EVEN the super coach Jack Gibson had fallow years, lean
times when he scattered the seed only to find nothing much grew on rocky
ground. Or perhaps it was the seed: bad stock, better fed to animals and
not fit for the purposes to which Gibson sought to turn it.
Gibson endured the ignominy of departing South Sydney not at the time
of his own choosing in 1979 after two rough seasons and he ended his career
at Cronulla, yet another fine coach to struggle in the Shire. "Waiting
for Cronulla to win a premiership is like leaving the porch lamp on for
Harold Holt," Gibson remarked with customary wit.
But Guus Hiddink, in a much larger and more treacherous pond, has avoided
Redfern and Endeavour, his Midas touch showing no sign of abating. He
can now - if not before - write his own price in whatever currency he
chooses after repeating earlier stunning results with South Korea and
Australia with the (previously) uncoachable Russians.
As with the Socceroos, Hiddink worked in large part with the same raw
material that had performed so poorly for the previous coach. Australia
came last of eight in the Confederations Cup and, less than a year later,
made the World Cup round of 16, and came within a whisker of going further.
Russia failed to qualify for the last World Cup, losing 7-1 to Portugal
in the process. Now, with five of the same players, they stormed into
the Euro 2008 top four before losing to eventual champions Spain. What
makes a great coach is a question guaranteed to find a different answer
from every person asked. Yet few could argue Hiddink deserves the mantle.
How much better than the rest is he? A lot, suggests John O'Neill, who
recruited the Dutchman to the Socceroos post.
O'Neill, now back at the Australian Rugby Union, where he has helped install
Robbie Deans in the Wallabies' head role, believes a great coach can improve
a team by as much as 50 per cent, citing the Socceroos' turnaround as
evidence. Perhaps winning is not so much a matter of inches but of choices.
But the choice of Hiddink wasn't all Australia's.
"When we recruited him he was attracted to the challenge but he really
was insistent on doing his own due diligence on our player base,"
O'Neill said. "He chose us as much as we chose him. He does his homework."
The movement of Wayne Bennett from Brisbane to the Dragons next season
- and Deans to the Wallabies - no doubt have similar elements of who's
doing the choosing. And why. The best way to prove yourself a good coach
- or confirm your reputation as a great one - is to take underperforming
playing stock and have them aim up and achieve.
Wallabies captain Stirling Mortlock has no doubt some coaches are just
better - not that he's letting on who they are. "I've got no doubt
certain coaches, if you put them in a similar environment, will be able
to bring the group up," he said.
The how can vary. Mortlock suggested some coaches can identify the skills
lacking to lift a playing group. Others might find players technically
equipped but missing a collective sense of purpose.
"I guess the really good coaches are the ones who can do a bit of
all those things - identify where the group needs to go, identify the
direction and then harness and motivate the cultures," he said.
It won't surprise Shane Warne to hear John Buchanan describe the great
coach as the creator of systems. "If a coach is worth their salt
then they're there for the long term and they'll set up a system and process
so that when the next person comes in, it will be a reasonably seamless
transition. Whereas other coaches are basically dealing with the here
and now: they try to win today and not worry about tomorrow," the
former Australian cricket mentor said.
He sees the coach's role as that of leader or chief executive, with that
position potentially compromised if they rub on too much liniment.
"If the coach decides they're the expert on any one area they'll
be found wanting and their credibility and respect within the group will
be diminished. That's virtually terminating their lifespan. The good coaches
rely very heavily on the knowledge of their players," he said.
But is the coach the boss or not? Hiddink comes as close to total control
as any coach.
"He's certainly the boss. I guess his stature and unambiguous message
he gives you that this is his turf and you don't enter his domain without
an invitation is laid out pretty clearly from the outset," O'Neill
said.
But total concession can be painful for administrators. "You don't
just throw them the keys and say, 'It's all yours'. There's got to be
a clear understanding of what the plan of attack is. The administrator's
job is not to coach but if the wheels come off then that's when the CEO
of a business has to be able to say, 'Well, what are you going to do about
this'?"
