New Zealand Men's U-17s

Hi Bruce i'm not going into any long explanation about my reasoning I just want the truth and all HUDSON gives us is talk and fence sitters like you just fall in behind.

Isn't that what you just did? "I'm not going to go into detail about my reasons" sounds familiar. 

Heyref, If you have the time and energy to throw around disaparaging remarks about me (fence-sitter) you might have the time to substantiate your own opinions. 

You don't need a long explanation. A short one will be fine. 

And if you are critical of Gourdie's questioning, explain what you think was lacking. (Go on, dare you)

If people just throw mud without ever looking to substantiate their opinions forums lose their impetus.

Nobody has a monopoly on truth.  But it is through the Socratic method of question and answer, thesis and antithesis, that we get closest to it. However it requires intelligent discussion, not just hot-headed name calling.

Hope this helps

Well done Tegal I thought it might of taken longer

Help me out here Smithy, 2nd Best etc.... am I just wasting my time feeding a simple troll by trying to have an intelligent discussion here?

I think his statement is fair. He said he agreed with one aspect of what Hudson said (and it isn't exactly an outrageous statement). He also congratulated the line of questioning that tried to dig deeper for those answers you so desperately seek, Hudson didn't give any answers to these. I'd hardly call this falling into line and eating up everything Hudson has to say. 

Seems like a perfectly balanced and justified view to have, unlike yours. 

I thought Gourdie's questioning was cogent, on point, and eloquent. He pursued a determined line of questioning calmly but with rigour in looking for hard news angles, and it made for one of the best one-on-one electronic interviews in NZ's recent football media history.

Sorry Tegal I didn't mean Gourdie more so the Holloways and Burgess's of this world who have a love of the game but that's about it Like Hudson they give you a big long speech. but to former AW it gives me the sh ts

unlike you who just slags people off without any speech whatsoever?

Heyref, what makes you think you have any idea of my background in the game? 

But if you want to see whose is the biggest, lets put it on the table

Gordie's interview was excellent. The public are now way better informed and understand the machinations of nzf. Only other question I wish he asked was why now? Minor quibble though. Gourdie deserves praise. Don't buy hudsons rationale or excuses that 'in football we don't have to justify ourselves' crap. An eye opener in this regard. Good players don't mean good coaches so I call bullshark on that point but if Hudson believes that hay and zoro are better coaches then that is an interesting point in itself. At least Hudson came clean on that.

Tegal you sound like journalist yourself but lets move on and talk football.

1000% this. Hudson would probably hire Danny Hay over AVB because the former played pro football.

I don't even know what that is supposed to mean. But I guess it means that I'm writing well and making good points, while asking pertinent questions. 

So thanks I guess. 

Imagine if the shoe was on the other foot and Hudson qualified us for the WC and he was then replaced by matt calcott because he was a kiwi. It would be wrong. But the karmic levels of the universe would be aligned.

The equalising of karmic tapestry in football is a subject worthy of further investigation.

I just wish that if NZF are to exercise their perogative in axing coaches that they make a bit more of an effort with their media releases in at least offering some sort of context beyond empty platitudes so that us stakeholders are not so reliant on the chance button-holing of someone like Hudson by the fourth estate.

It is incongruous to have the courage to make such bold strategic decisions - and then make such wimpy, empty, lame efforts in justifying such moves.

well done Gourdie. I bought a bit of what Hudson was saying to be honest. Just makes it difficult to digest given what a dropkick Hay is in his newspaper articles.

So is the St Kentigans thing fact or fiction?

True. I also want the fourth estate to be more pro active on the public interest story than just a chance button holing. I'm glad Gourdie got around to it eventually but I was fuming for a week!

I love the comment: "They both played at the top level in Europe" - Zoro was a good player, but even he would laugh at the idea that Leyton Orient is the top level in Europe

Temple and Figuero came to NZ when they were 18. They are now both 36 I believe. They have spent half their lives in NZ. I think they get to call themselves Kiwis and most of their coaching knowledge has been obtained here in NZ which i think also adds to the Kiwi tag.

Temple I believe has either completed his UEFA B licence or is close to it, something he undertook himself. Both have every NZ coaching licence available.

I dont think that either Zorocich or Hay have the UEFA B Licence and Temple and Figuera have had their NZ qualifactions for a number of years longer than Hay and Zorocich ( not even sure if Zorocich has got them all yet) and as well as that both Temple and Figuero have a number of years more coaching experience. Both have coached previously at age group international level.

Dumping them for Hay and Zorocich makes even less sense now given Hudsons interview with Gourdie.

There is some serious bullshark going on at present.

They did not come to NZ when they were 18.

They came in mid 2000's 

Maybe he was referring to Wealdstone FC

Temple first moved to NZ when he was 18. I ran in to him when he was a player in 2005 and he had already been here for a few years at that point.  I am unsure if Jose moved here with him or if they met here.

http://i.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/sport/local-sport/696823/Career-coach-Paul-Temple

Stop being a dick heyref

I thought Gourdie asked the questions well and made Hudson squirm. Like Bruce, I took note that he likes Hay and Zoro for what they bring, not what they can do. The paradox is his own career as a coach as he does not have those qualities that Hay has. In fact Jose and Temple would be closer to his own pathway than Hay etc and he has just jettisoned them.

Get FDJ on the hot seat next.

One thing I have to ask is "are NZF going to give Tony Readings the same power over the women's programme?" They kinda have to really... Mind you, the women's programme has always been in better shape than the men's.

Maybe the fact that Hudson didn't have much of a playing career is exactly why he wants people who did around him and the squad?

I guess for me, the thing about Hudson is at least he's got a strategic plan and vision for NZ football. It seems a bit beyond the position description of senior men's coach but I guess no one else at NZF has had the balls to to try something like this previously.

I know this thread is about U17 and not Gourdie, but just wanted to give more praise on the interview. I was reflecting on it this morning after watching again.

Gourdie did well not to go down the track of "when did you enquire with hay/zoro about whether they were interested in taking on U17?"... the reason being that (if rumours are true) all we would have deduced is that NZF had lined this up weeks ago and behind Figueira/Temples back. Basically, NZF management is a shambles. It's crappy management but not exactly earth shattering stuff.

The real issue and nuggets of gold is trying to get clear the strategy and reasoning behind the coaching changes which Gourdie did achieve. We actually hear that NZF is now valuing Kiwi's, ex-internationals and ex-pros over not. Additionally, it is strategically important to NZF to find people who are committed to coaching long term for the national structure when Hudson moves on. This is valuable insight. I don't say I agree with it but it's valuable for us to know how (in concrete terms) NZF are delivering their Beyond Football plan. None of this came through in the press-release dumped on a Friday afternoon.

A lot of people on this thread have asked good questions made some good points. And I think it's great Gourdie got some answers for us. 

I know Gourdie pressed on the process part and Hudson was reticent, but I would loved to have got clarity on whether, as a standard, NZF look at all coaching appointments after major milestones (e.g. qualification for the U17 world cup in this case) and re-evaluate the coaching staff and whether NZF's strategic goals for coaching are being met. Basically the consequence is that every NZF coach would be under the microscope even after successfully delivering set performance objectives. You too Hudson.

I would love to see how the NZF administration issue develops from here. Things along the lines of:

So basically Hudson is making all the decisions around High Performance. 

So FDJ, are you just collecting a paycheck now and shuffling a few papers about (... am I starting to feel some sympathy for FDJ...)? 

Andy Martin, When did you authorise the All Whites manager to do the hiring and firing of all mens age group managers, etc? 

It's probably better in a NZF shambles thread. Hopefully NZF now knows we want greater transparency on the way they are enacting their plan of a brave new world. I won't hold my breath though.

At the risk of digressing.... One of the reasons Gourdie's interview was so bloody good and refreshing, is that over the years it has become harder and harder to get agreement with those who hold or broker power in football to go on the record in a robust public interview situation.

Indeed, I'm struggling to recall the last time the public got such an unembellished and unmanufactured view from inside the tent.

It reminded me of an interview I attempted back in late 2003 with then NZ Soccer CEO Bill MacGowan, in which he promised frank answers to anything I would care to ask as editor of Sitter fanzine - only for then media-liaison officer Andrew Dewhurst to insiert himself into the picture and decide time did not allow any further comment - apart from when the questions suited, of course.

Any anoraks wanting a trip down memory lane can read an at-times bizarre interview here, starting at page 16....

http://sitterfanzine.weebly.com/uploads/1/5/1/0/15102074/sitter_59_print.pdf

My take: I think Hudson's role at NZF is in charge of the mens' national teams and all of this 'allignment is part of that'. He wouldn't come out and say it but Jose obviously does not agree with his vision/style of play/whatever and so has been replaced. Replaced probably by guys that aren't as good a coach as Jose. Hudson is doing exactly what I'd expect a new guy to do when coming in, fill the important roles with people he thinks he can work with best or make his job easier. What is different here is that he has been given this all empowering position when this has not happened before. We are seeing what is common place everywhere else in the world, football or business. True, unfair on Jose and Paul, but life isn't always fair unfortunately.

It's somewhat interesting to compare and contrast NZF/Hudson and Nix/Merrick. 

Similar in that they were appointed to head coach roles and have actively been involved in overhauling the style of play and development paths of players.

Merrick has worked with the incumbents (possibly with Board placing the restrictions) to implement the strategy effectively.

Hudson and NZF have run roughshod over the incumbents.  In my opinion, it's yet to be determined if NZF's approach is working. There have been no wins under Hudson (yes, a cheap shot).

It's clear from the Nix example that you don't have to clean out the incumbent coaches and backroom to achieve results.

In the slightest defence of NZF, if they believe that Hay/Zorocich are better coaches and willing and available then they wouldn't be doing their jobs by not enquiring about their interest in joining the NZF team. The treatment of Figueira and Temple though seems deplorable. I agree that we don't know the full story (perhaps Figueira and Temple were offered other roles in NZF but declined and pursued a settlement) but NZF just haven't been forthcoming with anything.

Why has the way temple and co been treated so poor. Were they spoken to beforehand?? We don't know what went on behind the scenes, perhaps they were asked to adopt a different style and said no... leaving NZF in a tough spot?

NZF has over the years done some dumb shark, but surely at some point they must get it right... the law of statistics tells us as much!!

My understanding is that they found out they were 'under review' through the grapevine first and that Hay/Chris were going to take over. 

I agree and have mentioned that as well. We don’t know other events that happened inside the tent but NZF should really be the party to enlighten the footballing public. It's a tougher spot for NZF not to explain it.

Yeah - that was pretty much Hudson's weakest moment. Talk about grasping at straws.

Imagine if the conversation between Hudson and Figueira went "Hey Jose, I'm sorry but we have done this because of alignment. Now alignment is a lot of things. It’s not just style of play. But I’m just saying it’s alignment. We need the right characters in"

I thought Hudson's strongest part of the interview was that, in his opinion, he thought Hay / Zorocich were stronger coaches. Direct and to the point on a reason why you might make a coaching change. Whether his opinion is reasonable or not, I would not know.

Have you been listening to my podcast rants Bruce?

Even then he only revealed that by accident, after Gourdie kept pressing him. He originally was saying he wasn't going to answer that (his favourite phrase)