How to fix Australian rugby's Trans-Tasman problem: Part 2

By Paulo / Roar Rookie

As my esteemed companion Loosehead Greg has pointed out, Australian rugby has a problem.

We will continue to explore this in Part 2 of the series. It is commonly known that looseheads and wingers are integral parts of the brains trust on the field, so it’s no wonder that we have all the answers. Sit back and prepare to be inspired.

New Zealand is incredible at a number of sports, being ranked first in the world in rugby league, first in ODI cricket, second in Test cricket, and third in T20, plus they are the current holders of the America’s Cup – to name just a few accomplishments.

Rugby union is still the passion that burns in most New Zealanders’ hearts. Even though Australia is ranked behind New Zealand in all those sports, there seems to be a burning desire to take on the world’s greatest rugby team in the history of the sport, and sometimes in their own backyard too.

You have to admire that naive ambition. Australian sides are certainly gluttons for punishment.

(Photo by Cameron Spencer/Getty Images)

The Australian teams had success in the Super Rugby Australia competition, but what should now be clear is that was not good preparation when you get called to perform on the big stage.

Yes, an Australian team managed to win the competition (I’m looking at you Reds, kudos). It is also worth noting that an Australian team lost every game of the tournament too. Taken as an aggregate, that is only a 50 per cent win rate, in their own tournament. It is hardly worth crowing about, and yet strangely we hear constantly about what a success the competition was.

Taking a step back from sport for a second, New Zealanders often come to Australia to help this country out, and by doing so, as a former New Zealand prime minister once said, they increase the average intelligence of both countries.

Gone are the days when New Zealanders would flock to the West Island to sit on the beach on the dole. They are lifters now, not leaners. Typically earning higher than the Australian average wage, they contribute huge amounts of tax revenue for the governments, while receiving very little social service support and being refused the vote and have a say on who spends those tax dollars.

While taxation without representation has sparked many a revolution or civil war, New Zealanders put up with this with a grace and countenance that is to be admired. You can just feel the Australian gratitude, can’t you?

Back to sport, what has become clear in the two rounds of clean sweeps so far in the Super Rugby Trans-Tasman is that styles and tactics matter, along with basic skills.

To get better, the Australian teams need to adjust to the different skill set and approach the New Zealand teams are using. In order to increase the rugby success here in Australia, is it any wonder that the path forward is to leech off the talent, skills and intelligence of the greatest rugby nation on earth?

(Photo by Cameron Spencer/Getty Images)

Schools often employ a system of exchange students: one of ours for one of theirs.

This could work for Australian rugby. Not at Super Rugby level of course, but at the former NRC or current NPC level. In the NPC, there are enough teams to allow for a large contingent of Australian imports to fit into 14 teams across two divisions.

This means, if you allowed two or three Australians per team, it would result in 28-42 players being exposed to New Zealand’s systems and tactics. That is basically an entire Wallabies squad.

This exchange would be reciprocal, having New Zealand players in Australia playing in an NRC type competition, increasing the talent pools and allowing the young players coming through the chance to learn and absorb the rugby IQ that the New Zealanders have developed playing out there on the frost-hardened grounds of the deep south; grounds where they have to scrap the snow away from the field markings with a garden hoe so players know where the lines are.

This would help develop the skill set and talents at this level, allowing players to step up into Super Rugby teams with a high skill set and better mindset. This is essentially like an intelligence or reconnaissance mission in enemy territory. And make no mistake, for all the obvious love between the two nations, rugby is war.

By understanding different styles and tactics, the Australian Super Rugby teams will be better positioned to adapt and change what they are doing. They may even be able to adapt and change tactics midway through a game if things aren’t working – something the current teams seem incapable of doing.

The Australian teams need to learn to respect the ball and possession. Too often they are kicking the ball away for the New Zealand teams to run it back to them. This worked against the poorly skilled Australian teams, but is a sure-fire way to get a cricket score posted against you when playing the New Zealand teams (Reds, I’m looking at you again).

(Photo by Joe Allison/Getty Images)

The teams that have performed the best are the ones with a structured and thought-out game plan: starve the other team of the ball, and stay disciplined and structured on defence.

One knife can sharpen another, so as Australian players get better by being in a New Zealand team, New Zealand players can get better by being in an Australian team.

New Zealand players, especially the ones taken in by teams that take a conservative, possession-based approach, will learn this trade and style. This will better equip them to deal with teams, particularly in the northern hemisphere, who tend to play that style, and which has been shown to be effective against the New Zealand teams.

The inclusion of two more Super teams will help with this exposure also. If the competition is set up as a big, 12-team tournament, then Australian teams will get exposure to all styles.

But if due to COVID we end up with a split competition, with the Fijian Drua in the Australian side of the draw, at least the Australian teams will be exposed to a high-speed and ball-running team that will better prepare them for the New Zealand sides if or when they were to face off.

While some might argue the answer is take your ball and go home, then pick weaker teams to play to ensure you have a chance of winning, that is not the way to get better. You might as well just stay home and play against other domestic teams, like Rugby Australia has been doing so far.

The Crowd Says:

2021-05-30T05:54:15+00:00

Loosehead Greg

Roar Rookie


Good response Paolo. Sorry I missed it when it was first published because I've been crying into my beer all week: until about 7 PM on Saturday night actually; after which things started to look a bit brighter. It's all very well to have some banter back and forth across the Tasman, great stuff, but the biggest story in Australian rugby right now has nothing to do with NZ. The biggest Aussie rugby story should be Western Sydney rugby union, and their fight to stay alive. We talk about wanting RA to invest in grassroots, we all want that right, well, here's an opportunity for them to show some real leadership. Not sure what Andy Marinos is up to this coming week - probably checking his frequent flyer points balance - but what he ought to be doing is clearing out his long lunch schedule, and calling an urgent meeting to discuss whether an intervention is needed in Western Sydney, and to brainstorm what RA's investment options are for developing rugby union in Western Sydney.

2021-05-28T07:21:31+00:00

The Neutral View From Sweden

Roar Guru


You have given no proof whatsoever for the claim that the English RU tried to use the same deal that would have applied if the game would have been played in a regular Test window. Obviously, since it is something you made up yourself. Damn, you are really thick.

2021-05-28T06:49:03+00:00


You have not "backed up" anything. You have said it. That is not proof. Proof or shut up please. I gave you proof. You didnt accept it so I want to see the proof as to why you dont accept my version and the article I posted version also.

2021-05-28T06:27:25+00:00

The Neutral View From Sweden

Roar Guru


I already have backed up that you lied. It is there for everyone to see who can read and think. You desperately trying to deflect from you original statement - the one I called out - but it will not change a thing. You lied about the English RU tried to use the same deal that would have applied if the game would have been played in a regular Test window.

2021-05-28T01:03:11+00:00

WEST

Roar Guru


Playing in SA we lose more.. like I said in “SA” out of 50 we won 24.

2021-05-28T00:57:40+00:00

Tony

Guest


Ah no its the opposite - Boks v Ab's - Head to Head Played 99 AB win 59 Bok win 36 draw 4

2021-05-27T23:01:17+00:00


Well I asked for clarification so if thats beyond you stop calling people blatent liars unless you can back that up. Feel free to prove your point please as Ive proven mine. The reason the Test did not happen is because NZ would have lost around 1.5mil from dropping the existing Baabaas match to Host England and England refused to make up that shortfall meaning England would have made around 8 mil NZ$$ and NZ would have lost 1.5 mil NZ $$ compared to the game they had signed sealed and delivered. Surely you can prove what you are saying….I HAVE…..

2021-05-27T10:22:25+00:00

Micko

Roar Rookie


Soccer is a genuinely competitive international sport though. Rugby union is NZ, South Africa, then half a dozen or less nations beyond that who hope to knock off these two.

2021-05-27T07:52:28+00:00

The Neutral View From Sweden

Roar Guru


Just calling you out on a blatant lie, that the reason for the Test not happening was that England’s RU tried to offer the NZR the same deal that would have been in place during an official Test window. Nothing more, nothing less.

2021-05-27T07:47:02+00:00


What are you trying to say tho? Are you nitpicking and trying to say that England offered a "bit" more than the standard or are you claiming they offered to share the profits 50/50? OR...Are you claiming they offered NZ more but not a share of the profits from RFU owning the stadium?

2021-05-27T07:39:53+00:00

The Neutral View From Sweden

Roar Guru


I have looked and you obviously can't read or understand what is written in the links you post. Nothing in them confirms what you are claiming. I called you out on that you claimed England was pushing for the same type of agreement that would be in place if Test was in an official window. And I still call you out on that hence you are 100 percent wrong.

2021-05-27T07:32:55+00:00


look at the post below for all you need. Now are YOU man enough to say you are wrong? NZ got far more than if they had cancelled the Baabaas and played England…No mistake.

2021-05-27T05:10:42+00:00

The Neutral View From Sweden

Roar Guru


Oh, I know England wanted to play this Test outside the official window. But your claim that England did not want to share more money than the usual amount NZR would have gotten if the Test was in an official window is not true at all, and that was what I called you out for. Let us see if you are man enough to admit your "mistake"

2021-05-27T00:35:40+00:00

Beedy Eyes

Guest


Agree Panama , only Rugby World Cup trophies count. Rankings do not matter at all.

2021-05-27T00:13:06+00:00

Brian Westlake

Roar Rookie


By having to sell off "the brand" to a foreign based company to remain sustainable?

2021-05-27T00:09:15+00:00


It would be run properly. Thats how.

2021-05-27T00:01:51+00:00


Its all there in the history annuls Neutral. NZ had the match booked v the Baabaas and thats a checkable fact https://www.smh.com.au/sport/rugby-union/england-want-to-play-all-blacks-in-5-million-showdown–report-20170315-guyji1.html

2021-05-26T23:51:43+00:00


Do you mean the first test where NZ scored 350 in their first innings or the 2nd test where India scored 250 in their first inngs? Sounds unplayable.....

More Comments on The Roar

Read more at The Roar