By Ian From NZ
July 27th 2008 @ 6:00pm
Loading ...
All Blacks spanked by a smarter coaching outfit
Robbie Deans is turning the Wallabies into the Crusaders. He is following this ELV game blueprint. In a few short weeks the Wallabies are 5-0.
Deans didn’t meet the Aussie players until after the Super 14 ended, unlike Henry’s mob who spent the whole Super 14 studying games and players. Australian rugby is supposed to have less depth than NZ, and yet Deans’ player selection has proved to be outstanding: the Wallabies did not miss Gregan, Larkam and Mortlock did they!
Deans has a sharp rugby mind and I think his successful trend will continue. Sure he has yet to get success away from home, and that won’t be easy, but it will happen. The Wallabies must be favorites for the Bledisloe cup, after all 34-19 was a thrashing, a real spanking!
Deans read the All Blacks weakness like a children’s book, it was that easy, and he exploited them, well done. There are those that say, watch out for the All Blacks’ backlash, I say watch out for the Aussies second win in a row 2-0. Are they that good, or were we so bad that we made them look that good, I guess this season will show either way.
Lets look at the All Blacks.
Firstly, the AB players did not loose this test match, the coaches did, from poor player selection and incorrect tactics. I have said on this blog that the All Blacks have a good A side and a not so good B side. The second half saw this B side play for the full 40 minutes and it was horrible, the capitulation in the last 10 minutes against the Boks highlighted this weakness that seem to have gone ignored, maybe it won’t be now. (Well Deans didn’t miss it, did he!)
Player Selection
The back four: Muliaina, Tuitavake, Kahui, Sivivatu as a combination (not individually) was a disaster. Smith and Macdonald should have been starting. Tuitavake and Kahui are not first string players. Sivivatu is a one trick pony, he has no kicking game, sure he was more industrious in this test match but to counter the attacking teams kicking game you need more smarts in the back four than Muliaina (who had an outstanding game as an individual) on his own.
Henry’s selection of Kahui over Smith was pure rotation, Kahui does not have a hair on Smith, Smith is a leader of the backs and can organise the wings and defence the same way Frank Bunce did. Kahui did have a good game against the English in the second test, but that was soft English meat and not the same as the first test where Smith shined and the English weren’t already beaten. Henry’s selection of this back four combination was plain stupid. This loss has shown that up, and him up.
Nonu, Kahui: To counter Ma’a game all you need to do is tackle him, that’s it. He has no kicking game, he is a one trick pony and that’s ‘run like a fridge’. If you are going to select him, you need to counter his weakness with strength and that’s by having a good first five and center around him. Kahui did not meet this demand, he is a young player with an inexperienced head, latter years will see him be better I hope. Ma’a needs a leader outside him and that’s why the Carter, Nonu, Smith combination works best. Henry selection was stupid again. Rotation weakens combinations.
Andy Ellis: There was talk before the game that Cowan would start, he didn’t and that was a mistake. Cowan, sure not yet fulyl tested, but he is more ‘Justin Marshall’ than Ellis and as it happens the game last night could have done with that type of player. Ellis did ‘put out’, but I guess I fancy Cowan’s ‘I take no mess’ attitude better!
Forwards: This game highlighted the need for replacements, not from the front line team but from the squad. These players should be dropped from the squad: Braid, Lauaki, Mealamu. Kaino should be benched as replaced with Mose Tuiali’i.
Lauaki was shown up, he was selected as an impact player for 10 minutes only, in this game he had to play for 40 and it was sooo painful to watch, his Super 14 form did not warrant his nine cat lives as an All Black. Another stupid selection by Henry’s mob.
Mealamu is not what he used to be. The hooker (Andrew Hore) should only be subbed in extreme situations because his lineout throwing is critical, something Henry’s mob has yet to learn. In the last two test matches the immediate subbing of the hooker has lead to loosing critical lineouts at the closing stages of the game. Deans know this, he does not sub off hookers with such frequency as Henry.
Tactics
Deans experience with the ELVs shined last night, Henry has yet to pass this exam. His team selection did not support the much needed force back game that the ELVs require (I don’t like it either), and that’s why we spent most of the game in our own half. The ELVs allow a team to assume, in error, that less rugby union structure may be best for the attacking game, the All Blacks had too often slow forwards running in the backs negating any attack.
The All Blacks did not follow the mandate that ‘forwards be forwards’ creating up the middle pick and go and driving mauls, rather they decided that the should be backs and playing glorified touch rugby out wide. (I suggest you read this post: Super 14 Final: Birth of the generic ELV rugby style).
The wide subbing of players in the second half was panic, why else would you let Lauaki play at the back of the scrum for so long, George Smith was beating us, but he didn’t need to, as Lauaki gave the ball up 7 times in as many minutes.
A loss, so what?
I have said before that this year was going to be patchy, if not bad. You can’t loose so many front line players after RWC and march on as if nothing has happened. It takes time to rebuild (but under Henry, maybe too much time). But I do suggest that if Deans was the All Black coach the record so far would be 5-0, without a doubt!
Loosing a rugby game does seam to bring out the calls for structural change, and panic. This is not needed, the poor performance of the All Blacks is down to the All Blacks and not NZ rugby (at the moment). Yet I hear that Sean Fitzpatrick is calling for the selection of overseas players. And I bet the 2 cell-brained media idiots will join him: “Because of the exodus overseas and the injury to Richie McCaw. It’s just another example of what I have been talking about - our lack of depth with experience at this level and how it is hurting us.”…
Sorry, did the Aussies select overseas players after they lost Gregan and Larkam (and Mortlock out through injury)? When we lost 5 games in a row under John Hart would players from overseas make any difference, nope. Losses may be used to maneuver political positions on the weak minds of the rugby public for the individual own advantage, but we are loosing because we have made poor administration decisions at the NZRU board level (Tew) and coaching level (Henry).
Henry’s mob won’t last the next 24 month in their current form. After the last RWC there should have been a break up of some sort, maybe Hanson, Smith, Cooper, something like that. But to keep the same trio was not smart.
That’s two losses in a row, it better not be 3, because that’s a trend, and we have away games after Auckland, so loosing trend growth would not be good print for Henry’s mob.
We have the players and skill to beat them all, it’s just a question do we have the coaching smarts to make this happen?
Watch Episode 8 NEW of The Roar Rugby Review
Free Email updates:
Our daily emails are only sent if there is content for the sport or that author. You can subscribe to multiple daily emails; or get the daily Roar email with all our content in it. We value privacy. More...
(13)
Sign-up to The Roar's A-League tipping comp. Get your mates involved and let the banter begin!
stu said | July 27th 2008 @ 9:59pm | Report comment
Carter was peerless in last night’s match, but he is the only brain in the ab backline (and arguably one of the greatest rugby players of all) - macdonald would add some smarts - for the ab’s to have 70% of the possesion and not win, suggest that the current players don’t know how to think on their feet. They are desprately missing the playmaking skills of mauger at second 5.
Is Nick Evan’s even in the ab squad?
Sam Taulelei said | July 27th 2008 @ 11:12pm | Report comment
Great summation and analysis Ian, you summed up our performance accurately as well as the predictable reaction and backlash from the NZ media and public. Henry conceded earlier in the week that his lack of experience in coaching the ELV’s was something that worried him as well as the obvious advantage it gave Deans. He’ll have to learn quickly otherwise we could be taking another lesson from the Wallabies in Auckland even if McCaw is selected.
I stated before the tests against SA that even our proud and formidable record at home offers me little solace this year as the longer a winning record continues, the closer you are to your first loss and only the most faithful will be seeking refuge in the All Blacks record at Eden park as a lozenge to soothe the choke hold the Wallabies had over us on Saturday night.
So far 2008 is looking eerily reminiscent of 2004 for NZ. Back then we impressed against the world champions England and won both home Tri Nations tests against SA and Australia, then the wheels fell off spectacularly with away losses, the last one an absolute thrashing in the republic with Marius Joubert scoring four tries. SA won the Tri Nations and were voted IRB team of the year and Jake White coach of the year. Australia and Robbie Deans are heading down the right track to emulate that achievement.
Bledisloe 1 perfectly captured the difference in the psychology of the two coaches with regards to selections for the 22 man squad. Deans rewards people with selection who have earned their spot and can make a difference, nobody’s position is guaranteed but you’ll keep your spot as long as you keep performing. Henry is still hellbent on building depth by rotating players which only works when your strongest first selections are performing and he will need to rethink his position on certain players within and outside the squad.
The Wallabies don’t fear us but where in the past few years they may have lacked the self belief they could beat us, you can see the confidence growing in this side and they won’t roll over for anybody.
ohtani's jacket said | July 27th 2008 @ 11:34pm | Report comment
Great article.
The only point I disagree with is the following:
“Firstly, the AB players did not loose this test match, the coaches did, from poor player selection and incorrect tactics.”
Henry’s not responsible for every mistake the All Blacks made. The players need to shoulder some blame for the handling errors, lack of commitment and poor defence. Henry got it wrong with his tactics, selections and subsitutions, but the players themselves couldn’t execute at pace, kept turning the ball over in their own 22 and defended poorly.
It took Carter two or three clearance attempts before he bit the bullet and opted for touch. It’s no wonder our forwards blew up. I realise he had a brilliant attacking game, but I don’t think he ran the game particularly well.
peter marks said | July 28th 2008 @ 5:05am | Report comment
Ian
A smart assessment of the test (in other words, I mostly agree with you) but with the following qualifcations: firstly, the rotation policy must be dropped, for the moment at least. We’re too far away from the next world cup to be worrying about building depth. We need instead to rebuild confidence, which only comes from winning. In crunch games, and surely this was always going to be one of those, you put on your best team, which means Smith in the centres for Kahui. At test level combinations are crucial, and as Deans showed with a depleted Crusaders team this year, they work at other levels as well. The fact that the AB team on Saturday night had never played before told heavily against them. I know that this has been true of every Henry team, but this was also a team with very patchy test experience in the backline–Kahui, Tuituvake, Ellis and Nonu are all relative novices. True, the Wallabies also had new players, but Deans’s great gift, as he showed with the Crusaders, seems to be to get 15 players quickly functioning as a cohesive unit no matter the personnel. The AB backline on Saturday night did not function as a unit, I think for reasons I’ll give below. As you say, Smith has more nous and experience than Kahui at this stage, and these count for a huge amount when the pressure goes on. The point was, though, that Kahui hardly ever (perhaps never) got the ball in a regulation backline move and so never got a chance to show his strengths. He looked slow and bewildered in broken play, but that has much to do with the higher speed and pressure of internationals. He’ll learn, but not until the northern tour, I hope. Which brings us to Nonu: as I mentioned in an earlier posting, his trouble is that at Super 14 level his ability to break a tackle makes him dangerous, but at test level he needs to use the abilities of those around him to create tries for others, as well as occasionally score them himself. In other words he needs to pass, and not just as he’s going to ground. Against England he was offloading intelligently, and as a result Smith and Sivivatu were given space and looked very dangerous. On Saturday Nonu reverted to type, trying to smash his way through rather than distribute the ball. This meant that it never went to the wings in a flowing movement (’no look’ pass situations are desperate attempts to get out of jail, not serious attacks, even if some times they pay off.). So, Sivivatu and Tuituvake never got the ball in the situation that best suits them: one or two men to beat from 30 metres out. Most of the time Sivivatu was running it back from 80 metres into a wall of Wallabies. You don’t score a try a test for 30 tests if you’re a one trick pony. You do score a try a test if you are asked to finish off a sustained and coherent backline move by a team moving the ball swiftly and creatively, which the ABs only did sporadically on Saturday. The real culprit in the backline, though, was Ellis, whose slow pass and Gregan -like lateral running cut down room for all those outside him. Apart from an inadequate pass, Ellis is not strong or aggressive enough (see Piri Weepu, Justin Leonard, Byron Kelleher) to rip the ball out of rucks and mauls and get it back quickly into play. Typically, he stands waiting for the ball to come out. The AB backs need quick ball to keep overall momentum going–Ellis retards the backline, so that by the time the ball gets to Nonu the opposition is right on top of him and he goes back to what he knows best, crashing up the middle. By then the backline continuity is lost and the 4 guys outside Nonu are wasted. In a backine of 7 men, that’s a big waste. Additionally, Ellis has no real running game to speak of, and so causes no uncertainty among the defending team (again compare Weepu, Leonard, Kelleher). I’ve criticised Cowan before as being Marshall Lite,but he does get in an mix it (see his try against the English). The neglect of Weepu has come back to haunt Henry and Smith. Perhaps injury will give him his chance. I hope so.
As to the forwards: Lauaki was terrible, but his one-handed running always had disaster written all over it at test level. Your don’t need to tacle him around his thighs when all you have to do is tackle his wrist. Even before Saturday night he regularly lost the ball in the tackle. Being the biggest kid on the park at Super 14 doesn’t matter at test level. Handing over the ball to the opposition 7 times in circumstances where momentum and continuity were essential was criminal. This let the Wallabies off the hook again and again. Worse than that, it gave them a chance to counterattack or simply to hoof the ball down the field, forcing the ABs to score from 80 metres, an increasingly impossible task as tiredness compounded the pressure. “Here, equally tired opposition under the cosh, you have the ball. Oh, and while you’re at it, have a breather, use up time, get on the front foot and get your self-belief back” I’m not saying the ABs would have won had Lauaki NOT touched the ball in the last 25 minutes, but it must surely have helped. Braid was outplayed by Smith, although that was to be expected. Again, though, it meant that ruck and maul ball was slow, or lost. Assuming McCaw returns fit this week, expect more quick ball with a consequent improvement in the backline performance. And while Smith and later Waugh made key tackles, I can’t remember Braid doing the same. Perhaps I’m being harsh here, but several times potential tries were stopped by massive Wallaby tackles. Clearly Alli Williams was not 100%, and this cutdown the lineout options, causing poor throws, and the important loss of ball on either attack or defence. Again, in tight games, gifting the ball two or three times to you opponents is of itself enough to sink you. Do it 25 times. . . . .
Can the ABs win this week? Despite the doomsayers, of course they can. Surely they won’t cough up the ball 25 times two week on a row, and with McCaw back they should get better ball. If Williams is fit the forwards might work more as an aggressive and cohesive unit, which they failed to do on Saturday. This should get the ball to a backline with Smith in the centres and ( I hope) a new halfback.
Which isn’t to say that the ABs will win or that Wallabies didn’t deserve to win last Saturday, because they did given how the game panned out. They played to their strengths, were more committed in tackle area, quick on defence, and they rode their luck. They created their luck as well, and they scrapped hard. It was a gutsy performance, though, rather than a classy one. But I’m sure Wallaby fans will take a gutsy win over a classy loss any time. I know I would.
Mark said | July 28th 2008 @ 2:52pm | Report comment
Good summary Ian. Well written & very close to the mark. The only good thing is this team (with a couple of changes) have the potential to play better over a more sustained period of time. Here’s hoping it’s in Eden Park as a start or we’ll be looking for a new coach after the EOY tour & last time I checked our two favourite contenders are otherwise engaged. How about Jake White for AB coach ?? Now THAT would get the cat amongst the pigeons
ohtani's jacket said | July 28th 2008 @ 3:10pm | Report comment
Wow, Jake White.
The earth might spin off its axis if a South African coached New Zealand.
Would he really understand New Zealand back play?
The mention of White does bring up an interesting point. White had complete faith in his under-21 boys, even if it meant South Africa lost a hell of a lot of Test matches leading up to the WC.
The idea in NZ is that the under-21 guys go through the provincial level, step up to Super 14 and so on. We’re not likely to see another Baby Blacks team any time soon, since we’re in a bind over that Adidas contract where we’re supposed to win 75% of our Tests, but I wonder how the NZ public would react to us losing as many Tests as SA did if it meant we won the WC in 2011?
Or do we want to have our cake and eat it too?
Peter made some excellent comments. I think our performance at the breakdown is killing our back play and not helping Ellis in the slightest (and that guy is trying hard, he really is), but I keep waiting for Wayne Smith to make some adjustments. Seems like I’ll be waiting all summer (it’s summer in Japan.)
Mark said | July 28th 2008 @ 3:15pm | Report comment
OJ - “Would he really understand New Zealand back play?”. Well he knew how to play to his strengths & keep it simple & was smart enough to get Eddie in to help. The current Bok coach is is 1 from 3 in the TN, so maybe Jake was better than a lot of people are willing to admit i.e. made a mediocre team better.? OK, now I’m just stirring, there’s no such thing as a mediocre SA team
Enjoy your summer, it’s wet & cold in Melbourne
JohnB said | July 28th 2008 @ 3:21pm | Report comment
Who is Henry rotating currently? Haven’t the AB’s picked their best available teams for their 3 tri-nations games to date (or at least tried to)?
While I’m very happy with the Australian performance and the result from the weekend, I can only agree that there is nothing to say the AB’s won’t reverse the result this weekend. It’s a new game, the scores are back to 0-0, different conditions, different teams etc. And for mine the AB’s weren’t nearly as bad as you would think from reading the reactions today. To keep the cliches flowing, it’s very much a game of inches - they were close to scoring 2 or 3 times, should have got a penalty in front for the Hynes tackle on Sivivatu (though not a penalty try in my view - Tuqiri was too close for a try to be probable) and you can’t say how that might have changed things, and I was a bit surprised the Australian player in the ruck got away with grabbing the foot of the AB defender standing out of the ruck immediately before the Horwill try. Take that off the final margin and it doesn’t look such a debacle.
I hope the Australians keep improving as they have been, so it doesn’t matter how well any of their opponents play, but it’s very early to be writing the AB’s off.
Peter K said | July 28th 2008 @ 3:26pm | Report comment
Peter I hope Henry doesn’t read your article.
I hope, just like with flatline back play, he is convinced he is right and keeps the same personnel and strategy.
For the future when he is fit I think Leonard is your best halfback option.
Nonu running at Giteau, Barnes or even Viliers and Jacobs just is not working. Nonu back at wing maybe or on the bench as an impact player. The biggest trouble is at O/C.
If you have someone else at 12 then Muliana at 13, and McDonald at 15.
The tight 5 are fine. With McCaw back at 7, and Soiolao moved to his rightful 8 then the only weakness is at 6. I do not know why Kaino is not used at 6, mind you I would pick Read.
Peter K said | July 28th 2008 @ 3:31pm | Report comment
If Henry is rotating players for the TN’s then he is incredibly arrogant and treating the other 2 countries with disdain.
Does he think, that the AB’s can field 2 teams that can beat the Wallabies and Boks away, if so he deserves to lose the games and lose his position as coach.
He is selecting who he thinks will work best to his plans and combinations, it just so happens he has it wrong.
ohtani's jacket said | July 28th 2008 @ 3:49pm | Report comment
Mark,
White had 1 win and 8 losses away from home in the Tri-Nations.
White was Henry’s great nemesis, however, even if he never beat the All Blacks in New Zealand. Now Henry has Deans and potentially De Villiers.
Sydney wouldn’t have been so bad if we weren’t coming off a loss in Dunedin. Even losing would’ve been tolerable had we played well. Still, it’s only the half way mark I suppose.
On the whole we played much better against South Africa. There was more of an unknown quantity against a Deans coached Wallabies side and they’re riding a home wave that’s important for Australian rugby. Now that we realise Deans has a lot of counter attacking structures in place, I suggest we figure out how to beat ourselves! These are New Zealand structures he has put in place.
Mark said | July 28th 2008 @ 3:56pm | Report comment
OJ - that’s for straightening me out, didn’t realise his away was THAT bad & I did have my toungue firmly in my cheek. You’re right a lot of people are throwing out the baby with the bathwater. Dn - should’ve could’ve won with an inexperienced pack. Sydney - Falls in the ‘what happened tehre’ category. Fortunately it’s not the WC & we have next weekend to look forward to.
tropmalk said | August 1st 2008 @ 12:19pm (4 weeks ago) | Report comment
AB supporters should not be so picky - look at the positives for rugby - these first 4 tests played under the ELVs by the best 3 teams in the world have been outstanding spectacles and advertisements for our game, particularly with League in dissarra, fans will come back in droves! As for Henry saying he’s still adapting to the ELVs - thats worth getting the sack for immediately, what the hell is a coach for!!