End Game

This board has grown out of the old 606 board,many here I know and respect from there,most are intelligent people.
Passionate about the game,and in support of there team right or wrong,when they win or lose,that is how it should be.
I belong to another era,when it was EVERY teams ambition to beat the Boks or All Blacks,when weak sides were not an option.
Those days are long gone ,reality is with the players work loads there will be injuries,for maybe long periods or need resting.
That is when the hopefuls get there chances,for want of a better simile we will call it a 4 year cycle ending in RWC year.
Now a few points during this 4 year cycle there will be Test Matches ,and High Level domestic comps.Super Rugbyand HC
as examples.When your side loses the first thing most will question some of the Refs.decisions BUT HE is the sole arbiter
on the field of play.[I`m no different in this respect to any one else].
They are Human they make mistakes,you can only ask they are the same to both sides,IF a certain player commits a certain
act.Is spotted by the Ref. caught doing it chances are he will be whistled out of the game,maybe not noticing the other side
Commiting the same offences,I laugh at the McCaw cheats,All Blacks cheat comments on here,OFF course the do so doesor did
Neil Back[he wrote the book on it]Phil Waugh,Heinrich Broussow, Pocock,Juan Smith and every other decent loosie.
The Politically correct term is Gamemanship,Playing the Referee what ever it is cheating by another name EVERY TEAM does it
get over it.THE Great England side were Masters at it,Hill, Dallagio,Back,Martin Johnson some of the greatest cheats ever in 2002
they beat the All Blacks by a few points,had two men in the bin for professional fouls.Calculating the AB forwards could`nt beat
the 6 remaining forwards a calculated risk.The All Black pack under of all the ironies John Mitchell the former England forward coach.
That England side was built by Sir Clive Woodward from 1996/7-2004,it was ONE of the most successful England teams[THE most
was by Jack Rowell].
Sir Clive said judge me on my RWC success,when his side was bombed out by Jannie de Beer in 1999,its lucky the RFU did`nt take
him at his word.It became a very successful team,and one of the greatest cheating sides in the history of the game.
That side notched up a string of 12 win home and away versus SH sides prior to RWC 2003.plus some good wins v NH sides so don`t
ever tell me the All Blacks were favourite s for 2003 they patently were`nt.
England beat the All Blacks twice pre RWC by three ponts or less,had Andrew Merthens played the full 80 minutes in both they would
probably have lost both.Poor Goal kicking being the difference,Merthens was THE man in a crisis kicking wise for the ABs,but his
face did`nt fit with Mitchell and Deans.
Like it or not the RWC is perceived to be THE peak for players,many retiring from Test Rugby or for cash [which in NZ/AUs means the same thing]
afterwards teams are rebuilding sic. until the next one.
A coach has a plan or plans for his side,incorporates the players he`identified can do that and starts building,BUT some teams have more time than others
The All Blacks will get maybe a year at best [2004] to settle down or instant [2008] they don`t lose matches no excuses it`s not allowed,of course they
do but seldom have a bad run for long .1998 and early 2009.But usually the wheels are back on the wagon.
Most teams are given time England went thru two coaches who had over there first 15 games a better win/loss ratio than SCW before being sacked,some
consider Englands 2007 RWC performances made up for 4 years of rubbish in between. I don`t a 30 point thrashing by the Boks,then beating Australia
then a French side who only had one decent game in the tournament just did`nt turn up.Then were squeezed out by the Boks again.
This year we are moving into the end game period again,on the Strength of a narrow win in Hong Kong and the Reds performance in the S!5 they were
being talked up as THE team .Often by people who should no better,McCaw was finished,Carter not his old self.many AB names underperforming etc.
Genia/Cooper/Pocock cocks of the roost,and the famous quote "We can beat ANYONE.,ANYWHERE now" brave words Deans could hardly say "WE will
be Mullered could he"
Back to reality a few facts ignored,The Crusaders despite having no home games only lost ONCE in NZ versus the Blues first game in the S15,Reds
two wins over them were at Home,and one of those very contentious .
Add to that they had lost twice recently to England,one of these by a considerable score, 3 out of 4 versus Nz in 2010,one of these when Crudon and Slade plus Weepu
outthought them in a narrow victory in OZ.
Further add the fact that the All Blacks were at home,very few win there,Yes Genia/Cooper are arguably the best PAIR at half back in World Rugby
Yes Pocock is a very good Seven,comfort yourselves if you are an Aussie fan ,that the difference could only be seven points or that you won the second half.
THEN look at the facts,the All Blacks made seven changes to the week before,and played for 80 minutes for the whole of the first half you were shut down
Pocock and Cooper at least in this match played second fiddle to the "Dynamic Duo",had they not been clearing the bench you may not have even got your consolation scores.
If Carter had stayed on in Hong Kong I think the ABs would have won that one too,The truth is in the RWC as usual at leat two of SH sides are the sides to beat.
NZ maybe they are back to 2006,to many maybes and not aettled team only time will tell.
For OZ to beat the ALL BLACKS they need to build a big lead early,then play flat out for 80 plus minutes,ahalf time lead is not enough,plus more tactical nous,take every point possible
and get your goal kickers practicing.
Off to SA versus a team with something to prove,with several very skilled goal kickers in there squad,Sa may try to squeeze them out.

I personally think this mentality of 4 year cycles are foolish.

If a team is going to have the start of rebuilding anew squad in my opinion it takes longer than 4 years.

In a 4 year cycle a team plays roughly 50 tests at most. Taking in concideration injuries it is highly unlikely that any player these days plays all those matches.

Then add to that experimenting in a position with 2 or three players, you need to give them a handful of tests before you can decide whether it is worth keeping them in that position or finding someone else.

It could take a coach 4 years just to find a solid performing team. Then there are retirements and not all of them happens after a world cup.

Then those players have to be replaced, if this happens 2 years after the RWC, and with experimentation you might sit with a handful of first choice players with little experience.

So I think if there was a cycle it would be roughly 8 years.

The best of course is not to worry about a cycle, decide which players will get an opportunity for that year, expose them gradually and not all at once. Let them experience a winning culture in a settled team environment, this way you will have 30+ players at the required level at all times.