Has running rugby had its day?

Thanks for your article Junior. I felt that I was watching rugby league with line-outs when I watched the ABs take on England and Ireland. Because they were close games it was tense but the reality was it was as dull as dish-water in terms of running play. I was extremely annoyed that the ABs have not learned to counter the league defence run by the Northerners. The Bok game in Wellington was fantastic in terms of running play and intuitive back play. The English and Irish games were absent the defining qualities that separate rugby from league.

I don’t think that the rules need major change but ensuring and promoting a bigger contest at the breakdown which attracts more defending forwards leaves more gaps for attack. That plus a focus on offside defence will help with the attack. The rush defence can’t be onside.

Thanks for the article JS. Not sure if anyone else noticed, but sitting smack in front of Eddie Jones for the England vs All Blacks match was none other than Craig Bellamy! So maybe someone has already considered acquiring the advice of a successful Rugby League coach to help with modern tactics. Or possible he was just enjoying the spectacle at his own request to do some research. Certainly there are a lot of tactics from RL in RU these days, although I'm surprised no one has bothered to do the opposite. RL is ripe for teams pushing in scrums, lifting jumpers, short kick-offs (line drop-outs) 3 man attacking pods with double man carries and gain line back door runners. It just seems that while the sport of RL has evolved, it's generally in the direction of conservatism and defensiveness. Which I guess is also currently where RU is heading. I've also noticed that a lot of NH teams are putting two jackals of the tackle now, as it makes the conventional clean-out harder to effect. One jackler often protects the other. Great innovation, but mostly on the defensive side of the ball. The big risk for teams like Ireland is when you've trimmed out all the fat and created a low risk style of play, where do you go from there?

ur only looking at NZ - there are lots of small guys in other teams. even bok Kolby was in 7S and Kwagga is not so big. small quick guys have a future in 7S - more than XV is my point.

It's great because you only have to watch the sixth tackle, you can get a lot done in between.

@ Paulo That's your personal definition and it's not flawed imo - I just don't agree with it is all. I have a different def'n and it's not flawed - it can't be cause it's mine. JuniorSenior has no definition of running rugby at all. None of the other commentors here have a def'n either. And that is exactly my point - and my original question.... What exactly is running rugby? It's a moving target but 1 thing is certain. 10 years ago very few international teams played running rugby by anyone's definition.

Good article. For my mind, the lasting legacy of Cheika’s tenure (which hopefully is drawing to a rapid close) is that Australian rugby running is a myth. You look at our periods of success and see that this is actually the case. The resurgence of Queensland in the 70s and 80s was built on strong fundamentals and effective kicking by Paul McLean and Michael Lynagh. It dominated the flash of NSW and Randwick running. The Grand Slam was built on a strong line out and scrum, augmented by Ella’s running (although he liked a drop goal too) but it is no coincidence he had the solid choices of Lynagh and Slack outside him. 91 World Cup was defined by Campese, but we actually had a darn strong forward pack who knew how to grind it out (final try off a maul) I think it was the dastardly Richard Loe who rated the Daly, Kearns, McKenzie front row as the strongest he ever played. We also had tradesmen-like backs such as Roebuck and Egerton who did the fundamentals (kicking, tackling) well to counterbalance the mercurial Campese. 99 Wallabies let in two tries all tournament, but just as importantly ground out the semi final against SA with 8 penalties and that drop goal. Again they had an uncommonly strong forward pack who did the fundamentals well, as did the 2001 version against the Lions. Frankly, the running rugby myth was simply born out of the 90s advertisement campaign with the Jo Jo Zepp and the Falcons song. Great ad, but like most ads, showed a fantastic view of things

League is a cure for insomnia.

Here here Geoff are we slowly becoming as myopic as the Americans. The Twickenham match between a struggling Aussie team and England sold out with 80,000 tickets ranging from $AUD100 to $AUD300.

I am not sure 7s is the answer for little blokes either. Of the Team that took the field in the Gold Coast Comm Games Scott Curry Tim Mickelson Dylan Collier are all 6'3" plus and 100+ kg Yet only Curry plays as a forward. The smallest Vilimoni Koroi is still 1.76cm (5'9") 1cm and 3 kg bigger than Mackenzie, 7cm taller than A. Smith.

It was interesting Sheek When I toured here in the late 80's, our Fullback was trained to be peppered with high ball and chip kicks to turn our forwards around. And so it was the case. Never in NZ had we faced as much kicking as when we toured Aussie.

Congrats on your first article JS! I'm not sure the headline does the article any favours, some of the issues you cover are more challenging than just whether or not running rugby (whatever that actually is) is dead. What you say about the size of athletes is no doubt true, but things go in cycles - for example the skill levels of forwards has also markedly improved (at least in other countries), so we now have sides like Scotland playing an open type of game and doing it pretty well.

Maybe time for you to reduce your handle from three words to two, Elf? Try getting your hands on a ticket for next year's RWC - it's ridiculously oversubscribed already. Or getting a ticket for a 6N match. Don't confuse Australia's problems as being problems with the game overall.

I should emphasise, although it probably isn't required, there is no right way or wrong style to play rugby, but there is a smart way, knowing when the different styles of rugby are appropriate to use. A team doesn't even need any great strategy or tactics. Just an emphasis on developing sound basic skills, understanding the fundamentals of the game, & applying those skills effectively. In attack, get over the gain-line, move to where the defenders are least, support the ball player, maintain momentum of attack. In defence, prevent your opponent from crossing the gain-line, plug the gaps, trust your team mates to make their tackles, maintain momentum of defence. In both attack & defence, be always aware of potential opportunities presenting themselves, & be ready to capitalise on them in an instant.

Agree with this - you need size and it's one of the AB's weakness in that whilst they have all the skill in the world, they can be bashed and beaten up. However with the suffocating defence as shown in the Lions series etc - It would be good if the linesmen and Ref's starting to police the off-side line vigorously. All teams are doing it - however if you want to see attractive rugby - you do need that line policed. In some of the recent games - it felt like the opposing teams backline was sitting in the attacking teams pockets.

Great more contest at ruck less forwards spread across the field = more chance of attacking rugby

Thanks JS, really enjoyed it, is Bastareaud the future of centres?