Our next generation of heroes destined for mediocrity
Roar Pro By itsuckstobeyou, 22 Mar 2010 itsuckstobeyou is a Roar Pro
- Tagged:
- Berrick Barnes, Digby Ioane, James OConnor, Kurtley Beale, Matt Giteau, Quade Cooper, Rugby Union, Super Rugby, wallabies
The constant shuffling of Australian backlines will result in our best young players never reaching their potential, falling victim to the ‘Peter Principle’.
The ‘Peter Principle’, penned (somewhat comically) by Dr. Laurence Peter in the 1960’s, is a common truth which you may well have heard of, or at the very least, been witness to.
It states: “In a hierarchy, every employee tends to rise to his level of incompetence”.
To clarify, here is an example. A man is employed as a cleaner at a law firm. So impressed by his performance are the firm, that they promote him to the mail room. After revolutionising how mail is sorted and distributed, the firm promotes him to secretary, then legal assistant after excelling yet again. Finally, after earning a degree, he is promoted to a fully fledged lawyer. The man loses four out of every five cases.
Despite being hugely talented in his previous roles, according to the principle, he will live out his life as a lawyer, the role he is worst at.
The ARU, the Super 14 franchises and the fans have followed a similar course to the firm.
The hierarchy within Australian rugby exists in the backline. Fly-Half is king. The next tier includes scrum-half, fullback and increasingly, inside centre. Wing and outside-centre make up the rest.
Over the past few years we have seen some revelations dotted throughout our backlines. Giteau and Barnes were highly acclaimed at inside centre. Ioane was our most dynamic winger and James O’Connor would cement the Wallabies fullback position given time.
Despite the gleaming talent we’ve seen from these players in their respective positions, their incredible success has us demanding they be promoted up the hierarchy. Giteau has become the Brumbies and Wallabies starting five-eighths, with Barnes also being pushed into the role. Ioane has been moved to the centres and O’Connor has played three positions in four weeks.
The promotion of these players within the hierarchy has impacted on other great talents too. Once seen as the future of Australian rugby, Quade Cooper and Kurtley Beale were touted to spend their careers fighting it out for the Wallabies number 10 jersey. As a result of the promotions of Giteau and Barnes, Kurtley has been adapted from our brightest young playmaker to a utility reserve.
Australia’s best performing fly-half, Quade Cooper, is most likely to play inside centre for the Wallabies which, as has been mentioned, is the position Giteau and Barnes excelled at.
Ioane and O’Connor, whilst adapting their roles, are losing valuable game time in their preferred positions.
The reason why this has occurred is simple. We want our best players to have the ball in their hands as often as possible. We have seen it work before, in particular, with the promotion of Stephen Larkham from fullback to fly-half.
Unfortunately, this notion is far too simple.
The case of Larkham was relatively unique. He was a born number 10 who was mistakenly started at 15. He was an intuitive player with incredible decision making skills. Whilst his execution in some parts of his game may have been inferior to some of his more athletic rivals, he was moved to the position he was born to play.
The same cannot be said for our young talent today. Giteau, Barnes, Ioane and O’Connor were not the victims of a mistake. By being promoted, their effectiveness has been reduced and in doing so, they have prevented some of our best young stars from reaching their potential.
The solution to the ‘Peter Principle’ is not to take your best talent and squeeze them into your highest ranking positions. The solution, in rugby terms at least, is to do away with the hierarchy, play the best player for each position and focus on strengthening combinations. Where talent is lacking, fill the gaps with targeted development or recruitment.
Whilst it may appear the players are out of their depth, the truth is ‘Peter’s Principle’ was inherited. It is their employers who have reached their ‘level of incompetence’ and it is they who need to rectify the problem.
Recommend this story.
The Turkey 10
The Turkey 10 teams have now been selected, as Wild Turkey Bourbon's sport sponsorship kicks into the next exciting phase.
Choose which side you're going to support and get in the running to win $2,500!
Simply visit Wild Turkey Australia on Facebook for your chance to win.
Find out more.
March 22nd 2010 @ 6:28pm
ohtani's jacket said | March 22nd 2010 @ 6:28pm | Report comment
Great article. Completely agree with what you’re saying.
The trouble is that national coaches spent half their time trying to fit everyone into the Test side so that they don’t bugger off overseas, and then they bugger off anyway.
March 22nd 2010 @ 7:09pm
Red Rooster said | March 22nd 2010 @ 7:09pm | Report comment
OJ – a downside of having 5 super teams is that everyone knows where the talent is but only 22 will run out for the Wallabies. All very well unearthing them but someone like Beale will now consider his o/s options as he is only warming the tahs bench, but was playing for the wallabies 4 months ago, meanwhile the force cant find a ten
March 22nd 2010 @ 7:26pm
ohtani's jacket said | March 22nd 2010 @ 7:26pm | Report comment
It’s scary to think how many Wallabies and All Blacks will be heading overseas after 2011. I read today that there only half a dozen NZ Super 14 players aged 30 or above. Half a dozen. The lack of adequate back-ups and makeshift utilities is annoying when you consider how many NZ and Australian players there are overseas.
March 22nd 2010 @ 7:53pm
Gatesy said | March 22nd 2010 @ 7:53pm | Report comment
Red Rooster’s point is well made. If we had 14 Super teams we wouldn’t be worried about hurting someone’s feelings. It would be full on competition to be the best and be selected.
March 22nd 2010 @ 8:41pm
Brett McKay said | March 22nd 2010 @ 8:41pm | Report comment
ISTBY, this is a mootish point, but Stephen Larkham was a scrum-half when he was picked up by the Brumbies, and played outside centre in their inaugural Super 12 game in ’96. Before he settled at fullback, he was almost like a mid-90s version of Adam Ashley-Cooper…
March 22nd 2010 @ 9:33pm
itsuckstobeyou said | March 22nd 2010 @ 9:33pm | Report comment
I wouldn’t say the point is moot. I just didn’t want to turn it into an essay on Larkham. I’m a big fan of the bloke. There aren’t enough pages on the net to accommodate everything I have to say about him. Roarers got off lightly this time.
It probably further proves that he is the exception to the rule. One of the few players who was promoted from “cleaner” to “lawyer” and still excelled.
March 23rd 2010 @ 7:10am
Brett McKay said | March 23rd 2010 @ 7:10am | Report comment
quite right, and fair point about not wanting to turn this into an essay about Larkham too….
March 22nd 2010 @ 8:56pm
allblackfan said | March 22nd 2010 @ 8:56pm | Report comment
O’Connor has been promoted way too soon. He lacks confidence and is still mentally fragile.
I understand why they did it but he needs a couple of years playing at a a level just below test rugby but above club (ie provincial).
March 22nd 2010 @ 9:16pm
Working Class Rugger said | March 22nd 2010 @ 9:16pm | Report comment
Allblackfan
Funny you saying that. In today’s SMH (online) Andy Friend outlines his belief that the ‘A’ squads need a more consistent schedule of games. He goes as far as too suggest for all intensive purposes an Academies Championship (an idea I have floated previously, so which one of you are Andy). He does acknowledge the restricting factors but suggests using the new conference format of Super Rugby next season as a means to an end. The A teams would play their competition as curtain raisers.
Over time more Academies could be added filling in the gaps left when the main squad is touring. A level such as this would be ideal to blood and develop up and coming talent like JOC without exposing them to quite the same level as Super Rugby right out of school.
March 22nd 2010 @ 9:36pm
CraigB said | March 22nd 2010 @ 9:36pm | Report comment
I think this argument is a silly one. Primarily because the players mentioned have been playing out of position not because of any ‘peter principle’ at all, but because they were the best players for that position at the time. Now Gits may be a better 12 than 10, but who in recent years has shown to be a better option?? Barnes? He can’t even get a run there for the Tah’s. Who has shown to be a better fullback than AAC? Likewise when Mortlock got injured, who was the shining light to take up 13?
The fact is this year seems to be the first year in a long time that we have had competition for spots. Mortlock seems to have lost is aura, and Ioane has stepped up again. Likewise Cooper and Genia. This makes it easier for the laymen to say ‘why aren’t they playing such and such in there best spot’. Look at the options at the time and make the best of it. This isn’t peter principle, it’s selection.
March 22nd 2010 @ 10:08pm
itsuckstobeyou said | March 22nd 2010 @ 10:08pm | Report comment
It would appear that Giteau will be the “best player at the time” for inside centre come the international seaon.
Wouldn’t you agree that he and the Wallabies would benefit from him playing inside centre at S14 level? Wouldn’t Matt Toomua also benefit from more time in the role? Wouldn’t the depth at both inside centre and fly-half be strengthened by such a move?
At the Reds, Barnes being promoted to 10 in effect demoted Cooper to 12. Didn’t that work out well! Don’t you think that the players, Qld and Australian Rugby would have been better off if Qld played it’s best 10 @10 and it’s best 12 @ 12?
March 23rd 2010 @ 12:10pm
CraigB said | March 23rd 2010 @ 12:10pm | Report comment
‘It would appear that Giteau will be the “best player at the time” for inside centre come the international seaon.’ – agreed, but only since the regular output of Q Cooper – mostly due to the time given by the slick service of Genia.
Wouldn’t you agree that he and the Wallabies would benefit from him playing inside centre at S14 level? – no doubt but the Brumbies do not worry themselves about that. They, quite rightly play him where they think he is the best use to them.
Wouldn’t Matt Toomua also benefit from more time in the role? – Yes but you have only 13 weeks and therefore there is no room to do this for his benefit alone. While he may benefit from this exposure there is no guarantee a Toomua/Gits combo will be better than Gits/Leafaino
Wouldn’t the depth at both inside centre and fly-half be strengthened by such a move? – not really as we already know what Gits can do a 12 and I don’t think him playing 10 dimishes that. It may be that playing 10 with reduced time allowed from defenders that he is improving his overall game. Toomua shold improve with exposure but there is nothing to sugges this would definitly happen.
At the Reds, Barnes being promoted to 10 in effect demoted Cooper to 12. Didn’t that work out well! Don’t you think that the players, Qld and Australian Rugby would have been better off if Qld played it’s best 10 @10 and it’s best 12 @ 12? – Who is to say they did not. Faiginaa is really only showing what he can do now. Barnes game at 12 for the Tahs hardly shows a knack for the position.
Again – I believe it is make the best use of limited resources. Now we seem to be developing these reources there is no doubt a review about how best to use them is required and this should be ongoing. To suggest that the best player play 10 by default is incorrect, otherwise J Eales would have played there.
March 23rd 2010 @ 12:59pm
itsuckstobeyou said | March 23rd 2010 @ 12:59pm | Report comment
I think this is very near sighted. The reason we have limited resources is due to these developing players being denied the opportunity to ply their trade in their most suited positions.
March 23rd 2010 @ 5:55pm
CraigB said | March 23rd 2010 @ 5:55pm | Report comment
I think its naive to expect S14 clubs to provide opportunities for players who are not up to it at the time. The ARU needs to spend money developing another tier with more teams so that players who are not getting a run in S14 to be able to play in comps better than club. Do that and the players you mention get to develeop their game in their preferred position. They also get to show their good enough and they will get the chance in the S14.
March 23rd 2010 @ 12:49am
ohtani's jacket said | March 23rd 2010 @ 12:49am | Report comment
C’mon, the Aussies have been shunted around so much that none of them are good in their positions. There was no pressing need for Giteau to play first five; it was an experiment just as when he played halfback. All told, he probably made a decent fist of it considering he’s not a 10, but it was a bad idea as were most of the other “selections” in recent times. The fact of that matter is that no back in Australia has developed into a quality player in quite some time. Someone, somewhere, is obviously doing something wrong.
March 23rd 2010 @ 7:40pm
matthew said | March 23rd 2010 @ 7:40pm | Report comment
9: Genia
10: Q Cooper
12: Giteau
13: AA Cooper
14: Ioane
11: Mitchell