How many?

[Vespula Vulgaris]

Like many of you, I suspect, I have been thinking a lot about our current inability to win.

When one player is failing to hit the level of ability we know they have we simply say they are out of form. But when enough of them do it to affect the entire team we say the coaches are failing.

So I have a few questions.

How many players being out of form means it is no longer their own fault but that of the DoR?

And how many players need to be out of form to drag the team down?

Who are those players for us currently?

[Tervueren]

Not sure any are out of form. We all see players having a "bad game" but how often is it really in isolation. Is Robson suddenly not getting quick ball from the ruck actually totally his fault? Or is it others not being ready? Or the opposition disrupting more successfully.

Not wishing to come over all Norman Lamont...there were some green shoots in the last match in that (IMO) we played more like a team than at any time so far this year. Only doing that for 40 minutes per match is still relegation form but the good bits were an improvement, and this season looks like it is going to be about improving faster than one other team.

We have been disjointed, less than the sum of the parts. This might be down to the DoR and coaches, or it might be down to familiarity, so many new players, or a bit of both. IMO we have a set of good players, the Coach/DoR shop does not have any obvious upgrades on offer, so it looks like this is what we have.

[NellyWellyWaspy]

I think, for the starting 15, if you have 5 or less who you can say are 'on form' and the rest are meh, then you have a coaching problem. When 2 or 3 on the field are underperforming, you sub them. Given the role of 'finishers' (the bench), all of them should be on form.

Now, all players will have the capacity for some 'moments' on the pitch, but when those same players do that week after week (remember Le Roux?), you have a problem.

However, I think, if I am allowed to say it, but it is the wrong question.

Are the players PRL class players? Yes.

Is the team balanced and, on paper, capable of winning? Yes.

That they do not do so is down to leadership. That is on field (captain) and off field (coaches). In any organisation under performance is about leadership. Yes, you might have a few players you would say might be an issue (I don't think so in this case).

My issue is that I see the younger players playing well with different Wasps coaches. Less experienced (maybe) coaches. I see them being captained by less experienced players.

So, you then look at what has changed. Players have left and retired. IMO that has left a cohort of senior players who are not competent enough to be a captain. I include Joe and Dan in that.

So, we must look to our incomers. In our potential first team, for me that is Shields and Willis. If we keep dodging that issue, we will continue as we have been, misfiring, with poor on field decision making and inability to adapt our game. In other words, losing.

Off the field, there can be no doubt that there needs to be a big broom taken to the senior coaching squad. How far up the chain to you go? I don't think Dai is the problem. It is who is under him. My first target would be our attack coach. It is clearly the weakest part of our game. Backs defence next.

[Shugs]

It's a good question(s). For it to be a coaching problem I think you need evidence of whole team units not functioning. They fall into four main categories, attack, defence, the pack and the set piece. For me the last three have improved and it's our attack which is the issue. So looking at that I do think we are creating chances but are just not taking them. We appear to be snatching at things - a classic sign of a lack of confidence. So, for me, it's a lack of confidence which is affecting our ability to be clinical and also leads to silly individual errors and an element of panic when we hit the front (Quins!). The coaching is not such a big issue. In terms of individuals I'd say those out of form at the moment are Robson and probably a bit harsh but Gopperth. In form but possibly just not good enough I'd say are Le Bourgeois and Kibirige (defensively really worries me - attacking fine). So, for me, the coaching thing is overplayed and we are just the wrong side of fine margins. I wouldn't be averse to a fresh voice coming in under Dai which I think we are trying to do but I don't think we need wholesale change.

[mike909]

In all areas of performance - be that in industry or sports - the performance is usually a result of what comes from the top. Key to this is often culture - as in the confidence to state when something doesn't make sense - or if you are being asked to do something that as a player/front line worker, you know to be wrong

Now this happens for a number of reasons - but key is having a leadership team that is not renewing itself in skills or in ideas or in the way of working and can be indicated - often - by the leadership wanting to do  the same things again and again - and expecting a different outcome. But a leadership team that becomes defensive and inward looking will have a defensive and inward looking team and we seem to have a team that hasn't got anyone prepared to lead on the pitch.

Sometimes people at the top can just be there too long and can lose the dressing room (so to speak). I've seen this happen in sports teams and in work teams and there is not often a quick and easy solution. But carrying on regardless is rarely a good idea.

I too think the coaching team is a likely focus - the players are individually good enough - but the team does not seem to have leaders on the pitch and having now watched most of Wasps game this season - I'm not certain what our plan A is, let alone plan B. And that shows in both play and in inability to manage play.

I have no knowledge of how things are within the club - but my gut feel is that no one ought to be above review. Dai included, and sometimes - as we've seen in sports coaching again and again - your time is up, no reflection on the people involved - its just how management is.

[DGP Wasp]

It all becomes something of a catch 22.  Poor form among a handful of key players then rubs off on those around them.  So Robson, Bassett, Gopperth (sadly and perhaps unsurprisingly nowhere near his best since he came back) play poorly, and the likes of Le Bourgeois and Kibirige fail to reach their full potential.  Putting similarly promising yet inexperienced players into a team full of form and confidence will certainly get more from them.

Totally agree with Nelly's point on leadership.  Senior players have not stepped up.  While Shields has all the credentials and experience, I think the club needs look no further than Jack Willis.  Make him captain with a view to the longer term.  May also make him easier to keep hold of when contracts need renegotiating.  He is a similar age now to LBND when he was made captain and that didn't work out too badly.