Jones speaks out
Eddie Jones explains why he thinks the Wallabies are struggling under head coach Robbie Deans.
In an interview with Sky Sports Radio, Jones said Deans is forcing a game plan that doesn’t gel well with the Wallabies because it is a ‘New Zealand style of rugby’.
‘I think we’ve lost that instinctive way we play, and we stand wide and we’re lateral and we play like a New Zealand side,’ said the former Wallabies coach. ‘Robbie has a way of coaching, and I think he’s a very successful coach, but I don’t think his style of attack suits the Australian players and that’s something he’s going to learn over the next period of time.
‘You’ve got to learn instinct. Whilst some players are born naturally with it – the Giteaus and the Carters – the others, you’ve got to coach into it and it’s the structure you put around them to allow them to play.’
Jones also thought Deans’ attacking game plan was not ideal in the modern game.
‘It’s about the way the game is at the moment. Most sides play rugby league defence, that’s quite obvious, and you can’t play an old-style rugby union attack where you stand deep and you stand wide and you expect to beat them on the outside.’
While critical of Deans’ coaching methods, Jones believes with a few adjustments, Deans can still become a success with the Wallabies.
‘I think Deans is a very good coach. He does need to change his methods a little bit, the Australian players are different to New Zealand players. New Zealand players have generally been the best in world rugby because they have been physically stronger and faster than anyone else,’ he said.
‘Australian sides traditionally, while physically we go OK, our point of difference has been that we’ve been tactically and strategically a little better than other teams. I think at the moment we’ve lost that a little bit.
‘I think Robbie can learn that. Some good things have happened and there’s no reason to change the coach but I think he does need some help.’
November 25th, 2009 at 10:55 am
I am watching a rerun of Superugby as I type, all about our front row woes, Bullet Dalton is a guest giving his opinion….intruiging stuff !!
November 25th, 2009 at 1:31 pm
I never liked Eddie Jones as a coach, and he fluked a lot of wins (I guess that’s why he and Jake White were such buddies ((thats when JW was despised by supporters as opposed to admired which seems more the case nowdays)).
But I agree with Jones on this – Deans is playing fantasy rugby and trying to turn the Wallabies into All Blacks part 2 (and its never going to happen)
November 25th, 2009 at 1:34 pm
@justrugby: Pray, enlighten us more ..
November 25th, 2009 at 1:40 pm
I reckon the Oz are playing a good style of rugby and they are unlucky that the Boks are ahead of them with experience/caps and graft /skill winning them games.
Deans is right to weed out the older players, they do like a whinge and under the old squad at Brumbies they shafted any coach they didnt like. Fair enough if you are getting the results but not anymore.
Oz have a good front row, good locks, good loosies. Missing a scrummie altho Genia is getting there. Need a solid 10 to kick and unleash Gits.. the rest all look ok as well with Ashley-Cooper looking world class. Dont rate quade though.
Now that was nice and balanced by a Bok supporter !!
November 25th, 2009 at 1:40 pm
@bananas:
Bullet reckons definetely BJ at 3 and PDEV must decide between his captain and his best hooker(Bismark), make the decision and move on !!
November 25th, 2009 at 2:19 pm
If Jones was coaching the Aussies and Deans the AB then I think the rugby world would be a different ball game.
November 25th, 2009 at 2:51 pm
@bananas:
Good locks but not exceptional.
Far sight better than the current AB crop in the second row though.
November 25th, 2009 at 3:35 pm
@ufo:
I am sorry but you are wrong about your dog bite statistics. I have been doing a lot of research on the topic as I own a Neapolitan Mastiff and the Chilean Government have proposed to ban Neos and 11 other “dangerous” breeds. Pitbulls and Rottweilers are by far the worst offenders internationally. In the USA more than 50% of attacks that result in serious injuries or death are perpetrated by Pitbulls.
My Neo is not very friendly but definitely not a menace! I walk him twice a day with a muzzle and on a leash – just in case …..
November 25th, 2009 at 3:56 pm
@Chile Dog:
hey bud… it’s strange how you make assumptions based upon assumptions…
you haven’t read my post properly and you couldn’t have been doing too much research… and owning a breed like you do and taking it out in public… muzzled too… demonstrates your need for people to know you own such a dangerous breed… so you would want your stats to prove this…
if you’re narrowing it down to ‘dangerous breeds’ you could be spot on and I’ll take your word for it… I’m talking about ALL breeds…
dangerous breeds normally inflict far more damage when they do bite… and make more news… but more people are bitten by the non-dangerous breeds simply because there are more non-dangerous dogs out there…
statistically more spaniels and retrievers bite people in pure numbers because millions of them are owned around the world… so although they may not make the headlines… mom and dad still have to take baby or child along to the doc for tetanus shots…
that’s why it IS so surprising… everyone expects Pitbulls and Rotty and Neopolitans etc to head the list… of course they do as far as damage concerned but they do not bite more people… fact!!
Check it out with the Kennel Union of Southern Africa… KUSA… you see I did do my research based on unemotional fact… I’d rather take the offical dog NGO’s statistics as fact than yours…
but hey… of course you’re welcome to use whichever facts support your theory.
November 25th, 2009 at 4:16 pm
@ufo:
Here are the dog bite statistics of the United States between 1996 and 2007:
Dog Bite statistics by breed
Thought you would all find this interesting–the numbers represent five colums, Column 1 is Breed Attacks doing Bodily Harm, #2 is Child Victims, #3 is Adult Victims, #4 is Deaths and #5 is Maimings. (The # sign meant there were additional comments, I left the web address for this info down below if you want to read more, it is 7 pages worth of info) Additionally, this info is specific to dogs that were family pets.
Akita 48 32 14 1 39
Cane Corso 4 1 2 1 3
Doberman 11 7 4 3 7 #
Doge de Bordeaux 2 1 0 0 1
Fila Brasiero 1 1 0 0 1
Great Dane 24 5 4 2 9
Mastiff 16 11 4 4 9
Tosa 1 1 0 0 1
Pit bull terrier 1110 495 397 104 608 #
Rottweiler 409 231 109 58 223 #
Golden retriever 6 6 0 1 4
Cocker spaniel 1 1 0 0 1
German shepherd 63 42 17 7 38
Total: 2209 1142 658 264 1323
As you can see Pit bull terriers account for most of the dog bites in the USA. I took their statistics because they have the biggest documented dog population in the world and they follow up on all kinds of bites.
It is interesting that German Shepherds account for so many bites and Neapolitan Matiffs for none.
These are the statistics used by the group I belong to to prove to the government the insanity of including Neos with Pit Bulls and Rottweilers and excluding German Shepherds from their list of dangerous dogs.
By the way Neapolitan Mastiffs are used as therapy dogs so they can’t be vicious and in no country in the world do they account for more bites than Beagles do.
November 25th, 2009 at 4:21 pm
@Chile Dog:
This in only an extraxt of a list that is 7 pages in length.
November 25th, 2009 at 4:22 pm
@Chile Dog:
extract
November 25th, 2009 at 4:25 pm
@justrugby:
did he happen to admit, again, how he never came close to scoring that winning try in ‘98 ?
November 25th, 2009 at 4:30 pm
@Chile Dog:
you missing the point chile… those are stats in which significant and serious damage is done… but more ‘less severe’ (for want of a better word) bites are inflicted than maiming and death causing attacks…
your total of 2209 attacks doing bodily harm between 1996 and 2007 (12 years of stats) is put into perspective (with this debate) by the stat that some 4,7 million people are bitten by dogs in the USA alone (forget the rest of world…) EVERY year…
the most common quoted stats are of dangerous breeds or of fatal or ‘maiming’ attacks… simply because they make the headlines… but more people (mostly kids) are bitten by the “non-dangerous” breeds and spaniels and retrievers head the list… contact KUSA or the AKC (American Kennel Club) and ask them… don’t take my word for it…
November 25th, 2009 at 4:34 pm
@WakaNathan: Yip…..he said it was absolutely legit
November 25th, 2009 at 4:42 pm
@ufo:
I don’t want to get involved in an ongoing dispute with you but the figures I quote are all of the bites that are reported. I can also bore you with statistics from Europe. If one excludes Rottweillers, Pit Bulls and Wolf-hybrids most of the statistics are evenly spread amongs dog breeds. The strange thing is some breeds have an undeserved bad reputation (Dogue de Burdeos, Doberman etc.) , much like our beloved Springbok team!
It is true that any dog can be dangerous under the wrong circumstances. Look at this:
“The most horrifying example of the lack of breed predictability is the October 2000 death of a 6-week-old baby, which was killed by her family’s Pomeranian dog. The average weight of a Pomeranian is about 4 pounds, and they are not thought of as a dangerous breed. Note, however, that they were bred to be watchdogs! The baby’s uncle left the infant and the dog on a bed while the uncle prepared her bottle in the kitchen. Upon his return, the dog was mauling the baby, who died shortly afterwards. (“Baby Girl Killed by Family Dog,” Los Angeles Times, Monday, October 9, 2000, Home Edition, Metro Section, Page B-5.)”
And now let’s agree to disagree. I have agreed with most of your rugby comments the last couple of months following this blog.
November 25th, 2009 at 4:52 pm
@Chile Dog:
cool chile… I know where you’re coming from and do know about dangerous breeds of dogs too…
but a quick google will reveal that 4,7 people are bitten by dogs in the US every year… which makes over 56,4-million people bitten in the 12 years of stats you’ve covered numbering in their thousands… as the ‘dangerous dog’ attacks are reported… that leaves some 56-million people bitten by non-dangerous dogs…
but you’re right… let’s rather chat rugby…
November 25th, 2009 at 5:09 pm
Typical Eddie Moaner-Jones to undermine others from his previous roles or ones he has had an association with. Did the same to Connolly at Queensland, Fisher at Brumbies and McKenzie at Wallabies. He’s like a mutant strain of swine flu, no matter how many innoculations you take, he’s still in there spreading his anti-virus.
November 25th, 2009 at 10:56 pm
Have a read of ‘Eddie Jones (Rugby Union)’ in Wikipedia – “His win-loss ratio is the lowest of any Wallabies coach”.
I know that Eddie found favour with the SA fans and has been credited with helping them win the WC, but the stats (if correct) suggest that he doesn’t know any more about coaching Aussies than RD does. Add his single super 12 title vs RD’s cupboard full, and whilst his points sound ‘reasonable’, is there really any reason to think that he knows better than RD? RD is obviously doing some rebuilding and working to get his team sorted for the future. Like the AB’s, it is also obvious that the current set of rules do not fit well to their more natural running game, so like the AB’s they are learning how to adapt to rules that are more suited to the NH teams.
I still believe that over the next couple of years we will see a much improved Wallabies team, with a new generation ready to give them several years at or near the top of the sport.
November 26th, 2009 at 10:52 am
Oh Eddie, you’ll probably be in k@k for this again!