What Stuart Lancaster can really learn from Bill Walsh
It’s a scary word. It makes people uncomfortable. It threatens our security. And so we change ‘change’ and call it innovation. The greatest coaches of all time tend to be innovators. Is Stuart Lancaster? That is the big question, not least for himself.
The England coach’s big thing is the philosophy of “let the scoreline take care of itself.” Lancaster attributes it to Bill Walsh, the legendary coach of the San Francisco 49ers.
He says, “Walsh knew, fundamentally, that if you established a culture higher than that of your opposition, you would win. So rather than obsessing about the results, you focus on the team.”
That is only one of the things that Walsh knew. He invented what became known as ‘the West Coast’ offence with its new running routes. That challenged the orthodoxy of establishing the run to set up the pass. Walsh established the pass to set up the run. He was a revolutionary, “a whirlwind of wisdom” with a blackboard and chalk who became known as the ‘Genius.’
He was also a great identifier of talent, bringing in Joe Montana, Ronnie Lott, Jerry Rice and Roger Craig. Rice was crucified in the early stages of his career, but Walsh saw the ability that developed Rice into one of the greatest wide receivers in history.
Steve Young, the quarterback who took over from Montana, said of his impossible task, “He (Walsh) knew me well before I knew myself and knew what I could accomplish well before I knew that I could accomplish it. That’s a coach. That’s the ultimate talent anyone could have. I said in my Hall of Fame speech that he was the most important person in football in the last 25 years, and I don’t think there’s any debate about that.”
Is Lancaster the sort of man who can bring in edgy talent as Clive Woodward did? Woodward was a big part of the push that brought league players into union and developed Jason Robinson into one of the best players in the 15-man game. Would Lancaster step out onto that precipice?
Lancaster says, “When you have a critical mass who want to go in a certain direction, any players not buying into the team ethic have a choice to make: either change your conduct or pay the price by not being selected. You go with the players who will be right for the culture. That is a prerequisite for me: select on character, not just talent.”
Hmm. The greatest coaches, certainly at international level, persuade the mavericks to buy into the process. It’s not my way or the high way. It’s my way, but I will make you think it’s your way.
Can Lancaster innovate a playing style? He is cruelly handicapped by England’s clubs. Watching Northampton and Leicester in recent weeks has been depressing. Northampton’s attacking play is coachbound and sterile. Leicester’s involves cheating, one of the centres repeatedly taking out the defender ahead of the ball. But Woodward’s England were similarly hindered by the clubs and he found new ways to challenge the players.
These are big questions for Lancaster to answer. The victory over the All Blacks has bought him a disproportionate amount of goodwill. Insiders will tell you that the win must be taken with a large scoop of salt because many of the New Zealand players were very sick. They were under orders to say nothing about it, a no-excuse culture which does them credit.
If you discount the Fiji match, England’s record over their previous ten matches is lost 5, won 4, drawn one. Six of those matches have been at home and over a period when South Africa and Australia have been greatly reduced by injury and retirement. It is a record that needs improvement.
Lancaster says, “Credibility is the foundation of leadership. How do you develop it? You need to be honest, inspiring, forward-thinking, technically competent. Those are the four qualities I would aim to model myself on.”
So far we can give Lancaster a tick for honesty and a pass mark for technical competence.
But can he embrace change? Can he innovate? Can he motivate the awkward buggers and make them part of the culture?
Walsh lost 14 of his first 16 games as coach of the 49ers.
The rest is history.
Lancaster’s history still lies ahead of him.
What do you think? Is Lancaster the man to innovate England’s playing style?
Posted under News & Opinions
4 months ago
Hi Mark .Couldnt agree more re premiership rugby – no ambition ( excluding Quins ) too many forward /overseas coaching eg Gary Gold doing his best to destroy Bath and Toby Booth presiding over a culture of fear and bigger is better – though they arent the only ones .The treatment of George Ford at Leicester is a scandal , and the sooner he leaves the better- witness John Callards comments in papers today re young stars not getting game time.But what can he do about it ?
The man England should pick right away is Elliot Daly, he has some real star quality about him , wants to run with the ball and is as tough as nails without being a gym monkey , like so many others who are being told thats the way forward …..and fingers crossed that Freddie Burns stays fit ,he will be Owen Farrells conscience if he kicks too much out of hand !
Re Stuart Lancaster ,his PR is sensational and very appealing to all of us , though if he says the word ‘journey’ again …… but he knows what he is , and an innovator isnt it .He is trying to get a certain mindset into players and thats fair enough ,the players love it though i have no interest in player endorsement – their undiluted support of Martin Johnson meant nothing and was misguided.
The key man for me is Mike Catt , who at least has the experience of making match turning decisions in big games …perhaps he was the one who had Brad Barritt looking to the outside shoulder when he made the critical break against the All Blacks .
The level of expectation for England has skyrocketed – we will need to be on our guard in Cardiff and Dublin , the Celts love that optimism , they will feed on it . Thats where Lancasters next test lies ……tactically , can England take the running lines of the AB game and make them second nature …….? Come in the Premiership and thats where it becomes circular !
4 months ago
The English win over the AB’s was more the AB’s fualt than that of England outplaying. I think the AB’s were already on the beaches getting a tan. Dont take too much out of that win.
4 months ago
Mark Reason. If its so easy please tell us coaches who will be winners instead of this retrospective view of a different sport coach. I am sure there are 10 failed Bill Walshes for every successful one. (Who ever he is). How do you spot winning coaches making the right moves ahead of the results? I sense it with Lancaster but what do i know… I’m an optimist. Lancaster has embraced change anyhow.
4 months ago
Stuart Lancaster is an honest Jo in a great position leading the best resourced team in the world. I like his philosophy and agree with Marks comments, innovation and having the courage to implement new ways of organising and playing puts enormous pressure on the lock of the trap door that all head coaches stand on all the time. It’s all about performance on the pitch until you play well and loose all your games
4 months ago
“plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose”
Fred Allen, the great All Black and coach, wrote in his book “On Rugby” that there are 4 “roads of destiny” for the coach who wishes to bring the best out of his team: discipline, respect, team-spirit and morale. Or in modern vernacular “culture”. Walsh himself was following in the footsteps of the great Vince Lombardi who espoused similar ideals. It is also no surprise that the England World Cup winning team, owed a lot of their cultural development to there exposure and time with the Royal Marines, who base their training around these pillars.
When you replace these fundamentals, with “gimmickry” and try to find success through just the application of sports science and analysis, you are doomed to fail, although you will line the pockets of the latest snake oil salesman!!
As for England’s victory over the All Blacks, I think it said more about the All Blacks culture as opposed to England’s . The mantra of no excuses, the gracious way that only the best can conduct themselves after a loss. That is precisely why Lancaster is good for England, because he brings a measure of humility that has been sorely missing from English Rugby; not the likes of Catt,(whom mr Halliday seems to suggest is the only capable coach, because he played international rugby) whom could never create that kind of non ego-centric environment that develops these essentials.
4 months ago
Mark – Woodward’s England didn’t innovate in terms of playing style, but they did set new standards of fitness [certainly in the NH], and they picked up on SH playing trends pretty quickly. SCW’s greatest triumph was in making a lot of ‘non-English’ selections, such as Austin Healey and Mike Catt himself, which made the team a lot more adaptable at Test level. In terms of tactical approach, they weren’t doing anything that Australia or the Kiwis hadn’t done already.
As far as the All Blacks sickness bug goes, well, they had it worse before the Wales game and won that by over 30 points. They also played better at Twickenham than they did against both Scotland and Wales. While the result isn’t a be-all and end-all it does point to England’s potential.
Simon, it’s very hard to weigh up any of your contributions – by either blog or post – because everything passes through a ‘Bath of the 1980s filter’!
I’m guessing that you believe Elliott Daly should be picked at 13? I believe he will have a long international career, but it will be at 15. The game has moved past the point where you can select a player with Daly’s qualities at outside centre. The most obvious feature is that 13 would make no use of his long left-footed kicking game.
I guess this is where a bit of Walsh-like vision is required – to see that this is where a player’s Test future will be positionally.
4 months ago
hmm , well i wont apologise for the Bath team of the 80’s – and 90’s! We had a simple philosophy to play through space and at pace , in the areas we could do the most damage, and we attacked opposition strengths . RWC winners England operated in the same way under SCW – and we saw some of that in the AB game in December !
Actually , flexible on where Elliot would play because in the backs specialist positions are less relevant than ever – however if you make a break in midfield , someone is likely to score a try – get your best players into the key positions and if you really believe the game has ‘moved past the point’ etc then you have been taken in by the muscle and brawn factor and i urge you to take a look at the sensational Wesley Fofana from Clermont , who could be an outside bet to dominate the 6 Nations .And i hope he does .
Ashley ,look at what Lancaster said were the reasons for bringing in Catt -he wanted some specialist attack coaching once he had lost out on Wayne Smith . I would like to think this is the sign of Catt having an impact ……
4 months ago
‘Where to put your best attacking guys?’ is a key question for all international coaches right now, isn’t it?
France seem to have their doubts where to play Fofana – centre or wing? – and Ireland have the same issue with Keith Earls. You rarely see a break from outside centre in the structured phases after the set-piece [at least not the classic ‘outside break’] so coaches have to think of other ways, and usually other positions, to see and exploit space – especially that key space around the 13 channel.
The muscle/brawn factor is just a reality at least at Test level. The need for power has moved steadily outwards, and it’s why even the Kiwis eventually gave up on trying to play two distributors at 10 and 12.
So I guess it will be interesting to see where PSA selects Fofana eh?
8
Comments