Karl Marx, in his 1846 book, The German Ideology, said: “The philosophers have only interpreted the world in various ways: the point, however, is to change it.”
The book, as a whole, deals with how; through social dynamics and the establishment of a ruling class, the human race has been able to distinguish itself from other animal species and develop into the complex arrangement of systems that we see today.
The change Marx spoke of was revolution, both in thought and action. He believed that it is change and the push for change that aids in the development and furtherment of the human race and that it is every person’s duty to constantly evaluate the need for change.
In the modern world we see the clash between change and tradition happening on a daily basis; the erosion of traditional cultures, languages and ideas and the catalytic explosion into an all-connected age of social media and instant communication.
Being a complex system, the analogy also applies to the sporting world. The more complex the game, the more change it will inevitably have to deal with.
Rugby, being one of the most complex games in the world, will always subject to evolution. Look at how much rugby has changed in the last hundred years.
Look at how much it has changed since 1996 when it went professional. There was revolution then with Rupert Murdoch’s breakaway Super Rugby just as there is revolution now with the Heineken Cup.
On the field, players have become bigger, stronger and faster while game plans have evolved to deal with these changes.
What I would like to talk about are four Southern Hemisphere players whose skill sets could significantly add to the evolution of their team’s game plan.
South Africa – Willie le Roux
If you didn’t watch the magnificent Rugby Championship decider between New Zealand and South Africa then you would have missed the coming to fruition of a new era of South African rugby and a star that is going to take them there.
Often chided for playing a limited, kick first, pressure form of footy, South Africa’s problem over the years has been their size.
They are just giant people and this has fostered a “monster” mentality; “We are bigger than you, so we will monster you into submission. We will use our size and strength to intimidate you into making mistakes.”
When the game was kick heavy, such as 2009, when the ill-fated ELVs made players too scared to run the ball, this game plan was perfect. However, generally, the seven point option has been much more effective and this is where Willie le Roux is revolutionising the Springboks.
At 80kgs, he is much smaller than the big bustling wing prototype that has been in vogue since Jonah Lomu pioneered the idea, but he is nimble, smart and he knows the best place for the ball to be (which is not always in his hands.)
Bryan Habana scored two great tries but I think his contribution was overshadowed by Le Roux’s.
Habana is an excellent finisher and creates tries for himself, but this can be somewhat predictable. In LeRoux, Heyneke Meyer has discovered a dynamic ball-player that can break the line and then link with the classic finishers that South Africa possess.
His background as a 10 means he can hold up the defensive line and his attacking nous means he can finish as well.
South Africa haven’t had such a clever player for a while and it’s no surprise that their attack is going better with him there.
New Zealand – Aaron Smith
It was tempting to put Brodie Retallick here because New Zealand often play a bruiser as their second lock (think Thorn/Romano) while Retallick has more subtle ball playing skills that he uses in midfield a lot, however the prize goes to Aaron Smith because the All Blacks have completely based their game plan on his skillset.
When Smith came into the team at the beginning of 2012, Steve Hansen stated that the All Blacks wanted to speed up their game plan and go to a new level of play.
Smith was key to this approach.
His most valuable asset is the speed and accuracy of his pass which is also unique in that he squeezes the ball out between his thumb and forefinger.
Many have compared him to Graham Bachop (New Zealand’s nine in the 1995 World Cup) who was pretty much just a link man, but the speed he was able to get the ball out to Lomu and Wilson meant their skills were maximised.
Smith is in the same category.
His pass is affording wider players like Ben Smith time to find gaps and the All Blacks are benefiting.
The interesting point here is that this game plan is now two years old and like England showed, it can be shut down with the right amount of intensity, however New Zealand is also on the brink of bringing in a man called TJ Perenara who many are predicting will be even better.
Argentina – Pablo Matera
You may have seen Matera in this year’s Rugby Championship as the bullish young Argentinian open side tearing up yardage through established defences.
At only 20 years old, he has quickly made his mark at International level and will be a forward runner that Argentina will base their momentum on for the foreseeable future.
His play may not be evolving the Argentinian game plan as such, but they do have a lot of older players in their forwards pack and Matera is going to be an integral part in replacing players such as Juan Manuel Leguizamón and Juan Martín Fernández Lobbe.
It’s also interesting to note that Matera (at 6 foot 4) has been selected at 7.
This, I believe, is a very clever utilisation of the fact that the days of the pure pilferer are at an end.
Tacklers are now being taught to blow out beyond the tackled player in an effort to clear out opposition and create a fairly simple turnover, rather than getting involved in a 50/50 turnover situation that may lead to a penalty.
Of course, pilfers are still going to happen, but look at how much bigger open sides are this year than a few years ago.
Matera fits this bill and he should be Argentina’s go-to forward in the coming years.
Australia – ?
Australia was the most difficult team to choose from.
There have been many players in the last few years that have arrived on the scene and promised a revolution in play – Tatafu Polota Nau brought an unbridled cannonball ferocity, Sitaleki Timani was a giant, Will Genia, a savant like calm while Kurtley Beale, Quade Cooper and James O’Connor showed intense genius.
However, you could arguably say that Genia was the only one that really evolved the Wallabies. The rest were the victims (or orchestrators) of consistency, injury or Tom-foolery.
So who is there now that can positively change the way the Wallabies play?
The easy answer is Israel Folau.
He has had a wonderful year and is obviously an amazing athlete but is he going to revolutionise Australia?
Is he going to do much more than a Digby Ioane might? Maybe… but I’m going to plump for Christian Lealiifano.
Even though he hasn’t really shown it yet, Lealiifano has the game to take Australia to another level.
When he was with the Crusaders, Robbie Deans was a staunch supporter of the double playmaker idea and often ran Dan Carter or Aaron Mauger in the 12 slot.
However, when he went to the Wallabies, for some reason he went for 12s with very limited skill sets. Perhaps it was a lack of options, but players like McCabe, Horne and Fainga’a would never have been 12 in Deans’s Crusaders teams.
Deans must of cursed Lealiifano’s ankle in 2012 when he went out. My guess is that Deans might still have his job now if he could have developed Christian on that tour instead of having to deal with immature prima donnas.
Lealiifano has an excellent running and distribution game which includes a beautiful looping long ball.
That is something Australia hasn’t had in the centres since Matt Giteau pre 2008.
Of course, Lealiifano hasn’t quite produced it all yet and many pundits will soon be pumping for Kyle Godwin, but if they want Folau and the other outsides involved in the game then they have to get him the ball.
Playing multiple play-makers is the best way to do that and Lealiifano has enough quality to revolutionise the Australian back line.
So, as the fans, the coaches and the rugby world drive change off the field, so too must the players drive change on the field.
Marx may not have been a rugby fan but he may have liked the way these players are challenging the traditional perspectives and skills of their respective teams.
Roarers, is there anyone I missed?
Bakkies
Guest
Justin Tipuric and Tommy O'Donnell are different types of opensides you see in the NH at the moment. Tipuric has pace and ability to fix defenders. A Magne type back rower that pilfers. He is the type of player that Deans wanted in the Wallabies as he can play what's in front of him, create and also pilfer/splinter ruck ball. Probably explains why he was picked ahead of Robshaw. Robshaw is more of a 6 wearing a 7 on his back. Robshaw is more limited in terms of skills, high in work rate but doesn't have the potential to open up games like Tipuric does. Quins have an up and coming openside in Luke Wallace which may see Robshaw go to 6. O'Donnell is the more explosive 7 that Munster are using. He has explosive pace, links and hit shoulders. A more Saffer style player as he isn't a fetcher. Munster tend to use their tight forwards to pilfer so they aren't reliant on one player.
jk
Guest
i salute you edward for your grasp and use of marxist theory in a rugby article. that instantly makes things more interesting and adds a dimesnion. the analogy was a stretch though (esp given the examples used) i am not sure if you may not be a better sociologist, philosophy or political science academic than rugby analyst (that is no critiscism whatsoever and in fact a compliment. especially as every bum at my pub seems to have a degree in rugby analysis. and none would understand your first 2 paragraphs). in my uneducated opinion would keiran reid not repersent and evolution better than anybody. all the key traditional skill and physicality of his position but with a far advanced skillset to boot. ranging wide regularly with pace and a wicked offload etc? feel free to shoot me down...
jk
Guest
very impressive breakdown. gotta love defined analysis from someone studious and fact / data driven (not being sarcastic whatsoever in case anyone gets wrong idea). congrats
Chan Wee
Guest
@ Edward Pye ma8 that was sooo last century. some peeps here may not have even heard of him. Since GO played a lot of guys like Sivi Rocko Howlett 2 Gears Kahui SBW Ranger D Smith have been on the wing. Just wings by trade :) Actual transformation is described by another article on this side (circa 2009).
woodart
Guest
I think he has missed steven luatua, his wide running has created big headaches for opposing players. he has almost recreated an old time position,, wing-forward.
Geoff Parkes
Expert
Agree Ben, Edward, I don't understand why you single Aaron Smith out for his style of play, then put Perenara into the same basket, when they are entirely different types of players. As Ben says, his pass is nothing at all like Smith, for speed and accuracy. The reason is that Perenara is a "me first" type of halfback, he's thinking about what he can do, ie a box kick, a snipe or maybe a pass, whereas Smith's first thought is to pass, with the other options only if the ball is slow, or the kick is a planned move. Perenara is young and talented. But he needs to understand and develop an instinct to serve his backs first and himself second, and not overplay his hand.
DougRedsfan1
Guest
Baffled as to how you can list Lealiifano. He is the one player from the teams back line who didn't play we'll & surely will be dropped soon. We already have a fly-half, Quade Cooper, I don't understand why we need two in the team? Because that is essentially what Lealiifano is. He doesn't smash the advantage line, he is not a dominant tackler. He is actually I the same ilk or vulnerable inside centres that Australia has persisted with to no avail. Go Kuridrani & AAC in the centres. Just like a Nonu-Smith combo.
DougRedsfan1
Guest
Baffled as to how you can list Lealiifano. He is the one player from the teams back line who didn't play we'll & surely will be dropped soon. We already have a fly-half, Quade Cooper, I don't understand why we need two in the team? Because that is essentially what Lealiifano is. He doesn't smash the advantage line, he is not a dominant tackler. He is actually I the same ilk or vulnerable inside centres that Australia has persisted with to no avail. Go Kuridrani & AAC in the centres. Just like a Nonu-Smith combo.
In Brief
Guest
Not to Roar: It would be good to get a full 10 minutes editing time, not just 10 seconds..
In Brief
Guest
They say to the victors go the spoils. And so it is with the ELVs with continuing misinformation and negativity not based on the actual facts. This article states that kicking went up in 2009 due to the ELVs. Pure drivel. The Tri Nations in 2008 was played under the full ELVs and had the highest ever percentage of ball in play time - in two games 40 minutes. The majority of games were decided on tries, not penalties, many of which were scored off scrums. Kicking did increase marginally, but it wasn't the 'hot potato' tactic of 2009 and 2007. In 2009 several key ELVs were scrapped, including the sanctions law which turned many current penalties into free kicks, and it was this fear of being penalised (that didn't exist under the ELVs), which lead to the risk averse, aimless kicking strategy which had blighted the 2007 World Cup. It is worth noting that 9 ELVs were adopted and are currently being used today. So much for being an abject failure. I have given the IRB statistical analysis below: THE WHOLE BALANCE OF SCORING CHANGED ♦ In 2008, under the ELVs, tries scored went up by 50% when compared with the previous year, ♦ Conversely, under the ELVs, penalty goals went down by almost 40% over the same period ♦ In addition, tries exceeded penalty goals for the first time in 7 years and for only the third time in the history of Tri Nations ♦ Fewer penalty goals were kicked than in any of the previous 14 years of Tri Nations competition. In 2008, tries became the most significant element in the scoring mix – and this was reflected in the final results of matches. In the 9 matches played, the team scoring the most tries won eight. This was the highest proportion since Tri Nations began. This suggested that the sanctions ELV had had a major impact – at least on methods of scoring through the enhanced contribution of tries and a reduction in the impact of penalties. THE ELVS At this stage it may be helpful to revisit, albeit briefly, certain of the ELVs in order to clarify the context in which the game has been played in Tri Nations over the last 3 years. The progression has been as follows: 1. Tri Nations 2007 - no ELVs implemented 2. Tri Nations 2008 and Tri Nations 2009 – certain ELVs incorporated in both years, the most significant ones being: ♦ Playing the ball back into the 22m ♦ Quick lineout throws extended ♦ Scrum offside line set at 5metres 3.Tri Nations 2009 – those ELVs excluded from 2009 but which were applied in Tri Nations 2008 were as follows: ♦ Maul pulling down allowed in 2008 – but not in 2009 ♦ No limit on number of players in lineout allowed in 2008 – but not in 2009 ♦ For all offences in 2008, other than offside and foul play, free kicks only awarded. – (the sanctions ELV) With the sanctions ELV being applied and fewer penalties being awarded, it was inevitable that in 2008 fewer penalty goals would be kicked – and so it proved, with the results noted above. What was perhaps surprising however was that kicks out of hand increased in 2008 – despite the fact that breakdown sanctions were almost invariably free kicks. What was to be of major interest in 2009 -because of the rejection of certain of the ELV proposals, especially that related to sanctions - was to see if the shape of the game had changed in 2009 and/or had reverted back to what was seen in 2007. TRI NATIONS 2009 Some of the results were not long in coming. By the time the first few games had ended, it was clear that the primacy of the try had gone and that penalty goals had reasserted their domination. At the conclusion of the 5th game of the competition, 11 tries had been scored and 47 penalties kicked. At that stage, the average of 2.2 tries per game was the lowest ever seen in Tri Nations while an average of over 9 penalty goals per game had never been exceeded. There had been 4 times more penalty goals than tries. This ratio, however, changed somewhat in the last 4 games when the difference between tries and penalty goals became closer. Nevertheless, by the end of the championship ♦ The average of 3 tries per game was the lowest for 9 years ♦ The average penalty goals per game of almost 8 was the highest in the 14 year history of the tournament. This, not surprisingly, had an impact on the scoring profile of the winning teams. Whereas 8 of the 9 games in 2008 had been won by the team scoring the most tries, this year the corresponding figure was just 5. In addition, in one game this year, the team scoring the fewest number of tries won, something last seen 5 years ago. There were also other measurable differences in addition to scoring outcomes: ♦ Despite the recent increases in aerial kicking, only one try was scored from an opponent’s kick. This compares with an average of just over 6 in each of the previous 3 years. 091024 IRB ANALYSIS TRI NATIONS 2009 REPORT Page 3 of 26 ♦ Only 3 tries started from within the scoring team’s own half. This equates to 1 try in 9 compared to 1 try in 5, 1 try in 3 and 1 try in just over 2 in the three preceding years. ♦ 50% of tries did not contain a single ruck or maul in the build up while the comparative figure for the 3 previous years hovered around 30%. Possible reasons for such changes are largely conjecture – but an emerging playing strategy that emphasises theimportance of gaining territory and minimising the risk of conceding kickable penalties especially at the breakdown, could have contributed towards these changes. With penalty goals capable of being kicked from 60 metres, and transgressions at a ruck being punished by a penalty and not a free kick, it is hardly surprising that teams place a premium on playing rugby in their opponent’s half whenever possible.
Edward Pye
Roar Guru
Yeah I agree with your points, but the reason I didn't go for a Ben Smith is because the fullback-wing has been a part of the NZ game plan for many years, think Glen Osbourne.
Edward Pye
Roar Guru
Rather than getting back onside and going for a direct turnover, a lot of players are now using the fact that once they get up, they are still in an onside position and can just push players out of the way so the next playing coming in can affect the turnover.
moaman
Guest
@ #2 " Roarers, is there anyone I missed? " I think people may HAVe (not '' of " ) forgotten Luke Romano and his particular skillset.There is a reason why he was keeping Retallick on the pine before his (Romano's) injury.
ben
Guest
Im just not sure about perenara. Ive watched him since secondary school and every game since. If our game thrives around smiths outstanding pass then it will suffer from perenaras as that imo is a bit of a weakness for him. All other aspects are good ....but his pass aint great. Hopefully theyll work him hard to upskill it.
Crackle
Guest
Not sure that these players are revelations....maybe just that it suits to 'go back to the future'. More like plug & play really as far as NZ is concerned anyway. They have a deep resource of halfback styles and the luxury of deciding which flavour they fancy. Look at Piri, now on the fringes despite having good form in the ITM. Just his flavour is not top of the pops at the moment. IMO I would think Kieran Read is more of a show changer for ABs, clearly in a class of his own and not at easy to replicate the wide range of skills. Zinny might have been the closest. Good to see you considered Retallick in your thoughts on this theme, he's a favourite ( I reckon if he had his teeth done like 'Jaws' of James Bond fame, he'd be simply awesome!) Agree that Le Roux is exciting and may be an important catalyst for encouraging HM to stick with the new program. There have been nimble smart & successful wingers in the past, Grant Batty springs to mind. Folau still looks like a fish out of water to me, despite a hat trick on the w'end against extremely poor opposition. Not sure who the messiah will be for the Argies as their style and commitment seems to be in a state of flux at present.
chann wee
Guest
@ Edward Pye, 1. The big wing is on one wing only, there has been a smaller but more skilled wing on the other. In fact what you shud identify is the new prototype , "fullback wing" (Jane, Ben Smith , Piutau). This has come about with the kicking game, a reason IMO why Gear did not play a hell of a lot more and Frank Halai is still a wider training member. (In fact Halai is a near Jonah clone and quick too). Credit to Meyer; he is copying the MIB where possible. Now if only he had a good full back..... Even Pumas did try it with Amaraseno (but then a certain Sir GH is their adviser so...) 2. IMO Smith is a cog in the bigger wheel , a very mobile pack. In this RC the forwards were seen playing ball a lot more than before. Luatua Messam Cane Retallick Whitelock all were involved in the line at one point or other. Also look at the shift towards a very mobile hooker Coles and the boy Marshall brought into wider training (Under 20 hooker). In the RC Smith did not get protection from the 3rd row at certain times, maybe that is what u mean about England,. TJP is a bigger unit , more like TKB. different game ... 3. Matera is also from Under 20. He reminds me of French flanker Olivier Magne. I would say both of same size. Not just physical but fast with ball skills.Again I see the influence of Sir GH. IMO the purely ball stealing openside has given space to the "total flanker" in the mold of Mccaw Flow Wood. the MIB started the trend and SA copied the style. It is very likely England will follow suite this November with their 3rd row. 4. OZ have Folau but IMO it is the Genia - Cooper combination that can set them on a path to regaining past glory. Losing too mant either to injury or retirement/migration has not been ideal so it is a rebuilding process. IMO the reason RD did not use a ball playing 12 was Cooper's tackling skill (or the lack of it). He had no option but to employ a very defensive 12 to secure the 10-12 channel AND make Ioane come into defend while Cooper went back. Interesting to note Cooper mark II now tackling, all the more reson he will be important.
FF
Guest
A little confused about the tactic you're referring too "Tacklers are now being taught to blow out beyond the tackled player in an effort to clear out opposition and create a fairly simple turnover". Not exactly sure what you mean by that. Other than that, strong article