johnthegriff wrote: ↑Fri Dec 04, 2020 8:36 pm
On this thread and " The Open Letter to the Board" thread several people are suggesting they are in the know about certain aspects of recent events, in view of the almost total exclusion of fans from both Welford Rd and Oval Park I suspect much of what is claimed as knowledge is actually guess work which may or may not be near the mark. One thing is certain, Steve Borthwick is in charge, he is dictating team selection and tactics, in all probability he will be leading recruitment, I assume players brought in will be recruited or approved by him, the coaches he will be working with will have been accepted by him, in short in a results based business success or failure will be down to Mr Borthwick. That seemed to be the situation under Dwyer, Deano and later Cocker, I think it changed somehow along the way as certain people expanded their roles and areas of authority. Results are all important both on and off the pitch. Many that have been calling for change are not happy that we are getting changes they had not anticipated. some changes maybe precipitated by the affects of the pandemic some by personality and some for strategic reasons, frankly I don't care, I just want to see my team winning.
I would add one little proviso for both Board and Borthwick DON'T MESS ABOUT WITH THE ACADEMY! our future depends on it and currently it is in good hands.
If we wanted Borthwick as the DoR (which is what he now is), we should have been honest about it from the start, instead of telling Murphy that we were bringing Borthwick in to work underneath him, then getting rid of Murphy as soon as he was no longer needed.
As Tolstoy wrote, "there can be no greatness where there is not goodness, simplicity and truth." We are failing on all counts, just as Saracens did - that's why they cannot be considered a great team, and neither will we if we continue in this vein. Winning without a soul is not winning at all. There is no reason we couldn't have got to SB as DoR in a calm, decent and strategic manner.
I don't believe having SB as 'DoR' was the plan. The problem is that the relationship between SB and Geordan soured within a very, very short period of time. To the extent that they weren't speaking to one another.
The decision to remove Geordan was due to the breakdown of that working relationship.
..countless post were made stating that it was nonsense to put Murphy over Borthwick due to experience. This setup was obviously flawed and if we could see it, was it just convenience that the board chose to ignore it.
This was all too predictable, this has the stamp of the incompetent and disingenuous Board all over it!!!
If you know what you're doing and understand your business and it's people then, yes, it should have been predicted. For it to fall apart within a couple of months they must have had fundamental difference of opinion in important areas - what were we discussing with Borthwick during the recruitment process if we couldn't predict that he would want to do things so differently to Murphy?
As pointed out, it has happened to us repeatedly, whereas other clubs seem to avoid it quite easily. I'm far less experienced than Mr Tom, and yet I've never employed two people to work closely together who disliked each other so much that one of them had to leave a couple of months later - it really isn't that difficult!
The only plausible explanation for me is that we brought SB in to replace GM, but told a different story to GM because we needed to keep him around a little longer.
Our situation kind of mirrors Aston Villa’s in football,bar the relegation and conveyor belt of owners. But they made mistake after mistake,coach after coach,regression on the field,laughing stock in the media,other clubs were etc then they found Smith. Let’s hope Borthwick is our Smith and it’s all over now! Enough is enough!
"Rugby isn't a contact sport,ballroom dancing is a contact sport. Rugby is a collision sport" Heyneke Meyer
Tiglon wrote: ↑Sun Dec 06, 2020 12:28 pm
If you know what you're doing and understand your business and it's people then, yes, it should have been predicted. For it to fall apart within a couple of months they must have had fundamental difference of opinion in important areas - what were we discussing with Borthwick during the recruitment process if we couldn't predict that he would want to do things so differently to Murphy?
As pointed out, it has happened to us repeatedly, whereas other clubs seem to avoid it quite easily. I'm far less experienced than Mr Tom, and yet I've never employed two people to work closely together who disliked each other so much that one of them had to leave a couple of months later - it really isn't that difficult!
The only plausible explanation for me is that we brought SB in to replace GM, but told a different story to GM because we needed to keep him around a little longer.
My italics. I know its hearsay, but I'm inclined to agree.
Formerly of Burbaaage (not Inkleh), now up north at uni
Scott1 wrote: ↑Sun Dec 06, 2020 12:31 pm
Our situation kind of mirrors Aston Villa’s in football,bar the relegation and conveyor belt of owners. But they made mistake after mistake,coach after coach,regression on the field,laughing stock in the media,other clubs were etc then they found Smith. Let’s hope Borthwick is our Smith and it’s all over now! Enough is enough!
Scott1 wrote: ↑Sun Dec 06, 2020 12:31 pm
Our situation kind of mirrors Aston Villa’s in football,bar the relegation and conveyor belt of owners. But they made mistake after mistake,coach after coach,regression on the field,laughing stock in the media,other clubs were etc then they found Smith. Let’s hope Borthwick is our Smith and it’s all over now! Enough is enough!
I would be up for our Smith being our Smith.
I love that idea!
"Rugby isn't a contact sport,ballroom dancing is a contact sport. Rugby is a collision sport" Heyneke Meyer
Judging by the chaos I just wonder if they thought they were bringing in Borthwick to add polish and support to the Murphy regime?
I imagine that that wasn't how Borthwick saw it and the longer he was in post the more apparent the need to assert himself and insist on making the changes he felt essential when he decided some of the coaching staff and others were not capable of delivering his plan.
I suspect we have lost some that he felt had to go and also perhaps Boris who may have felt the board had lost his trust?
strawclearer wrote: ↑Sun Dec 13, 2020 11:23 am
So - Richard Wilks it is, according to TRP.
Hardly 'strategic' other than to say 'Borthwick gets what Borthwick wants'!
..wasn't that the same thing, that the Board said about Murphy!!!
Nothing was going to be too much and we believe in his plan so much, we will make him DoR as he will have complete oversight.
