PERFORMANCE DIRECTOR

PLAN Ireland was a document published by the IRFU in 2012 that recognised the shortcomings within the Irish system. Contrary to what might be presumed, it has not been one seamless success for the sport here since it turned professional in 1995.

The success of the provinces in the 2000s had strengthened them but with that came risks to a system that relied upon centralised power; at its best, the provinces must serve the national team.

The system needed an authoritative figure who was not a coach. They come and they go, their fates reliant upon results. For the longer term, the IRFU recognised the need for a new role, as described in Plan Ireland.

‘This paper contends that the present balance is not working as well as it should to deliver the highest possible national performance and that a more integrated approach will only be delivered by having clear integrated leadership of the whole professional game structure at national and provincial level, led by a Performance Director (PD) and overseen by a streamlined committee structure which recognises the role of the IRFU Committee but creates an effective structure of professional delegation so that agreed policies and plans can be implemented quickly,’ it read.

Before Schmidt’s time, Ireland coaches up to and including his predecessor, Declan Kidney, had to sit down on the eve of a Test match and explain the team they had picked to the ‘national team review group’, a collection of committee men.

It is difficult to conceive of such a system now. Schmidt was appointed in April 2013, and it would be a further 12 months before the performance director position was filled.

From the IRFU’s perspective, it was worth the wait: David Nucifora has been a huge success, with Schmidt and the provincial coaches answering to him.

This means the interests of the Irish side are now prioritised. The relationship between Schmidt and Nucifora has been central to this age of success.