Comments on: Play the first minute like it’s the last

By: Sledgeandhammer

Sledgeandhammer — Tue, 24 Jun 2008 11:12:35 +0000

I agree with Sheek, it’s a willingness to play for the whole 80 minutes, which is of interest. This is not a reference to under 11s running around like headlesss chicken. Nor it is about playing to a limited game plan of run the ball at all costs. It’s about playing to your potential and not allowing the occasion to dictate the game. In so many instances teams do wait until the last minute before they actually play any rugby, and by then it’s too late.

A good example of how this typical ‘wait and see’ approach can be turned on its head comes from the 2003 world cup. In the the semi final, Australia was playing NZ. The Australlans were huge underdogs, but cleverly changed their game plan. In the opening minutes they actually came out and ran the ball. The Australians played the entire game to their full potential, and with a bit of luck (thanks to Mortlock) scored an unlikely win, a win which would not have come about if they had sat back and waited until the last minute to chance their arm.

By: Jameswm

Jameswm — Mon, 23 Jun 2008 08:48:05 +0000

You know I made a comment 7-8 years ago that the Brumbies were playing after the siren rugby during the 80 minutes.

No, it wasn’t high risk stuff. But when you’re 4 behind and the siren goes, the tactic is in fact not to be risky – it’s to control possession of the ball. So often, after the final siren, a team will win 20-30 phases and work their way upfield. The Brumbies seemed to perfect this style for the whole match, and it took the others a long time to catch up.

Of course, as cycles go, everyone else caught up and worked out how to stop it. Yet Gregan & co kept playing it for too long after it lost its effectiveness.

By: Andrew B

Andrew B — Mon, 23 Jun 2008 04:53:41 +0000

If you want to see this type of rugby, go down to your local park on a sunday and watch the U11′s play. They try to score every phase!

By: Blinky Bill - Bellingen

Blinky Bill - Bellingen — Mon, 23 Jun 2008 03:41:07 +0000

Sheek & JohnB covered it all nicely.

My real question is why do teams continue with the same ineffective game plan until the final whistle? Over the years I would have loved to have seen the Tahs switch from Plan A to Plan B when required.

By: JohnB

JohnB — Mon, 23 Jun 2008 01:20:05 +0000

Rugby is hardly the only sport where this happens. It is a matter of risk/reward. Of course a team which is one score behind will keep throwing the ball around in the final few minutes – the risk is effectively zero, the potential reward (winning instead of losing) very large. Ten minutes before fulltime is a different matter – the reward is still high (though not as high – going ahead as opposed to winning) but the risk is much greater – going 2 scores behind. Does that mean teams shouldn’t try anything until it’s death or glory? Of course not. But equally you can’t expect them to play all out attack all the time.

By: sheek

sheek — Sun, 22 Jun 2008 22:39:29 +0000

This is an old chestnut. It usually revolves around courage, or lack of.

Teams throw the ball when when all is lost, or mostly lost, simply because they have little more left to lose. The attitude is, “we’re going down, so we’ve got nothing more to lose”. Basically, it’s a cop-out attitude.

I am a great admirer of NZ rugby. They play hard the whole 80 minutes. There must be something fundamentally wrong with rugby that NZ have only won one World Cup. They deserve better than that. In 1995, they were beaten probably by the Gods, & a team wholly inspired on the day.

In 1999 & 2003, they were beaten in the semis mostly by their own arrogance & hubris. The 2007 loss remains unfathomable. But this is beside the point.

It is NZ who continue to be the flag bearer of world rugby, & provide the game with its standard bearer, or high point, like Australia in cricket & Brazil in football. Alternately, England for all its resources, is a sham & disgrace to rugby.

But getting back to the thrust of the post, yes, it’s basically a lack of courage that teams only decide to throw the ball around when all is lost. Just like aimlessly kicking possession away.