A Proper Clear Out

[kk20gb30]

On the evidence of the past ,at least 3 - 4 seasons a 'Proper Clear Out' has long been needed and is long overdue ; ironic perhaps that Covid should force The Clubs hand.
Again , as a players and perhaps on a personal level it is sad that those associated with The Clubs halcyon days have departed but in the case of Murph on what basic could Leicester have possibly extended his contract as DoR ? Certainly unjustifiable on the strength of results, performance and (arguably) overall progress.
If a Club statement was issued on Friday (13th) stating that Geordan Murphy's contact had been extended could you imagine the reaction/furor on this and other forums questioning the validity of the decision ?

[MCC1964]

Interesting piece in the Rugby Paper by Nick Cain (who I don’t like particularly) that ‘the eighty year old’ Tom has done a hatchet job on Murphy. As usual what this article does not do is reflect on what the general sentiment (and I emphasise ‘general’ from what I have read) seems to be here on the forums (and my own for what it’s worth) is that there is no doubt that Murphs is an outstanding bloke and a club legend, but did we ever actually see any improvements during his tenure as skills, backs or head coach? Can we really say he was taking us in the right direction or did he simply not have enough time?

That being said, it does seem a little odd that a few months after having created the role of DoR the board decided that they no longer needed that role. Perhaps the clear outs at Board level should not end just yet. We do seem to be making ourselves look a bit of a laughing stock.

[Tigerbeat]

The role of DOR was under contract till the end of the season. Murphy was told that it would not be renewed and has departed the club. The DOR role may only have been put in place for a transition period whilst a new coaching set up was established. None of us know why but things have been asked of the Club, clear outs, changes have happened and it is now time to see some stability in the structure.
I believe that Tigers have a stronger squad and more depth than in previous seasons and expect a mid table finish.
Newcastle are reported to be struggling badly financially and Peter Tom has indicated that Tigers are in a good position at the moment.

[Cardiff Tig]

That being said, it does seem a little odd that a few months after having created the role of DoR the board decided that they no longer needed that role. Perhaps the clear outs at Board level should not end just yet. We do seem to be making ourselves look a bit of a laughing stock.

Is it not just a contract length issue? The club would have had to pay off the remainder of his contract to replace/remove him a few months ago. Instead they chose to wait until it came to an end and not renew it. GM decided, understandably, that it was time to leave.

[Wayne Richardson Fan Club]

It is the why was GM given the DOR role that wasn't going to exist in 12 months that is the big unanswered question & the bit that doesn't make any sense & is where the "smell" comes from.

I would rather have a chairman & ownership model that Tigers have, than some of the other Premiership Teams, swap Tom for Wray or Craig anyone?

Ignore GM's time as "skills" coach, you can't teach skills at an older age, you can enhance & refine, maybe some of the players coming out of the Academy recently & in the near future will have better "skills", unfortunately its not something that's concentrated on enough at younger ages in England, arguably not just in Rugby.

[MCC1964]

It is the why was GM given the DOR role that wasn't going to exist in 12 months that is the big unanswered question & the bit that doesn't make any sense & is where the "smell" comes from.

I would rather have a chairman & ownership model that Tigers have, than some of the other Premiership Teams, swap Tom for Wray or Craig anyone?

Ignore GM's time as "skills" coach, you can't teach skills at an older age, you can enhance & refine, maybe some of the players coming out of the Academy recently & in the near future will have better "skills", unfortunately its not something that's concentrated on enough at younger ages in England, arguably not just in Rugby.

Fair enough, backs coach, head coach and director of rugby. Don’t get me wrong, I love the bloke - particularly having met him on a couple of occasions, but I was always concerned that I never really saw where we were going or much improvement. What was his stamp on the club? I think it was timing as much as anything else. This club at this period is not a place to cut your teeth at being in charge (good luck Borthwick). Perhaps taking that Cardiff job would have been the best for him after all. Then again, as much as it was a mistake for the club to offer these positions, perhaps the mistake was his also to accept. But one thing I will always be grateful for was his clear determination to use the academy and give the youngsters a fair crack of the whip. I for one hope that is a trend that continues.

[mol2]

We can only hope that this brings to an end the sorry mess of the last few years.

Appointing Murphy to head coach was the equivalent of making a trainee teacher head of the maths department when the existing head left suddenly. Halfway through the term it became obvious he was struggling and unsurprisingly out of his depth. The response by the governors was to make it a permanent appointment. Move on a year and nothing has improved so they appoint a new head of department and promote Murphy to headmaster. New head of department not happy to implement the strategy of the head.

Finally the governors act. Clearly some of those need to go, as they have in the case of Underwood.

I fear one or two more may need to look at their actions in creating this very avoidable mess.

[JP14]

I think Wayne Richardson Fan Club is correct to point out the lack of skill at young levels with an emphasis on size, however our academy has benefited from not simply going for "Bearded Bills" as one academy coach put it. Whether or not this meant that Murphy was unable to improve the skillset much of players remains to be seen, personally I agree with others that his focus was more on back three positioning etc rather than offloads out of the back.

[TigerFeetSteve]

People asking why they wanted to scrap off the DOR role just months after making it.

What if they planned to phase out GM's om field roles while SB got settled, or perhaps GM misunderstood where SB's role ended and his began and the club wanted to change the name of the role to better define roles responsibilities etc.

Certainly in business it's quite common after forming a new team in a company to review and look at slightly redefining roles as how people see their strengths and weaknesses. In fact that's probably why it was a 12 month contract initially.

For all we know Pat's report said we need new coaches to not be given long contracts to allow them to refine roles.

Sounds like with Covid especially we made the call to have one voice for on field and a General manager off pitch after seeing how the team has worked so far.

[Cagey Tiger]

I recall Murphy saying in one of the post match interviews on Radio Leicester that as DOR he would have final say on selection when Borthwick arrived.

Any premiership level he is not really ready for a head coach roll. He needs to go and learn how to be a coach. As for DOR, that is a role for someone with way more experience.

I recall that others (RB?) have pointed out that this was in February (?) and was amended by GM himself later on.

..why was it that Murphy did the post match interviews?
You would have felt that Borthwick would have been keen to increase his own profile as he was the Head Coach and strategies and playing style would have been his remit.

To get the correct answer, speak to GM or SB.
I can only speculate that as SB makes Martin Johnson in his playing days look verbose and GM is
much more talkative...?
Anyway, why shouldn't GM have done it? Other DoRs do - Rob Baxter, Deano, Declan Kidney to name a few.

[Scott1]

Whatever has happened we need a good start to the season. Everything is easily forgotten about once you’re winning games. A winless run to start and then the vultures start circling again!

[MCC1964]

I recall that others (RB?) have pointed out that this was in February (?) and was amended by GM himself later on.

..why was it that Murphy did the post match interviews?
You would have felt that Borthwick would have been keen to increase his own profile as he was the Head Coach and strategies and playing style would have been his remit.

To get the correct answer, speak to GM or SB.
I can only speculate that as SB makes Martin Johnson in his playing days look verbose and GM is
much more talkative...?
Anyway, why shouldn't GM have done it? Other DoRs do - Rob Baxter, Deano, Declan Kidney to name a few.

Bang on in my opinion. He’s getting better, but clearly it’s not his forte.

[Redstripeman]

I recall that others (RB?) have pointed out that this was in February (?) and was amended by GM himself later on.

..why was it that Murphy did the post match interviews?
You would have felt that Borthwick would have been keen to increase his own profile as he was the Head Coach and strategies and playing style would have been his remit.

To get the correct answer, speak to GM or SB.
I can only speculate that as SB makes Martin Johnson in his playing days look verbose and GM is
much more talkative...?
Anyway, why shouldn't GM have done it? Other DoRs do - Rob Baxter, Deano, Declan Kidney to name a few.

..perhaps rugby needs to define the terms Head Coach and DOR.
As the aforementioned are instrumental in team selection and tactics then you would understand them fronting up to the cameras and giving their view on how the game panned out.
The fact that Murphy continued to take all the post match interviews and using the aforementioned Coaches as
examples of post match analyst, indicates to me that he (Murphy) is directly involved in selection and tactics.

[ourla]

If a Club statement was issued on Friday (13th) stating that Geordan Murphy's contact had been extended could you imagine the reaction/furor on this and other forums questioning the validity of the decision ?

Excellent point, well made.

[Cagey Tiger]

..why was it that Murphy did the post match interviews?
You would have felt that Borthwick would have been keen to increase his own profile as he was the Head Coach and strategies and playing style would have been his remit.

To get the correct answer, speak to GM or SB.
I can only speculate that as SB makes Martin Johnson in his playing days look verbose and GM is
much more talkative...?
Anyway, why shouldn't GM have done it? Other DoRs do - Rob Baxter, Deano, Declan Kidney to name a few.

..perhaps rugby needs to define the terms Head Coach and DOR.
As the aforementioned are instrumental in team selection and tactics then you would understand them fronting up to the cameras and giving their view on how the game panned out.
The fact that Murphy continued to take all the post match interviews and using the aforementioned Coaches as
examples of post match analyst, indicates to me that he (Murphy) is directly involved in selection and tactics.

As far as I can recall, it was always stated and never amended that the selection of the team was a group effort by the senior coaching team and including GM. This, I suspect, it how many other teams do it. The beef that others on here had was how much input and control GM had. Initially GM said that he would have the final say, which he subsequently changed to it being SB who would.

Anyway, this is all irrelevant now as GM gone, hence my use of the past tense.