The dominance of New Zealand sides in the new Super 18 format is worrying for South Africa and Australia, and threatens to derail the credibility of the entire competition.
New Zealand Herald rugby scribe Wynn Gray believes the “dominance of New Zealand sides highlights a weaker competition.”
On current results, and form, it is difficult to argue against this analysis.
New Zealand sides are, by and large, simply a class above.
The ‘class above’ that the New Zealand teams have shown in pace, and skill from 1-15 and the bench was on full display as the Chiefs utterly dismantled Australian conference leaders the Brumbies, and this was without one of the world’s best players, Brodie Retalick.
Even the lowest ranked New Zealand side on the ladder, the Blues, displayed some of the pace, ball handling and off-loading prowess against Argentina’s Jaguares.
Rene Ranger, fast returning to the imperious form that saw him selected for the All Blacks before he left for Europe, gave a sublime off-load to Ihia West who sprinted 30 metres to score the Blues second try.
The Hurricanes, after a dreadful performance against the Brumbies, have somehow found their mojo in the clubhouse locker room. Their fitness levels are back and even on the rise, no doubt through training sessions that rival the special forces. The result has been three victories on the trot.
The return of All Black hooker Dane Coles has strengthened their defence, scrum, and running game in the forwards, and no one throws the ball into a lineout better than Coles.
The Hurricanes’ immediate resurgence is despite a near season ending injury to All Black winger Nehe Milner Scudder and a naughty boy lay-off for the world’s premier winger Julian Savea. The latter was commanded to get rid of the Christmas pudding, and is set to return next week.
Mind you, it helps when you have a guy like Cory Jane to just step in, and keen to reassert himself after a season ending injury in 2015.
After the Hurricanes thumping at the hands of the Brumbies, I asked the question, “Were the Brumbies that good or the Hurricanes that bad?”
There is no doubt after the drubbing at the hands of the Chiefs, and the subsequent performances of the Hurricanes, all be it, against some of the weaker opposition, that is was largely the latter.
But that defeat at the hands of the Brumbies was one of only two that New Zealand sides have suffered against teams from other conferences. The second was the Chiefs loss to the Lions in a nail-biter.
All other games against opposition from rival conferences have resulted in 14 New Zealand wins and one draw.
If we look at the number of tries scored by the New Zealand sides, it tells a scary story.
Collectively the five New Zealand franchise are in a different league when itcomes to scoring tries against the opposition.
Of the Australian sides, only the Brumbies get a look in in the top five, coming in at number third with 21. The Chiefs are top-of-pops with a staggering 34, followed by the Crusaders with 21.
After the Brumbies is yet another New Zealand franchise, the Highlanders, with 20.
New Zealand franchises have crossed the line a ridiculous 103 times already this season. The combined total of the Australian sides is way below at 63 and the South African sides – I have taken out the lowest as there are six not five – is 74.
This means the New Zealand Conference is scoring almost 25-33 per cent more often than either the Australian or South African Conferences.
The key reasons for the difference is overall superior skill levels, pace across the park from 1-15, and great depth on their benches. So too (the Hurricanes aberration against the Brumbies aside) are their superior fitness levels as illustrated by the Chiefs with 20 minutes to go against the Brumbies.
Like the All Blacks, and perhaps more so this season than in previous years, New Zealand franchises can go up a level with 20 minutes to go that cannot be matched by opposition sides unless there are a lot of stoppages in the game in the second half. The Brumbies were run ragged on Saturday.
Only the Rebels seem to be able to go the distance in an 80-minute, high paced game, and even then, against New Zealand sides they still fall away.
It is also no surprise that four of the top five sides in the competition for off-loads come from New Zealand.
Put simply, from the All Blacks to their Super 18 franchises, New Zealand sides have higher skill levels across their entire squads.
As Rod Kafer stated on Fox Sports Rugby 360 program, “the All Black forwards pass more than any other pack in world.”
These skills are taught at grass roots and continued to be fine turned in their NPC, then into Super competition, and finally, the All Blacks.
On the same show, Phill Kearns was lamenting the lack of skills in Australian sides going as far as to say that “Our skill levels are dreadful”. A bit steep perhaps, but they are certainly not great across entire squads even if we can name certain individuals with good ball skills.
How to fix the problem is a major concern. The only saving grace for Australia is that the rest of the world is also way behind New Zealand in this regard, and even further than Australia, and even perhaps further than South Africa and Argentina as the World Cup semi-finals showed.
The disturbing fact is, and it does no credit to current Super 18 format, is that the biggest danger for New Zealand sides – is other New Zealand sides.
Watching the Conference’s current best side, the Brumbies, get mauled by the Chiefs, cannot have endeared fringe followers to watch the following week.
As one would expect, the skill levels and talent pool of New Zealand sides in the Super 18 competition has not gone unnoticed in the UK either.
Leading sports writer for London’s Daily Mail Chris Foy said “The stark fact is that New Zealand are showing no signs at all of relaxing their rugby stranglehold…The dominance could go on and on”. Foy also claimed performances by sides like the Chiefs “was already blowing the myth that the All Blacks would be in a rebuilding phase during 2016.”
We have heard talk in Australia of New Zealand being ripe for the picking in 2016, and that this season is the best chance the Wallabies have to reclaim the Bledisloe Cup.
On the current form shown by the New Zealand franchises and their endless talent pool of world-class players, I think this is pure wishful thinking, and dangerous at that.
And for those of you – and there are plenty in our Australian newspapers believe me – that claim Super form has no bearing on international form, well then here’s a reality check of the overall picture, not just a given year as some love to truck out as proof positive of this outrageously silly statement.
It is the big picture that really put this claim to the sword.
New Zealand sides have dominated Super Rugby in terms of number of sides making the finals and easily winning hands down, for instance look at the number of times a New Zealand side has won the competition over Australian and South African franchises.
Every New Zealand side has made the final at some point, and only one has never won it, the Hurricanes.
In the same time frame, the All Blacks have dominated the international arena, holding the Bledisloe Cup for 13 years.
They have won three grand slams 2005, 2008 and 2010. Australia did it last in 1984 and South Africa last in 1961.
New Zealand have become the first side to win back-to-back World Cups, and hold Old Bill aloft three times, and let’s not forget they lost only three games between World Cups which is simply mind boggling – even for the All Blacks.
And it is ominous to think the Wallabies recent wins of Tri-Nations 2011 and Rugby Championship 2015 both came in World Cup years when the Spring Boks and All Blacks rested players and tried new combinations.
South Africa even insulted everyone by sending a genuine B-Team down under in 2011 which the Wallabies and All Blacks subsequently spanked out of the park.
The victory in last year at least had a little more going for it than 2011.
So Super Rugby form has no bearing on international form?
And cows have no relationship with beef pies either?
ben
Guest
Tigranes and boris....exactly. But i couldnt be bothered with parsifal. Some aussies just cant accept that a little country like nz could possibly be better at something than aus.
Boris
Guest
Kiwi league team has been beating the Aussies over the previous three years or so, probably no difference on that basis?? 4.4 million verses 23 million is the other statistic me thinks!
Boris
Guest
I think the useless Kiwi golfer is in 2nd place at the masters today LOL!!
Boris
Guest
Yep start crowing AFTER the games, once the Aussies learn that trick be afraid very afraid!!
Tigranes
Guest
Kangaroos struggle to contain Kiwis as it is - if the resources geared towards the All Blacks were switched the rugby league, then we'd probably all end up playing AFL.
Parsifal
Guest
Here's a question for all the Kiwis on this site - which guys, in your opinion, now playing NZ league could, given sufficient time to learn the game, displace guys in the (likely) AB squad? And for Aussies, how many guys playing league in OZ, given time, could displace players in the (likely) Wallaby squad? I'll await some replies but I kind of figure Oz rugby would be the equal of NZ rugby if there was more crossover in the Aussie codes. And more recruitment from the AFL.
mania
Guest
mtiger - super only shows you how well an individual is doing in that team. a dress rehearsal to the real thing. it doesn't guarantee that they'll do well in the WBs environment. yes ABs had a lot of cattle thanks to super rugby but it still took Hansen to make them gel as a team and provide a positive environment. cheika took a rag tag bunch of average super aus team members and turned them into a world class team. like singleMalt I'm not falling for the propaganda that says aus will have a weak side this year. I'm a fan of cheika and know that he'll bring out the best in the players he has available. plus I still remember the gregan era where we went without for 5 years. that still smarts
Not Bothered
Guest
Well he mustnt have lived in QLD or NSW where rugby is just as big as it is in NZ. Sure they prefer league to union and in NZ its reversed but I was blown away by the facilities for sports in Aus and the place it holds in their culture. No matter where you go in Aus, sports are huge. I once picked up a Victorian newspaper that was 70 something pages in length, over 50 were entirely dedicated to AFL, no joke and that was the front and back pages. Its a huge part of their culture and the trains on friday when a game is on are packed with supporters going to the game which often attracts 100 thousand for a club match.
taylorman
Roar Guru
Your last sentence is very true Matt, there is a trade off. NZ packs never boss the other top sides around. They have managed to top the lineout area after a lot of work in that area but the simple trade of is which is more effective...five tight forwards all running, passing and tackling for the periods outside the set pieces, surely by far larger percentage of the eighty minutes, or a focus on moving from set piece to set piece while the other ten do most of that work? Though you include mauls in that regard. I don't see that is as much an issue so would love to hear that 'other story' you refer to. Using the 100 X 68 meter field or whatever it is these days to the max in term of having all 15 all over it as much as possible must produce the gains over a side that largely doesn't require the same coverage of its tight five. Look at the gains players like Coles, Faumuina, Retallick and Whitelock get in the non set play areas.
Boris
Guest
And what does this have to do with the topic?? Golf, F1 etc WTF
mtiger
Roar Rookie
Big M and SM, To be fair, Allblacks still won the RWC last year. I note how well Cheika drilled the Wallabies. Hansen, nevertheless, benefited from strong Super performances, that the Allblacks are kept intact, not overworked, with plans to take on all teams, including pulling out some magic to put Australia away. Strong super performances must be linked to concessions to the national team. That's what Allblacks had.
Single Malt
Guest
I have heard both Henry and Hansen state that the foundation of NZ rugby success is the coaching at junior and school levels. NZ is blessed with enthusiastic and well-coached coaches who encourage players' skills. This is no fluke. There is a training structure for coaches and few inexperienced coaches fall between the cracks. Hansen also said that at all levels of the game in NZ running and counter-attacking rugby is encouraged so that it becomes second-nature. You hardly ever see NZ teams from schoolboy through to ABs playing 10-man rugby. Here's an example: a local amateur club team near where I live appointed a well-credentialed Brit as coach. The team had good forwards but a small backline that got pummelled in pre-season trials, so the new coach tried to implement a conservative game-plan. But in the very first game the team reverted to type and kept running the ball. After four games like this and four losses the frustrated coach resigned. The instinct developed over years was to pass and run, and the players wanted to have a go. It's what they enjoyed and why they played the game. I have a feeling that the emphasis on skill and running might come at a cost to tight forward play, especially mauls, but that's another story.
Shaun
Guest
I think that is the nail on the head Ben! and one particular area where I think that shows most is that New Zealand teams have ball players and players with X-factor from 1-15. Prime example being Dane Coles. Also having played a lot of rugby in NZ, all the best teams I've played in have had coaches that place a huge emphasis on the entire squad being able to pass, catch, offload and play what's in front of you. This is something I think other countries lack, where a prop might get scrutinised for passing the ball for example.
CUW
Guest
@ Tigranes : i think u have answered ur own point - " and I think once passes start sticking for the Jaguares, they are going to be running up a few cricket scores towards the back end of this tournament. " imo , all teams are passing and offloading and doing everything nz teams do . the difference is a few nz teams are doing these things better than all the others. do not forget last week , highlanders had 18 handling errors , i think that was more than the tahs. but the differnce was tahs lost. imo , evryting finally comes down to execution in the park . my frnd who played cricket for sri lanka and was known as a text book player had very little net sessions ; instead he played in actual matches a lot , irrespective of the classification. he always used to say its runs in the middle that mattered not how long u bat in the nets. same thing may apply to these guys ; but one issue may be unlike cricket , u cannot go away and play a club match mid week and retain the energy for the weekend and also u run the risk of injury. also i think , most players at this level know where to be or when to pass or what to do . its just the probability of doing it correct that matters. in the highlanders match there was one attack down right flank , where fekitoa broke and had thompson on his right. his pass to thompson went slightly behind and thus ended the attack. now all the things u say was there except for the accuracy of execution. one could say fekitoa shud have put that ball in front or another could say thompson shud have been a little behind. either way the execution was not perfect. my point is there are many such occassions where things are attempted and break down becoz execution is not 100%. the team that has less errors in execution will always have a better chance.
Single Malt
Guest
Agree with you Mania. After Super last year it was Aussie doomsday on the Roar. Myself and other sceptical Kiwis wrote and said that Super rugby and test rugby are different beasts - different structures, different management and different motivation - and Australia had enough skilful players to make a very good 23 man test squad. The RWC final proved this. This year will be no different. The Wallabies are the World No 2 team for a reason. As an old Kiwi I have too often seen so-called 'struggling' Wallaby sides give the ABs plenty of grief.
DCNZ
Guest
Good point rebel, but NZ or Australia could also have Scott Dixon in the centres! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scott_Dixon
CUW
Guest
neat :P :D
highlander 1st5
Guest
We also have the World #1 female golfer... Australia does do well overall considering the ranking of union in the market place but the arguement of Rugby being small globally whilst AFL and League are the dominating winter codes seems odd
rebel
Guest
You are right, if Adam Scott as the Wallaby 5/8 and Daniel Riccardo was on the wing, they would have won the last world cup. Golf and F1 are ruining the Wallabies.
R2D2
Guest
AF ,is it time to give up ?