A few days ago I was scanning the Internet – or doing my job, it’s a fine line – and I saw that the NSW Waratahs had appointed Michael Cheika as their new head coach.
Within approximately 11.2 seconds I’d sent a text to some of my buddies advising them of this most important piece of news. One of my mates, clearly a workaholic, wrote back four hours later asking whether the Waratahs would play “good, winning rugby.”
I replied that I’d be happy with the Waratahs to play ‘good’ rugby for a year and make sure that becomes part of the psyche before the ‘winning’ part was expected from me.
But that got me thinking.
Which is more important: good rugby or winning rugby? There are so many conflicting thoughts about how these two ideas merge, intersect and play off one another. It’s hard to know exactly what to think.
Winning:
Would supporters have complained if, somehow, the Waratahs won the Super Rugby competition while playing a brutal but safe, drudging style similar to the Bulls during their successful campaigns?
It’s clear that the money flowing into sport as a whole, not just rugby, has influenced what is acceptable and even necessary from teams and individual players.
Cash from television, more lucrative contracts, pricier admissions and the myth that life ends at retirement from professional sport are incentive for all kinds of corners to be cut.
Players do whatever it takes to ensure their relevance and status. Coaches are looking out for their own jobs constantly and therefore look for the easiest way to ensure security. Winning ugly is job security. It is simpler, less risky and keeps the pay cheques coming.
I think the insider perception is winning uglier usually makes the scorecard closer. That is easier to digest in the case you do lose.
Understanding that mentality doesn’t take too much of a leap. We’ve all cut corners if it means mitigating risk and providing more security.
Taking it to an extreme; I can even understand, to a point, people who dope in sport. Winning and the cash that accompanies this is the ultimate goal now. Rules and fair play are just obstacles to be overcome on the way.
You are a mid-level investment banker that sees a potential advantage in the market. When you weigh up the moral implications there are clear reasons to turn the other way and continue on your merry way. But what if you aren’t caught? Would you take the moral-low ground to secure your future? We know that many bankers would and have.
A professional sportsperson is in the same boat. The choice could be summarised this way: continue on in professional mediocrity until a wunderkind turns up and makes you obsolete; or, do whatever it takes – including performance enhancing drugs – to get the most out of your abilities, perform at your peak and prolong your career. Which one do you choose?
Sport is not in a bubble, it is a reflection of society and our values. Those values lean towards success and money. All of these influence how winning is perceived.
Good:
Where does the ‘good’ rugby come into it? I love brilliance and being dazzled. No one is going to turn that sort of rugby down on the face of it. But if we examine this in the light of being victorious it seems a little short-sighted.
It is widely considered that the QLD Reds have been the most exciting Australian Super Rugby team of the last few years, and I wouldn’t disagree there. But personally, and I’m sure a lot of close rugby followers would agree, I think the QLD Reds definitely played the most exciting rugby the year before they won the Super Rugby title.
Sure, there were times during their Championship tilt they were breathtaking and daring. But if you look back at the statistics and at the game tape you’ll find they spent many games playing pragmatically with the aim of not allowing the opposition room to breathe. Many games saw the team deployed with instructions to pin the enemy back in their corner – not a bad move at all against some teams. Their match against the Stormers is one that stood out in that manner.
I don’t want this to sound like an indictment against the Reds play during that season, it’s just interesting to note when asking what good rugby really is about. Building on that idea, I think people would recognise that early this season the Reds possibly believed in their own ability to tear shreds off a team as their key to winning and that backfired on them, especially when injuries mounted.
Playing pragmatically is occasionally the best way to ensure victory.
A parallel could be drawn between this structured, measured style and the way England pulled Australia apart in the most recent Ashes.
What pops out immediately about that series is the way Alistair Cook completely dominated the series from beginning to end; occupying the crease for hour upon demoralising hour and grinding the attack into submission.
He didn’t attempt to blow Australia out of the contest. It was a matter of acknowledging the weaknesses of the opposition and his strengths; locate where they overlap and play in that window. Cook didn’t improvise or take unnecessary risks. He didn’t do a whole lot more than take runs off the pads and the puncture the off side semi-regularly. It was effective and laid the foundation for victory. This mode of restraint was particularly intelligent at the GABBA, where Australia usually dominate the first test and a greener pitch catches attacking batsmen off guard.
Back to the rugby now, and after a fair bit of thought what stands out to me as ‘good rugby’ is most often evidence of threethings: speed, skills and teamwork.
A rugby side that can display those first two qualities in the context of the third foundational element pleases me most.
At times kicking the ball is the skill, chasing is the speed and the ability to force mistakes, hunt in a pack and pressure the opposition is the teamwork.
On other occasions the speed is a full-back returning a kick with verve, skill is the offload to a supporting number 8 and the teamwork is the quick recycle when he is brought down five metres out, followed by making the most of the overlap to score.
If I can see those things fairly obviously I would usually give a team a pass mark and hold to the belief that in time the wins will follow.
Playing better obviously means you win more often, but you need to trust the process getting there without focusing too much on the winning itself.
In the era of professionalism some teams, the Waratahs for instance, have struggled to maintain a distance from the backdrop of other things that come along with it. Board members, crowd sizes, tactical adjustments, statistics and player involvement have sometimes found themselves in the way.
It is the job of Michael Cheika to balance the ‘good rugby’ and ‘winning rugby’ when he takes over the side. It’s not going to be easy.
As long as I can see speed, skills and teamwork I’ll be happy enough.
Blinky Bill of Bellingen
Guest
Who was it that said 'kicking is for karate'? I have been a critic of 'aimless' kicking and of course recognise that kicking has it's place. I'm no genius but even I can tell that the forwards must be pissed off with endless dumb kicking that constantly makes their job harder. I see it with aimless kicking but also with inaccurate (too long, too short and failure to find touch) and slow kicks that result in a charge down. It's amazing to me that some of our backs haven't been snotted by the forwards for not respecting the ball and all the hard work that went into securing it by the pack.
patonga
Guest
Tubby i agree but the last few seasons they seem to kick just for the sake of it... Remember the first game against the Reds this year. they only had to hold the ball but what did they do .. Kicked it and the rest is history. a kick is only as good as its chaser...or to clear it out of your quarter,, and no one ever was chasing towards the end of the season and the results showed this as well as the number of people walking away from watching the waratahs games.... if i want to watch kicks i will watch aussie rules. lets hope its a better year to come for the tahs in 2013....
tubby
Guest
nothing wrong with kicking so long as you know the reason you are doing it. For field position, to try and regather, to pressure the receiver and force a turnover. Kicking it away because you have no better idea is the problem.
patonga
Guest
If they learn the basics of rugby and run the ball more they will have to be better than last year,,,, JUST STOP KICKING THE BALL AWAY..
Carnivean
Guest
Good rugby is about creating opportunities and using them. Boring rugby is about not looking for opportunities but rather using simple tactics to prevent your opponent from creating opportunities. Smart rugby is about recognising when opportunities can't be created and putting your opponents under pressure. 10 man rugby is about putting your opponent in a position on the park where they won't risk trying to create opportunities because of the risks involved. The boring aspect of this type of play is that you spurn the opportunities to create opportunities unless your opponent gives you the ball in their 22, and because often teams will play it safe by kicking points. The smart aspect is that you are not giving your opponent the chance to score by not playing in positions that can lead to points. The "Good" rugby is about using your forwards to get you the ball repeatedly to maintain or recover possession, and using your backs to capitalise on the possession that the forwards give you. It is about running lines, at speed, that cause the defense to make decisions. It is about vision to see where gaps are, or can be created. It is about the skill level to get the ball to where it is needed and quickly, in front of a man running a good line, at speed. It is about having forwards that can get to the breakdown of backs play to maintain the ball, and recycle it quickly, so that the backs can exploit any defensive confusion that the previous play created. It's about doing that over and over, at pace, until the whistle blows, and for the duration of the match. Good, smart rugby is doing that last paragraph, and recognising when the odds aren't in your favour and having the composure and skills to put the ball into a position on the park where the odds are back in your favour. If you face a set defensive line, with more players on defense than on attack, in your own territory, then it is kicking to force a contest, with enough chasers to regather the ball, and the skill to win the contest. That contest could be a box-kick that your chasers can take, or it could be a line out 40m down field, or it could be isolating a fullback without supporting players and tackling him and turning over the ball. Alternatively, it could be the composure to realise that kicking the ball would give your opponent the advantage, and that attacking the defensive line will create opportunities in later phases, and having your forwards try and create some front-foot ball.
post
Guest
A champion team will always beat a team of champions. Fully agree, when you see a whole team clicking and trusting each other , that's when the magic happens. All the Waratahs need to do is hold the ball. People want to see their team at least attempting to make something happen, if your team is just defending all game then its a boring show.
Valleys Diehard from Brunswick st.
Guest
You make great points here @elishapierce. I will add that any coach under the ARU umbrella (coaching any Aust Super or club team) however competent a player manager and strategic skills integrator will almost always be at a disadvantage due to the ARUs inept management of talent from U7s to Opens. All players have to make that jump from club to Super rugby, so many fail. The 5 provinces deserve far more support in this area. @Gravitybasher authored a great piece, offering the only viable solution that would not bankrupt the ARU.
redsnut
Guest
Elisha, of the three things you mention, I'd put teamwork as the most important. If the players are not supporting each other and only playing for themselves, imo, the skill and speed mean nothing. You would have a team of selfish individuals who didn't care a hoot about wether the rugby was good or bad. One skillful and speedy player can't win a match without the support of the rest of the team. If you have the teamwork, then the results just "majically" come along. To (probably) misquote it, a team of team players will always beat a team of individuals. I think that "good" rugby is the use of the ball which resuts in a win. It is after all a ball game.
Jutsie
Guest
As WNM says above, you need to play smart rugby. Its one thing to play attractive rugby its another to run around like a headless chook spinning it wide at every opportunity without respecting the advantage line. Cooper needs to realise this before shooting his mouth of in the press. The kid has the natural talent and potential to be a champion but boy does he need to grow up and obtain some intelligence.
Jutsie
Guest
Nice post.
Elisha Pearce
Expert
Win ugly was a stupid concept! As I said in the article, you've gotta trust the process of playing good rugby leading to wins. If you try to win without doing that you'll eventually fall on your face being too conservative and you won't believe yourself enough.
Elisha Pearce
Expert
Yep, Bilongtek, balance is a word i like to use as well. Ive got some more on that for next week actually. The need to stick to the structure is important too, it doesn't mean that there isn't room for creativity. It is just to emphasise that the team as a whole needs to be working in a particular way, together.
Phil Bird
Roar Guru
I'd take adventurous rugby over winning rugby. I appreciated quads coopers comments recently on the wallabies needing to play more adventurous footy, and I particularly enjoyed everyone who used the term win ugly at the tahs is now looking like a moron. I hated that concept
Who Needs Melon
Roar Guru
Smart rugby.
AndyS
Guest
The problem with adjectives like "good", "boring" and many others attached to rugby is that they are so imprecise and subjective. What I want to see from Australian teams is confident rugby - confident both in their own skills and the tactical/strategic capabilities of the leadership. Right now I see a bunch of teams seriously lacking in the basic skills, playing game plans designed to cover for those deficiencies and minimise the risk of exposure. It is those skills that need addressing and any team that does so will see improvements in play and results. But if we want a strong and consistent national side, it needs to happen across all teams and therefore probably before they become Super players.
Nice one Elisha, I think good rugby is balanced rugby, like you say there are times when the pragmatic approach is the right way to go and other times adventurous rugby or chanching your arm is OK. For me rugby must always be competitive, no match is enjoyable if one team recieves a hiding, I also demand that rugby must be brutal, I love it when forward packs don't stand back and go toe to toe with one another, execution or the lack thereof can spoil a game quickly. So yeah if the Waratahs can balance their strengths in the forwards and the backs, know when to stick to structure and when opportunity arise to unleash, it will be all good (feels like I am talking about the Boks here) Ultimately good rugby is the process, winning rugby will take care of itself.