldwide rugby. As a coach he seems to be a spoiler more than a creater.

Show some humility for Christ's sake.

Mikey Brown wrote:I don't see how humility comes in to it.

Probably due to your lack of it.

Admit you were wrong ffs.

Ha. Wrong about what? That we wouldn't get anything other than spanked in the tests? Yep. Check. I stand by everything I've put in here.

I just don't see how the quality of having a modest or low view of one's importance is of any relation to what any of us think about Gatland's performance.

Mikey Brown wrote:Ha. Wrong about what? That we wouldn't get anything other than spanked in the tests? Yep. Check. I stand by everything I've put in here.

I just don't see how the quality of having a modest or low view of one's importance is of any relation to what any of us think about Gatland's performance.

It means that you have an overinflated view of what weight your rugby opinions hold...

Lol. Might as well close the forum if posters are required to have some sort of weight to their opinions. Like I said, I don't begrudge anyone for having enjoyed it, I just lost interest in it somewhat. Banquo asked me why and I responded.

How else is this place supposed to function? I don't see that any one poster* has a more valid opinion than the rest.

*Except for Bruce. Obviously. As if that needed saying. FFS Bruce.

Except for me.

Mikey Brown wrote: I don't see that any one poster* has a more valid opinion than the rest.

There are people on here who have argued for Sam Burgess, for Donald Trump, against vaccinations..., on such basis some opinions are less valid.

Don't forget the flat-earthers, creationists and "the earth is 4000 years old" ers

That's nothing. Someone on here thought Mark Atkinson would be breakthrough player of the year last season. Idiot.

Gavin Henson.






















Completely irrelevant to this thread but hes a marmite character about whom so much dross has been written.