A topical podcast discussion around the quality of Super Rugby on show in 2019 intrigued me in a way that I really hadn’t considered before recently, but actually made a fair bit of sense in this, a Rugby World Cup year.
It came during a welcome round of golf, listening to The Short Ball, the podcast out of RugbyPass.com, featuring New Zealand commentator Scotty Stevenson and in this particular edition, former All Blacks lock, Ali Williams.
The golf, for what it’s worth, mirrored the form of more than a few Super Rugby teams in 2019. An exceptionally good front nine was woefully let down by some poor execution after the break, punctuated by some ill-discipline, poor decision-making that led to unnecessary risks and penalties conceded, and with some ordinary finishing thrown in for good measure.
A lot of ‘what if?’ thinking was the overwhelming outcome.
Back to the pod, and the discussion kicked off after another typically mad weekend of results, and within it, what Stevenson described as some “bush league footy”.
It was a round that didn’t lack for excitement, he said, but just left a bit to be desired on the execution front, coincidently around the same time I had to mark a ‘three’ in the makeshift ‘putts’ column on my scorecard.
“I just wonder,” he continued, “if some New Zealand teams at the moment in their desire to showcase flair, athleticism, speed, have forgotten that sometimes you’ve got to get in the trenches and just win the grind?”
Luke Jacobson makes a break (Photo by Hannah Peters/Getty Images)
It was a question that Ali Williams first responded to with a thought, a question, whether Super Rugby was trying to create a new ‘Twenty20’ type of rugby where entertainment was the priority. The gap between Super Rugby and Test Rugby had never been wider, he pondered.
With game trends and coaching direction the main driver, Williams wondered whether the “respect for the game” was being eroded.
“I can’t understand how so many teams are going for the corner, to give you a fifty-fifty – maybe a 75-25 – lineout opportunity to then create a drive to then score off that,” Williams said.
“There’s three points there. You take the kick-off, you kick it down, you hound them, and there could potentially be a lineout down on the forty metre with a good exit play.
“I don’t understand the lack of… well not knowledge, but ‘respect’ of how the game was designed and played.
“I just don’t understand how these people aren’t grinding out points pressure, scrum pressure… you know, these elements that they just keep working, working, working to get reward,” the former Blues and Crusaders lock contemplated.
Both Stevenson and Williams conceded the Crusaders were unrivalled in their efficiency and general play, but proceeded to point out concerning elements within all four remaining Kiwi sides. The Highlanders, they agreed, were the team most likely and most willing to roll the sleeves up when needed, but that was far from ingrained behaviour.
“For the first time in a very long time,” Stevenson surmised from what he’d been seeing, “I thought, ‘far out’, if we take that philosophy, if these players don’t get that philosophy out of their system before the Rugby World Cup, they could be in grave danger.”
“Correct,” Williams agreed.
And though Stevenson and Williams were coming from a New Zealand perspective, their observations are valid across the teams and the conferences.
Certainly, more teams seem to be eschewing seemingly easy penalty goal attempts in favour of a lineout in close proximity to the opposition try line and the desire to find at least five points instead via their lineout drive.
Having taken a bit of a look at goal-kicking numbers in recent weeks, it’s quite astounding to see just how rarely some teams have pointed to the posts this season.
After twelve rounds, the Highlanders and Hurricanes have ‘kicked for poles’ just thirteen times. The Rebels have had only eleven attempts, and the Lions ten. Of these four, only the Lions through Elton Jantjies (73 per cent) have goal-kickers with success rates below three in every four attempts.
Bryce Hegarty is the leading Australian goal-kicker by some margin – 28 from 32, for 88 per cent – and has kicked all eight penalty attempts. But with Hamish Stewart’s one successful attempt, the Reds are still only on 9/9 for the year.
The Crusaders as a team are five from seven penalty attempts in eleven games, and quite remarkably, Christian Lealiifano’s penalty on halftime in Buenos Aires last weekend was just his and the Brumbies third penalty attempt (all successful) all season.
Curwin Bosch had four penalty attempts before halftime alone in Christchurch on Friday night, and his seven from nine comprised the Sharks entire 21-point haul for the match.
At the other end of the scale, the Bulls have taken 36 penalty attempts and Handre Pollard kicking 27 from 30 of them, and the Stormers have taken 33 attempts. The Sharks (26), Blues, Jaguares, and Sunwolves have all taken at least 21 penalty attempts.
Handre Pollard (Photo by Steve Haag/Gallo Images/Getty Images)
I’d love to have the time and computational power to work out the success rates of teams kicking for the corner rather than the posts, and to compare the effort required in finding the try line – or not – compared to the chance for a team to take a minute while a kicker takes the three-point penalty attempt.
It would be intriguing to know why some teams clearly believe the lineout drive is a better option.
Especially when you consider defences in 2019. Only the currently 14th-placed Chiefs and 15th-placed Sunwolves are conceding more than four tries per game. Six teams are conceding fewer than three tries per game.
And only the Crusaders are scoring more than four tries per game in 2019, while another six aren’t crossing the line more than three times a game.
So why are we seeing so few penalty attempts from nearly half the competition? And what impact could this have come the international season?
I don’t have the answer, but it’s a question worth pondering. We have interestingly enough seen teams forced in to grinding, defence-led wins in recent weeks, yet many of those same teams are making life difficult for themselves by ignoring not just kickable penalties, but sometimes dead-set sitters.
In a season where eleven teams are still within a two-win margin on the competition table, it seems this season more than most would be one where pragmatism toward easy points on offer would be a sensible plan.
Bruce Rankin
Roar Rookie
Lots of interesting discussion here. I've covered this topic in four (4) Roar articles back in 2007 entitled "The Art of Captaincy" and in Part 2 (updated in 2014) specifically covered the issue of kicking a penalty versus taking the line kick for the corner in hope of scoring a try from the ensuing play. Here it is: The Art of Captaincy - Part 2: Rugby Tactics In this Part 2 we’ll look at one attribute of successful captaincy – the ability of the captain “to change tactics and play many times during a game without reference to the coach.” A chapter could be written on rugby tactics, and another chapter on an extension of that – set moves. Time and space do not permit a full analysis. However one of the most basic tactics that often reveals a captain’s ability is: what do you do when you receive a penalty within kicking range? Does the captain take the kick for goal, kick for the corner to maul a try from the lineout, take a scrum, take a tap kick or cross kick to an unmarked wing? The basic rule is “you always take your points!” It is rare that the other options succeed. The key exceptions are (1) when you’re so far ahead or behind on the scoreboard it doesn’t matter – say 30-40 points; and (2) when you’re into the last 3 or 4 minutes, there is only one scoring opportunity left and you need a try or converted try to win. Yet the number of times Super 15 and even experienced international captains forget this basic principle is remarkable. Why is the captain’s decision to always take the points so important? Several: (1) It keeps the scoreboard ticking over – either increasing the lead or narrowing the gap; (2) It sends a message to the offending side that they will be punished and should be more careful; (3) It puts a psychological little nail in the coffin in the minds of the offending side every time they have to come back to half way to kick off again; (4) Going for a try with a 10-20% probability of success just doesn’t compete with today’s goal kicking success ratio of some 75-80%; (5) Securing the win is the first priority, ahead of bonus point considerations – exceptions are rare (6) It is especially vital in the last 20 minutes of a game, when you’re behind and need more than a converted try to win. If you don’t take the points, the offending side knows it can infringe with impunity, yet not have points scored against them. What about the risk of a yellow card? Defending sides presumably reason it is better to risk a yellow card than give away vital points! Cynical? Yes, but regrettably it happens and it wins games. Ergo – always take the points! Let’s also summarise key tactics in the critical last twenty minutes of a game: [added Feb 2014] Attacking Tactics: Behind and need up to say 10 points to win (1) Always take your points – as above - while you still have time to score twice, until 3-4 minutes to go (2) Hang on to possession ruthlessly (3) Do not kick away possession – no chips, grubbers, cross kicks, centre kicks, up and unders! (4) Only exceptions are when the kick is to an unmarked wing, or you are about to be forced into touch, an inside pass is not possible and you must keep the ball in play (5) Maintain an attacking mindset – eg ensure leaders trained and ready to take penalty tap kicks (6) Position team for set/special moves (7) Position team for a dropped goal... you can’t rely on forcing a penalty (8) Must not kick the ball out unless in your own 22 and you are last line of defence (9) Only take a penalty kick for a corner lineout and maul if less than 3-4 minutes to go and you need to score a try – ie 4-7 points to win.... “last throw of the dice” (10) Avoid scrums at all costs – they are too time consuming (11) Endeavour to take opposition line kicks for quick lineout restarts Defence Tactics: Ahead and need to maintain/increase lead for last twenty minutes (1) Always take your points – penalties – to increase the lead (2) Hang on to possession ruthlessly (3) Maintain an attacking mindset – ie do not go ‘into your shell’ mode: (4) On attack position for special moves (5) On attack position for the drop goal. If it succeeds the lead is increased. If not it soaks up extra time for the restart, therefore position to regain possession from 22 dropout and repeat (3) and (4) (6) When out of range take penalty kicks for the line to win ground and maintain possession (7) Take scrums on each optimum occasion to soak up time – typically up to a minute per scrum (8) Do not kick away possession (9) On defence and a line kick is last practical option, ensure the ball goes into the crowd to avoid quick opposition restarts. Putting the ball out safely is more important than distance gained. Let’s now look at some examples of tactics. In the first year of the Tri-Nations – 1996 – the All Blacks played the Springboks at Cape Town in the last game of the series, immediately prior to the three-test series. It was all South Africa for most of the first half and five minutes after half time, they led 18-6. The comeback was effective. First Mehrtens kicked two penalties. Then with just 13 minutes left Osborne scored down the left wing cutting back to the posts. Mehrtens converted and so the All Blacks led for the first time 19-18. With the Springbok forwards now tiring in the final 10 minutes, prop Craig Dowd drove over, Mehrtens kicked another penalty and the All Blacks had won 29-18. On interview after the game, Sean Fitzpatrick said, “Yes, it was good wasn’t it? We just kept chipping away.” In other words, through his leadership he did not allow his team to panic, they remained patient, took the penalty points as they came, and finally in the last 15 minutes, when they had control in the forwards, scored two tries. It was no coincidence that, immediately afterwards, New Zealand won its first ever test series in South Africa 2-1 under Fitzpatrick’s leadership. After the Crusaders had beaten the Brumbies in the 2000 Super 12 final, Blackadder was finally appointed captain of the All Blacks “nine months too late” according to Robbie Deans. Yet in two tests there were key lapses in his tactical skills. In the Wellington Bledisloe Cup test the All Blacks were ahead 23-21 with just 2 or 3 minutes to go, with a scrum feed in centre field on the Wallabies 22. The sensible tactic was for a Marshall-Mehrtens dropped goal which would give the All Blacks a five point lead. Otherwise a 22 drop out would soak up precious seconds while giving possession back to the All Blacks. Inexplicably the All Blacks ran the ball, possession was lost in the ensuing lineout, the Wallabies got the ball upfield, the All Blacks were penalised in the ruck and John Eales, cool as ever, calmly slotted the penalty. Blackadder later admitted “I just put my head in the scrum and left it to the backs.” A vital lapse. Two weeks later came the Tri-Nations test between the All Blacks and Springboks in Johannesburg. It was a helter-skelter mistake riddled match with the Springboks uncharacteristically attacking in the backs, to be up 33-13 before half time and the All Blacks recovering to 33-27 at half time. The Springboks continued to attack and led 46-40 with 15 minutes to go. The All Blacks pressed hard into the Springboks 22 on multiple occasions, forcing mistakes and several penalties. Inexplicably, although there was plenty of time, Blackadder declined to take the points and kicked for the corner lineout – all these attacks being successfully repulsed by the Springboks. The score remained 46-40. And so, in tight contests like these, little tactical lapses by the captain had a major impact on the result. 2001 came with a new All Black captain in Anton Oliver. His deficiencies as a captain were exposed in the Tri-Nations and Bledisloe Cup test in Dunedin, won by the Wallabies 23-15. Firstly a penalty try was awarded against Ron Cribb for tackling Joe Roff without the ball, described in Men in Black as, “a dumb move by Cribb, characteristic of the lack of thought under stress by many of the All Blacks that day.” While Oliver could not have stopped Cribb’s error, a good captain would not have allowed the latter to happen, or at least nipped it in the bud. Secondly, with one minute to go, eight (8) points behind and no hope of winning, the All Blacks were awarded a kickable penalty. Inexplicably Oliver spurned the three points that would have given the All Blacks a bonus point. Later, to general disbelief, he tried to explain he was “still playing for the win!” Three weeks later at Stadium Australia, it was the All Blacks ahead 26-22 with 12 minutes to play. Only a try to win! Twice Eales spurned the opportunity to take the points from two penalties and twice the Wallabies failed to score the try. Finally, just a minute to go, another penalty and again kicked for the corner lineout. Followed by the lineout win and Toutai Kefu’s memorable charge to score by the posts. Australia 29-26. * Then came a brief interview with Oliver, All Black jersey out down almost to his knees, socks around his ankles, looking slovenly, his eyes darting everywhere but at the camera. Later on stage for the presentation and John Eales farewell, all he could manage were a few perfunctory remarks to John Eales, saying, “It’s all yours mate.” It was a graceless performance. The contrast between Oliver and one of the most outstanding international captains of all time could not have been more marked. We’ll look at a few more examples in Parts 3 and 4. What about the captain’s ability to vary the type of play? (Attributes 2 and 5 of Captaincy.) Again if you’ll pardon the self indulgence, back in 1989 just two months before he died, my father outlined to me his approach to developing the game plan and tactics for each match in the 1950’s. His rugby brain was as sharp as ever in this “interview” summary: “Our tactics against the opposition were always carefully worked out for any match we played. We made up our own tactics – we weren’t worried what the opposition was going to do – it was what we were going to do. We looked at their strengths, their weaknesses and their ability and what sort of football they played – orthodox or otherwise. A well trained side played orthodox Rugby and always went to the right place at the right time. Consequently you could play unorthodox rugby against them, because they turned up at the ‘right’ place, when we were scoring tries going the other way. If you’re against an unintelligent side, you only played orthodox rugby, because there’d always be some silly clot who would turn up at the ‘wrong’ position at the right time and smother the attempt.” Today one would include both France and Fiji as unorthodox, unconventional sides, versus unintelligent – but the same principles apply. Taine Randell was clearly incapable of doing this against France in 1999. The important point is that it is the captain’s responsibility during the course of a game to change the type of play to counter the opposition, if the opposition’s tactics or type of play are succeeding. A top captain, supported by his senior leaders, will read the opposition play and make adjustments accordingly. This may sound simple, yet it takes years of experience. It’s perhaps no coincidence that six World Cups have been won with captains virtually at the zenith of their careers. * I would have taken the points, however who am I to question John Eales – one of the all time great international captains. Eales’ reading of the game may have been that he was sufficiently on top of the All Blacks and he’d crack them in time. Which he did. In the last two articles we’ll look at examples of how Australian and New Zealand - Super 15 and international captains have measured up in the attributes, including tactical ability and varying the play: Part 3: Australian Captaincy – assessment and selection Part 4: New Zealand Captaincy – assessment, selection and five failed World Cup campaigns Bruce J Rankin November 2007 Updated February 2014
Brett McKay
Expert
Patto, Foley's range is generally the 10m line. It's certainly true that he doesn't take too many kicks beyond that. Barrett is the same, that's why Jordie takes the longer kicks. Your line was "He is poor from 35 meters plus and even he misses the closer ones too." Look at the PG numbers above, and remembering that PGs are generally going to be inside the aforementioned 40m range and inside the 15m tramlines. Those PG numbers show that over the last five seasons he's kicked 90 PGs from 119 attempts - that's 75% from within his range. "He is poor from 35 meters plus and even he misses the closer ones too," you said. He's never been a long range kicker. He doesn't take kicks outside his range. And your perception of his kicking within that range simply doesn't stack up.
Patto
Guest
Nonsense! Beauden Barrett can kick further than Foley. Hodge is never picked as a starter by Cheika so how can he kick for goal ?.You will not win a RWC with Foley at 10. Those other stats you mention, how many kicks by Bernard from 35 + meteres out ? He likes taking the easy shots which ups his kicking percentage. TWAS has stated this before and you know it.
Keilidh
Roar Rookie
Thanks Carlos, this would be interesting to model, I wonder how many of the variables are available.
Jimmy
Roar Rookie
I wonder whether it is more to do with the fact that Super Rugby is (in some ways) seen as the training ground for test rugby. You can practice goal-kicking without an opposition, but it’s much harder to practice attacking rugby, set pieces etc. without an opposition? So they take the chance to practice scoring in 5s and 7s when they have the most useful resource: an opposing team.
Carlos the Argie
Roar Guru
So, if the other team is known to be bad defending a maul, you kick to LO. If you know the other team is good defending and your team is not good scoring from mauls, you kick a PG. The good defending team will be less afraid to commit penalties until they risk a YC...unless the other million options and scenarios....
Carlos the Argie
Roar Guru
Or maybe it is Quesada's French experience telling the Jaguares to take the points....
Carlos the Argie
Roar Guru
I have assumed ONLY kicks to the LO within the range of accuracy of the kicker. Not "Hail Mary" PGs.
Carlos the Argie
Roar Guru
It is the one stadium where you can see the attendees having a lot of fun always. Would love to join them once.
Carlos the Argie
Roar Guru
Momentum is a concept of no value in statistics. As they have shown for basketball, baseball and other sports, momentum doesn't matter. There is always regression to the mean. What SHOULD matter is strike rate by the attacking team and defensive rate by the defending team.
Carlos the Argie
Roar Guru
Harry, This is quite complicated! Let's assume that a team has a good 1/3 strike rate for tries when kicking to the corner. If in that match they already kicked to the LO 4 times and have NOT scored, does it mean that the next one has a higher chance of scoring? Or has a lower one because the defensive team has a 1/5 scoring against them? An attacking team may have a 1/3 tries but a defending team may have over the season a 1/6 tries against them. Which one then takes precedence? And if you failed or scored before, do we apply Bayesian statistics or independent counts? Your comment assumes pre-existing knowledge so it should be Bayes.....plus instinct. We should try to figure out offensive scoring rate by team and defensive prevention rate by team. I assumed 1/3 for the offense, but I think coaches should aim for 1/5 when defending.....(I can figure out the calculations later, it should be an "expected" rate less than the 3 points adjusted by the kickers accuracy rate).
CUW
Roar Rookie
super rugger added 2 new refs to the panel - aussy Murky and saffa Jacob. both are rubbish to say the least. in addition saffas also have Seconds - against whom even saffa teams have protested. calling something SUPER and then giving average product will enrage both players and fans. best eg is this year IPL. for some reason the IPL decided not to bring in the best umpires - despite tehere being no other international cricket. so umps like Dharmasena ( best ump last year ) Reiffel , Aleem Daar were not invited. there have been many issues thru out this year. latest is a case against England's LLong who had kicked a door down in anger becoz of a wrong decision on field and the subsequent arguement with players. i just cant imagine why these idiotic suits cannot understand that professional players - who are among the best on the planet want to be umpired or reffed by the best on the planet .
Harry Jones
Expert
Your third grade flyhalf can kick a penalty not in front? Jeez!!! Nice!!
CUW
Roar Rookie
playing each other and killing them slowly is not helping NZ teams. BEN SMITH is out for 6 - 8 weeks. Retallick Franks still out. Squire Naholo recovering fast.
Harry Jones
Expert
I think: - after a warning for repetitive maul infringements - when hooker has been on target all match - and you have a little lead, or are very far behind - it makes sense to go to the corner
CUW
Roar Rookie
as true as it is - Blues lost becoz they have rubbish 10s. there is no getting over the very well seen fact that neither Black nor Plummer have the capacity to run a team around. i have said this before - that Blues lost a great chance to get a good 10 like 3 years ago when Tusi Pisi was available - he went to Japs. i have been even more surprised that they have not replaced Perofeta in the squad with an old head - someone like Mike Delany , who had a nice season last year with Crusaders. i cant remmember all but im sure the Blues 10s have lost at least 3 matches just by missing kicks. in the lst match Black basically played for Brumbies. he missed 8 points - ok we forgive. then he gave away 2 silly penalties one after other , which then led to a maul- try. blues may have won playing with 14 duh !!!
CUW
Roar Rookie
ooo yeah - kicking at goal just got gold standard look at the rubbish in this list !! " Referees (12): Wayne Barnes (England), Luke Pearce (England), Jérôme Garcès (France), Romain Poite (France), Pascal Gaüzère (France), Mathieu Raynal (France), Nigel Owens (Wales), Jaco Peyper (South Africa), Ben O’Keeffe (New Zealand), Paul Williams (New Zealand), Nic Berry (Australia) and Angus Gardner (Australia) – 457 tests as referees Assistant referees (seven): Matthew Carley (England, reserve referee), Karl Dickson (England), Andrew Brace (Ireland), Brendon Pickerill (New Zealand), Federico Anselmi (Argentina), Shuhei Kubo (Japan) and Alex Ruiz (France) – 130 tests as assistant referees TMOs (four): Graham Hughes (England), Rowan Kitt (England), Ben Skeen (New Zealand) and Marius Jonker (South Africa) – 217 tests as TMOs " I will take Glenn Jackson for Ben O’Keeffe, Marius van der Westhuizen for Nick Berry , Mat Carley for Luke Pearce , Shuhei Kubo for Romain Poite any effing day !!! so England rule the world cup appointments ?? 6 out of 23 ffs !!! Karl Dickson and Brendon Pickerill ??? no JP Doyle or Rastaman ? this is going to be crazy - teams better get acclimatized to some iffy reffing. before u try to lynch me - just go watch how Gardener acted when the game got a little rough for him - and imagine a world cup match with just 26 on the park :P
Olly
Roar Rookie
For the Australian teams, it is because of our inept ability to exit our half from the kickoff. To me, it is clear when we play NZ teams they are more than happy to give penalty kicks at goal away knowing that they will be able to pin us down in our half from the kickoff. The only exception is the Rebels who have excellent long-range kicker options. NZ teams play a field position - high-pressure game and have for a long time now. They are confident that at the right end of the field they can put their opposition to the blow torch. Looking at their record over the years this has worked. Southern hemisphere teams are following this strategy now and personally, I think it could be the southern teams undoing at the pointy end of the RWC. Field position pressure vs scoreboard pressure.
AndyS
Guest
Agreed, can't see too many of the established teams straying too far from the tried and tested this year. That said, and probably dreaming, but being the RWC I would love to see one of the teams with nothing to lose challenge with something new. I enjoyed watching teams scramble to counter the non-ruck engagement by Italy, but that was more a surprise tactic than game plan. Often wondered what would happen if, say, one of the lesser sides focused on the dropkick and trained four of their players to be genuine threats from inside 40. Kick a team to death in the pool matches, then watch everyone scramble to find a way to cover four threats simultaneously without losing shape and making holes for other players to run through. Perhaps all the more effective if everyone else has got all conservative in their own preparation and plans...?
Rugby Tragic
Roar Rookie
Carlos, it’s a great stadium they have in Dunedin. Perhaps a little on the small size (28,000 capacity I seem to recall) but probably appropriate fir the size of the city. Rectangular stadium and with the roof, always a great surface and fantastic atmosphere. A huge improvement on the old Carisbrook ground which was open to the weather.