Mallett on Jake crisis
29 Jun 2006
Renegotiating coaching contracts is always a frustrating process, according to WP director of rugby Nick Mallett.
“Saru has been criticised for not immediately extending White’s contract to ensure he coached the side until the 2009 Lions series,” Mallett told keo.co.za. “However, I understand the position of the governing body. A lot of rugby must still be played between now and the end of the World Cup, and they probably want to see how the team performs before offering White a new contract.”
Mallett said he was a bit surprised that White had brought up the issue of an extension now, 14 months before the World Cup.
“I was appointed Springbok coach in 1997 with a two-year contract that would take me to the end of the 1999 World Cup. I started negotiating a new contract only two months before the tournament began.
“In White’s defence, he is concerned about his future and that of his players. I’ve heard that 13 or 14 current Springboks already have overseas contracts for after the World Cup. Should White continue as coach of the Boks in 2008, he would want to keep as many of his players as possible, and if the players know he’s sticking around, they might just stay on.”
Mallett believes that the problem with negotiating coaching contracts in this country is that not one single person can make a decision, as is done in conventional business. White approached Saru president Regan Hoskins to discuss the extension of his contract only for the board to refer the decision to the president’s council.
“It’s a very slow-moving, often frustrating process,” admitted Mallett.
According to reports, White wants his new Bok contract not to include a performance clause, something Mallett agrees with to some extent.
“I believe a performance cause would not benefit a Bok coach or Saru, simply because of the unique challenges in South African rugby. Many people say that there is no quota system but that teams are expected to be mixed. It’s probably unfair to tell a coach that he must win a certain percentage of his Tests when he cannot always select the team he wants.
“Jake might also say it’s unfair to have a performance clause in his contract when he’s trying to give 30 players enough Test experience before the World Cup. Why should he field an experimental side in the Tri-Nations if he will be penalised when the team loses?
“However, I think it’s not unreasonable to expect White to win at least 50% of his matches against the top four (New Zealand, Australia, France and England) and 75% of his matches against the rest.
“Ultimately, the coach and board must debate the issue and come up with a performance clause that satisfies both parties.”
By Simon Borchardt
26 Comments
29 Jun 2006, 10:48 am
Jake must stay.
29 Jun 2006, 10:50 am
Agree.
29 Jun 2006, 10:50 am
Hmmm perhaps he is looking elswhere as the oppertunitys arise now. Head coach and R20 million for the Poms job dont come around every day.
And of course Mallet would say this about White, he wants White to stay so he gets the Poms job.
29 Jun 2006, 10:52 am
13 0r 14 players with overseas contracts after the WC! Jinne, dan moet ons nou maar diepte kry want ons het skaars 13 goeie spelers in die huidige bokspan…
29 Jun 2006, 11:01 am
Agree with Mallett on the 50% against the top sides and at least 75% against the other! Good point!
We should be happy if we can beat the top four half the time!
29 Jun 2006, 11:02 am
I reakon all the concerned parlimentarians will be happy to know all these players will be making space for a whole new generation of previously disadvantaged players.
29 Jun 2006, 11:19 am
Ek’s seker Jake sal aanbly. Dis jammer oor die kota stront op die veld. Ek dink dit sal miskien teen hom tel. Lees klaar daar is sekere mense wat hom wil uit he oor sy span keuses. Dink nie dis ‘n maklike job nie.
29 Jun 2006, 11:19 am
Don’t worry Suparugby – It’s Solly that has the contract.
29 Jun 2006, 11:31 am
A performance stipulation of a 50% win ration versus Aus, Nz, Fr and Eng is risible. A 50% win ratio would represent the very best of our aspirations against these nations. Since the game went professional perhaps we have exceeded 50% in only 2 seasons. I think 25% woudl be fairer.
29 Jun 2006, 11:57 am
Mallet should get more involved in Sa Rugby. They should make Mallet director of Sa rugby and sort this while mess out.
29 Jun 2006, 12:14 pm
The problem of the PC 14, with 9 of them short of money needs to be dealt with ASAP.
after this, we can sort the whole sorry mess out professionally.
StM good point, whats the normal expectation for touring England?
29 Jun 2006, 12:19 pm
Oxfordshark
A thought. If a black player went to Paarl Boys or Grey Bloem, is he still disadvantaged?
29 Jun 2006, 12:20 pm
Nic is correct but I think a performance clause is important. Most modern succesful businesses have suite of targets (KPIs) for their top execs. I can’t see why they don’t introduce a similar system into SA rugby.
KPI’s are normally an outright measure e.g. profitability or a ratio e.g gearing
Each KPI is weighted and eventually bundled together to give an overall score. You can also have overrides e.g. if a score for a certain KPI is really bad it overides all other scores and some type of action is taken (knowing SARU it would probably mean a sacking of the coach).
Winning is abviously the most important and should have the highest weighting. You can also split it in the way Nic suggests.
But there are tonnes of other things that may also be important:
Number of non-whites coming through
Number of youngsters developed
Player retention
Fitness
Tries
These are only ideas and some are deliberatly there as a check and balance against other measures. e.g. youth development and player retention.
I wrote something for Keo a year or two ago about this but obviously SARU wasn’t paying attention.
If you have a satisfactory performance clause (and some other caluses) there is know reason you couldn’t give Jake a contract to 2009. I would!
29 Jun 2006, 12:22 pm
I’m calling for all Johannesburg & Pretoria Bulls supporters attention:
I have an extra “Losie †Ticket available for Saturday’s game.
Plan is to have drinks & good food at Kickoff Restaurant (at the Stadium), then watch the game, halftime drinks, watch the second half, then drinks again!!
I am deadly serious!!!!!!!
Who wants it!!
29 Jun 2006, 12:33 pm
I read a really good article in the sport section of the Cape Times about the current squad selection and what Jooste had to say about it.
After my initial shock, I can completly understand the axing of Shimie and Botha. Both players have been at a detrement to not getting any game time. Jake knows what he has in the players, and now its up to them to play full time rugby in the Currie Cup. Game time is far more valuable to SA’s players than Bench time.
Jooste also went on to say that Solly T was Schalks understudy and that now he will get his chance to prove himself. Irrelevant how Kak we think he is, or Muir thinks he is, the bok set up rates him. Personally, I would rather see Solly fetching than a make shift player eg Spies, Joe, Wikus, etc. It allows 7 and 8 to play more of their natural games.
INMHO, the reallity is Watson has really pissed JW off, unfortunatly he is the Tiaan Straus of his era. I’m much more comfortable and happy knowing that SA coaching staff can at least acknowledge the need for a full time fetcher.
29 Jun 2006, 12:41 pm
Crises? What crises?
29 Jun 2006, 12:42 pm
I really hope Jake stays allthough I don’t like this kak of him and certain players threatning to go to Europe if they don’t ger what they want. F@ck them then, let them go, we want players who wants to play for South Africa!! And there are alot of unfound talent in this country, if only they can get clubrugby to its former glory again. I also believes that there are allot of presure on Jake to win all the games, and thats unfair to him and the players.
29 Jun 2006, 12:44 pm
“However, I think it’s not unreasonable to expect White to win at least 50% of his matches against the top four (New Zealand, Australia, France and England) and 75% of his matches against the rest. ”
We dont currently have a 50% win ratio against the top 4 over the last 2 years.
29 Jun 2006, 13:00 pm
Vinnie we do
Australia – won 3 lost 1
NZ – won 1 lost 1
France – won 1 lost 2
England – won 0 lost 1
= 50%
29 Jun 2006, 13:17 pm
train…..vinnie said 2 years mate.
29 Jun 2006, 13:22 pm
Train, even by your calculations we still dont even have more than 50%. Mainly becasue we didnt beat France at Newlands last year, we drew. And we didnt play England last year.
Therefore in the last year we have won 4, lost 4 and drawn 1. Mighty impressive hey
29 Jun 2006, 13:37 pm
Train on the upside please remeber that England is NOT A TOP 4 RUGBY PLAYING NATION!
29 Jun 2006, 14:21 pm
Always great to hear Nicks views, wise words indeed. I met Nick at Keo’s Muppit evening at Monte Casino, and man, he is PASSIONATE about the game and knows what he is talking about. I too can talk rugby 24 hours a day, and it was AWESOME chatting to Nick.
Keo, will you be having another Muppit evening in JHB this year ?
29 Jun 2006, 14:56 pm
St Michel (9)
Is that the english standard 25%.
29 Jun 2006, 15:29 pm
It’s all hogwash
JW cannot afford a performance clause in his contract if he is not at liberty to select ALL his players. I will be difficult enough to get 50% as is with a merit Boks team
29 Jun 2006, 19:21 pm
The simple question is;
Why doesn’t Jake select deserving players of colour ?
This is what blows my mind…then he will surely have a lot less of the problems that he tends to plonk himself into !
And at the same time, why the hell does he insist on choosing equally useless white players ?
This is the mystery…perverse…
The bottomline is however, that there is no way in the world SA can win the world cup, it is a foregone conclusion.
We simply cannot beat England and France in Europe, we struggle against the Irish and Welsh there(and here !), and then the Kiwis and Ozzies have not even entered the equation, not to mention the Argentinians who look mean, thus the cupboard will remain dry…
The selection problems of Jake is very simple, he can’t admit that he is ever wrong, in fact, to cover up his original mistake, he will actually rather make another couple of selection howlers, that is WHY the Bokteam has been getting steadily worse from 2 years ago, it is also called too much dead wood…and adding…
Francois Williams
Have your say
You must be logged in to post a comment.