Two halves make a whole, but the breakdown will make it work

While debate may rage about the Wallabies starting halfback, it is interesting to note that on three occasions our replacement No.9 has gone a long way to winning us the game.

In Brisbane, it was Nick Phipps’ passing that kick-started the Wallabies, while Nic White kicked and ran us to victory in Sydney, and Will Genia scooted and chipped the US defence into submission in Chicago.

What is becoming evident is that the opposition are adopting quite polarised defensive systems to try to stifle Australia’s wide-wide attack, and that this variance is placing some unique pressure on our No.9 and 10 combinations and our breakdown play.

What we have seen defensively so far is as follows:

South Africa
Heavy ball contest focus – tackler plus two at the breakdown – number from the inside out.

New Zealand
Decision making focus – tackler plus one, next arriving player chooses based on likely success or failure – number from the outside in.

USA
Non-contest focus – only tackler at breakdown, all other players get in defensive line – number from outside in.

How does this affect the halfback I hear you say?

Well, one of the great things about rugby is that there are always the same number of defenders on the field and always the same amount of space. The way the opposition defends the breakdown often dictates where the space is, and where the space is dictates the skills you need from your halfback.

If a team defends the ruck aggressively and commit numbers, unless they are successful in slowing you down, they sacrifice line-speed and will generally leave space out wide, requiring a No.9 that can clear the ball quickly off the ground.

Conversely, if they defend the ruck lightly and commit numbers to the defensive line to rush the attack, they tend to leave space around or through the ruck, requiring a No.9 that can snipe around the edges and organise forwards to attack this area as well.

Why New Zealand are so difficult is that they tend to balance between both and can rely on their superior decision making abilities to read the situation, as well as using their No.9 heavily to fill any gaps.

So what does this mean for the Wallabies?

Well, we have already heard Bernard Foley and Michael Cheika saying that the fly-half position may be a ‘horses for courses decision’, but it appears that this may be even more evident with our No.9s.

Take this quick assessment of the strengths of both players:

Phipps
• Has played the wide-wide game well for three years, and has the motor to pull it off.
• Australia’s best off-the-ground passer able to facilitate a super fast attack assuming the clearout work is good.

Genia
• Great scooting game strengthened by the fact that he can square up and engage defenders.
• Excellent kicking game generally used wisely to stop rushing defences or to settle play.
• Knows how use forwards to attack the ruck.

Both are generally great support players and solid defenders.

While it would be great to think that one of these two would miraculously gain the strengths of the other via osmosis on the team bus, the chances are that these two are going to be best used to fulfil a specific gameplan or adapt to the defensive pattern of the opposition.

What remains to be seen is whether the selectors can choose the right half to start the right game, and whether the playmakers have got the flexibility to adapt to the situation if they don’t. This includes an ability to recognise when the space is through the ruck and calling on the forwards to pick and go.

When, as the USA did on Saturday, the opposition chooses to not contest the breakdown, the forwards need to adapt to how the opposition is defending. On numerous occasions on the weekend, the Wallabies at the breakdown had no opposition to clearout, but failed to realise that a simple pick and go would have taken advantage of huge gaps behind the ruck area.

This failure often meant that we overcommitted to the ruck compared to the US defence, meaning we often had nine or ten attackers running against 14 defenders.

For either of our No.9s to be truly effective, the team has to better understand how numbers at the breakdown dictate space around the field. As mentioned before, there is always the same number of defenders and the same amount of space.

If there is space around the ruck, then Genia is our better suited half. If the is space on the edges, Phipps is our better suited half.

But, if there is ineffective clearout technique and strategy, both halfbacks will struggle.