Dylan Cleaver and Scotty Stevenson have some thoughts after NZ Rugby’s latest debrief, at which it was announced under-fire head coach Ian Foster will keep his job through to the 2023 World Cup.
This story first appeared on The Bounce, a Substack newsletter by Dylan Cleaver.
Cleaver: Remember that time when the worst thing you could say about New Zealand Rugby was they were boring?
Stevenson: After the last month I’ve been pining for those days. Things were so much simpler then. Now it’s an endless debrief.
Yes, debrief, we must never mention the word “review” again. I mentioned earlier this week that I would be “staggered” if Foster remained – colour me staggered then. How about you?
Not staggered, because conservatism underpins everything this organisation does. I was staggered at the jocularity on display at this announcement, though. It was incredible. Like a shrug of the shoulders with a Looney Toons “That’s All Folks!”
I’m sure it was you who said just a couple of weeks ago that 80 minutes had the potential to change the complexion of the situation…
Yes, I did, I’ll take that. But once NZR made a point of saying that a decision wouldn’t be made until people were back home with their families, Foster’s position seemed untenable. I hate to be a doomsayer, but I still think it is to a degree. You tell me what you think the public reaction will be if the All Blacks lose the Bledisloe, and/or go to Europe and get turned inside out by Eddie Jones or – heaven forbid – Wayne Pivac?
What an awful scenario that would be! I don’t know if the public will ever be overwhelmingly in favour of Ian Foster as a coach, and there’s nothing he can do about that, but if that post-apocalyptic vision comes to fruition then I ask this: how many of the people in the organisation who have backed their man – players, management, board – are going to fall on their swords?
That’s a rhetorical question, of course.
I think Mark Robinson’s comments on that train wreck of a press conference on Sunday were telling, and not in the way he thought. We could have all done without the damned if we don’t, damned if we do caveat. It was, to paraphrase, “Yeah, we could do better but at the end of the day it’s your fault too.” Weird, but standard MO.
I’m glad you mentioned caveats and “cannot wins”. I can’t help but think this whole scenario would have been a lot cleaner if they’d acted on the poor reviews that followed the end-of-year tour when, if you need reminding, the All Blacks had their arses handed to them by Ireland and France. Is it fair to say that Foster and his men played to the lack of high-performance knowledge on the NZR board when they successfully pushed the narrative that they couldn’t be judged on a tour scarred by Covid and bubble life?
Couldn’t agree more. And this is why the fanbase is jaded by all that has happened. A review – sorry, “debrief” – after November suggested there was full faith. A “debrief” after July saw two men lose their jobs. A “debrief” after South Africa finishes with the “he’s our man, and that’s that” conclusion. Mind you, that leads us to the biggest news from the latest debrief, which is the elevation of Joe Schmidt – or as I like to refer to it, the Schmidt and Polish.
Yes, very good. Brass tacks here: as a concept I like the Robertson, Ryan and McDonald trio more, but on the surface, Foster, Ryan and Schmidt has a lot going for it, doesn’t it?
Well, we now have Foster, Ryan, McLeod, Strawbridge, Feek and Schmidt, so it’s a sizeable team. Let’s not beat around the bush: the players love Joe Schmidt. Hell, I love Joe Schmidt.
I daresay he was always going to have a wider role than “selector” and I am actually very glad to see him have expanded power to help the team. However, it is reflective of a certain narrative that has permeated NZR for longer than many think: that they fear the northern hemisphere teams in a way they never used to.
That’s an interesting point, but I want to stretch the Foster analysis to breaking point. I covered the Chiefs in the last year of his reign. He always struck me as an amiable and fair-minded bloke who the players seemed to like, but there were certainly questions around his head coaching ability (exacerbated when Dave Rennie came in and immediately started winning titles).
More than a decade later there are still questions about Foster’s head coaching credentials but we’ve also seen that he still has the confidence of key players. This is a really clumsy way of me trying to think out loud as to how much weight we should put on player testimonials?
This is a fascinating area to explore. I wasn’t surprised to see the players come out in support of Foster. A siege mentality has built within that team and that’s not necessarily a bad thing. My understanding of that Chiefs era was that a handful of players really controlled the changing room. I don’t see it being much different in this All Blacks environment. I would say I am always wary of player testimony. Players don’t do futures; they only do the present. That’s very natural when professional sporting careers are acutely finite. How much of that is for show I can’t say, but at risk of claiming a tail wagging the dog situation, I’ll suffice to say that backing your current coach is, in this situation, not a bad choice.
On the other side of the coin the Herald had a photo of Scott Robertson riding his bicycle around Sumner this morning, a moment so mundane and yet freighted with “On ya bike” symbolism…
But also, “Look Ma, no hands!”
One of the wildest moments of the press conference was how quickly Mark Robinson shut down any mention of Scott Robertson. That was coupled with a straight denial that Robertson had ever been on standby to step into the head coach role. I think there is more to that story than meets the eye, but if Robinson insists – as he seemed to – that no conversation with Robertson took place regarding coaching the All Blacks then so be it. I’d love that claim to be ratified by the aforementioned Robertson.
Yeah, well, obviously, because it’s not like we haven’t had enough palace intrigue yet. Talking of the world of courtiers and press secretaries, what have you made of NZR’s wider comms strategy? You never asked, but I’ll tell you what I think: “suboptimal”.
It is an organisation that has long decided that the adversarial option is the only option. Access to the All Blacks has long been weaponised, and that simply has to change. The constant conflation of social media and THE media also needs to stop. There is a big difference between those of us operating under media law and @BoZOtAp185 on the Wild West of Twitter. There was a lot of talk about “high performance”. NZR needs to look at certain strategies in the communications space and just be better.
I feel like I’ve spent an inordinate amount of time writing about and speculating on Foster and the All Blacks over the past month. The rugby has almost seemed secondary, but that was a good win on Sunday morning. I was up at 3am two weeks in a row and I know you were too. After a few false starts in recent years, I feel “immersed” again in the national sport.
So… um… rugby was the winner?!
Tell that to an NPC team.