I was just reading the news that the All Black rugby coach Scott Robertson has been fired after the New Zealand Rugby Board finished doing their annual review. Teams should not be fiddling changing their coach in between World Cups if they want success and this is pure common sense.
When you look at the previous All Black coaches and their percentage records we are literally talking the difference of 2 matches from the top percentage holder to what Scott Robertson achieved. These are fine margins and definitely not a reason to get rid of your coach.
When you compare this win ratio with South Africa's Springbok team coach who started out with a rough year on 50% and has ended up at around 80% since leaving an average of about 75%. Two World Cups do justify Rassie Erasmus method to his madness and why he has been handed an extension to 2031 which is unheard of in todays coaching circles.
Both Scott Robertson and Rassie Erasmus started out coaching at the same time with there being some clear and obvious differences. Erasmus coached the Free State Cheetahs, then became Springbok technical director, Stormers coach, Munster coach and only then Springbok coach and director of rugby. Scott Robertson went from coaching the under 10's to Crusaders coach and then the All Blacks coach. The experience is definitely lacking and this is not his fault as he was deemed the best coach available when appointed.
What a slap in the face it will be for New Zealand Rugby if Erasmus appoints Scott Robertson in an advisory role on his team. Highly doubtful Scott Robertson would accept the offer but if he did maybe he would learn what he is lacking as a coach which may be very little.
The problem with New Zealand rugby is the team depth as there is none and in order to create that depth you have to give new players the experience by giving them game time. Teams cannot be scared to lose during this growth phase and why Erasmus in his first year lost 50% of the matches played. Even today if it is not a World Cup game he is happy to experiment with new players and New Zealand for some reason are too scared to do this.
If you have an annual review board worrying about your win percentages instead of what is being developed then you are going to have a problem. The public demands success but at the same time would be forgiving if your team lost by blooding new players.
In 2025 9 new players earned their first international cap for the All Blacks with a total of 45 players used. I would guess many of these were forced through injuries The Springboks used a total of 54 players which included another 8 receiving their first international cap. The All Blacks had 9 injured players hence the new caps which was forced on them and not the normal. The difference is that the SA team does not worry about injuries anymore as they have the depth and luxury of 3 players of the same standards in every position. The win percentage ratio of SA if in place like New Zealand has would never have allowed the squad depth to grow and there is another 10 players under 21 years of age training and travelling with the squad.
Success is not a given how much you think you want and deserve it as planning needs to happen in order to ensure success follows. With New Zealand this is not in place and this needs to change because the time of expecting to win is no longer guaranteed due to other teams being in a much stronger position. The short sightedness by the New Zealand Rugby Board is almost as bad as selling their marketing rights to an American invest firm which depletes their revenue. The All Blacks do not have the funds they once had and cannot invest in their future which is a major problem and you cannot blame the coach for this scenario. Whoever is appointed as the next All Black coach is in for a rough ride and in many ways is a poisoned chalice.