Cockerill's message to us

[4071]

Starts at 10, even when Flood was available, and a long-term contract instead of a 1-year contract in his final season.

And a forward-thinking vision for the direction of the club, rather than a limited 'one game at a time' mentality.

Give me a break! How often have the anti-RC brigade shouted from the rooftops that it is a results driven business nowadays. Whether you like it or not Toby Flood was the better 10 at that time so he was rightly selected ahead of Ford when available.

How often have the anti-RC brigade shouted from the rooftops that it is a results driven business nowadays

Almost exactly never.

Your view is shared by Cockerill - it's all about who is the best player that week for that game. It's an immensely short-sighted view, and exactly the reason that we lost one of the best young players in world rugby.

It's not a useful trait in a Director that he has no vision beyond the next 80 minutes. And it's Cockerill's biggest flaw.

It's exactly why the two teams in the final are full of young players who are realizing their potential. You may not recall the gloating after every mediocre game that Ford had in his early days at Bath. But it showed the limited mentality of some fans, and it's shared with Cockerill. Bath knew that they had a player of great talent and HUGE potential. But they also knew that he needed to develop. So even when he was missing kicks or having off-days, they stuck with him and he kept getting better.

He's now England's first choice FH and has just been made Premiership Player of the Season. Which probably makes up for a handful of bad games in his early days at the club.

It's the same for the likes of the Vunipolas, Kruis and Itoje at Sarries, and the likes of Watson, Burgess and Eastmond at Bath. Every one of them spent time starting games when he wasn't necessarily the best player in his position at that time. Every one has developed and improved and their clubs are seeing the fruit of their development programme.

We... aren't...

We just look at the next game, heads down and unable to see the wall in front of us.

[jgriffin]

Crumblies; look up 'non-sequitur'. Your comments about MOC don't logically hold together; I said MOC wasn't good for the club either on the pitch or off (you didn't witness him at away games and, at Wuss, feel moved to go and apologise to Wuss fans for UTTERLY UNACCEPTABLE SHOUTED BAD LANGUAGE in front of fans including small kids). I have done this from early in MOC's coaching, having seen the nature of his single-note back play as well. I can support RC at the same time, since my support is nothing to do with MOC, without the two being illogical or cognitively dissonant, likewise Wheeler and Tom, despite the fact they hired MOC.
4071 and others: Tigers did exactly what any other club would do in dealing with Ford, the incumbent was an England international playing well at the time; after Ford had gone (was actually enroute as soon as dad got a foothold in Craig's coaching team,for a LOT more money and for a team built by his dad around him)a Welsh lad was playing better than the incumbent and got picked regularly. What is your problem with that? At the time, with us, Ford was inconsistent with the boot and many of the same critics on here were saying he was too small to succeed, needed bulking up and protecting etc etc. I remember being MOCked for pointing out that many small players were talented and capable of international rugby. J'accuse! (of the blessing of hindsight?)

You guys, girls (and those of unknown gender) are in the 'Damn Cockerill Regardless' camp - just come out of the closet and admit it, and save us the trouble of wasting minutes of our lives thinking you've something to say.

[Dave J]

4071, I'm not saying you've ever said it but the phrase "results driven business" has been used to beat RC over the head with and I would ask you this, If Tigers had played George Ford ahead of Toby Flood and Tigers had not then finished the season as champions who would have been held responsible for the perceived failure?

[sapajo]

Once Ford Snr arrived at Bath, Ford's time at Tigers was numbered, that is why he would only sign a 1 year contract. Tigers had fulfilled their roll in his academy development and it is abundantly clear to me that his pre determined senior development was to be joining up with his father at Bath. Tigers could never prevent it no matter what was offered to him because blood is thicker than water.

[Sajerj]

So the smart move would have been to have employed Mike Ford in 2012 as a coach.

[4071]

I remember being MOCked for pointing out that many small players were talented and capable of international rugby. J'accuse! (of the blessing of hindsight?).

Hindsight?

I've been a Ford advocate since he was 16 (I started his Wiki page.... ) and whenever the 'too small' comment came up I'd point out the success of the similarly sized Aaron Cruden.

I felt that it was usually the pro-Cockers camp who were most critical of Ford and doubtful about his ability to succeed. Not least because that point of view would align with Cockerill's hesitancy when it came to picking the youngster.

It was certainly the pro-Cockers who spent a lot of time after Ford's departure talking up Williams' potential in comparison to Ford and suggesting that Ford was unlikely to make the grade anyway. One on this site even suggested - apparently in all seriousness - that Ford had already peaked (at 20!).

[G.K]

Actually I don't particularly fault Cockers over the Ford situation. In my opinion once his Dad was established at Barf he was going to leave at some point regardless. It was also a different situation as at Tigers we had the incumbent England fly half, Barf didn't and Ford then was not Ford as he is now.

That said however, the man management of other players has in some cases been poor, here I'm thinking particularly of Moody, 12T, Castro and Waldrom where it seems there's been a fair amount of acrimony involved. There was a time when players who left Tigers did not generally go on to better things, now they regularly do.

I also fault the recruitment in recent years, where the emphasis seems to be to recruit journeymen who won't get called up too much for Internationals. Also too many times they arrive with pre-existing injuries, bad luck or lack of due diligence? It's happening too often to be just bad luck for me.

Much has been said about the way we play. However the proof of the pudding is in the eating and in the last two years Tigers have come up short against top opposition regularly. Several of the defeats in the last two years have been quite frankly appallingly embarrassing.

For the avoidance of doubt I still have a lot of respect for RC and all that he has achieved at Tigers, no-one can take that away from him. However as Darwin indicated it's a question of evolve or die and I'm not sure Tigers have the right structure or direction at the moment to do the former and I'm not convinced that the arrival of Herr Mauger in itself will be sufficient.

[4071]

Once Ford Snr arrived at Bath, Ford's time at Tigers was numbered, that is why he would only sign a 1 year contract. Tigers had fulfilled their roll in his academy development and it is abundantly clear to me that his pre determined senior development was to be joining up with his father at Bath. Tigers could never prevent it no matter what was offered to him because blood is thicker than water.

Yes, that would absolve Cockerill and Tigers of any failure to keep Ford which is - of course - the intention of continually repeating it.

Apparently this is how professional rugby players make major career decisions.

[jgriffin]

4071. The obvious is ignored in the pursuit of another anti-Cockers point scored.
GK - natural selection is a description of change in an organism in the face of changes in environment that take place over several or many life cycles, none of it directed or willed (teleological fallacy). Since Tigers are directed by a Board etc I think you are better off with sexual selection as your take on evolution, where those displaying seemingly advantageous traits get the best partners (or in the case of world class players, Boudjellal comes calling ). It fits the case of Ford well, a bit like an arranged marriage where the father facilitated the conjunction of a wealthy suitor with a promising youngster. Tacky, I know, but more apt,maybe?
BTW why does everyone leave Hippo or Ringo out of any gripes, like the forgotten discards; also nobody brings up the discarding of TV under Meyer, it's not just RC does this stuff.

[G.K]

Some people have to bring sex into everything (could indicate a Freudian problem?).

[sapajo]

Once Ford Snr arrived at Bath, Ford's time at Tigers was numbered, that is why he would only sign a 1 year contract. Tigers had fulfilled their roll in his academy development and it is abundantly clear to me that his pre determined senior development was to be joining up with his father at Bath. Tigers could never prevent it no matter what was offered to him because blood is thicker than water.

Yes, that would absolve Cockerill and Tigers of any failure to keep Ford which is - of course - the intention of continually repeating it.

Apparently this is how professional rugby players make major career decisions.

What is your point?

[Dave J]

I'm with 4071 in that I never doubted that Ford would develop into a great player. What I hoped was that he would stay at Tigers and after the next season the 10 shirt would be his for as long as he wanted. He chose not to stay and that still saddens me but I was not party to the negotiations and cannot say who's to blame and what's more I don't think anyone who posts on this forum know either. Yes they have their opinions, some of which are based on their personal dislikes, but they don't know and until someone provides me with proof I will look on any post on the subject as an opinion to which we as individuals are all entitled.

[Isambard]

Richard is golden in so many ways but his vision is narrow and Mauger will hopefuly be allowed to expand the way the team play.

Recruitment and retention n have been poor and I don't believe that RC can be expected to do everything in this area.

Too many good players have left the club recently and this is a man management weakness, whether this is how much game time or whether it is length of contracts signed I imagine it is a combination and those involved are not doing it very well.

[h's dad]

That said however, the man management of other players has in some cases been poor, here I'm thinking particularly of Moody, 12T, Castro and Waldrom where it seems there's been a fair amount of acrimony involved. There was a time when players who left Tigers did not generally go on to better things, now they regularly do.

Re your four examples:
In hindsight and indeed at the time, if Moody had stayed at Tigers it should not have been on the playing squad.
12T departed after intimating he was going to stay. It was not his, or his agent's, finest hour. I can't help thinking if he had stayed at Tigers he would have continued to develop at least as much as he has done elsewhere.
Castro went in something of a sulk because he was being pushed into second place. How has that worked out for him? Inter alia, compare the Flood/Ford position with that of Castro/Cole, bearing in mind that Cole had surpassed Castro whereas Ford was still getting there, and frequently showing that there was a long way to go.
I'll give you Waldrom although if the way he wanted to play didn't fit the club (Cockerill?) ethos what are the options? Should the whole gameplan have been built around him?

[h's dad]

Once Ford Snr arrived at Bath, Ford's time at Tigers was numbered, that is why he would only sign a 1 year contract. Tigers had fulfilled their roll in his academy development and it is abundantly clear to me that his pre determined senior development was to be joining up with his father at Bath. Tigers could never prevent it no matter what was offered to him because blood is thicker than water.

Yes, that would absolve Cockerill and Tigers of any failure to keep Ford which is - of course - the intention of continually repeating it.

Apparently this is how professional rugby players make major career decisions.

You'd have to be very bitter and twisted to disregard it as a complete irrelevance. And still quite bitter and twisted not to regard it as a major factor. I can think of quite a few examples at various levels, indeed across numerous sports. I'm sure you could come up with far more.