Only after having read all the comments and opinions on The Roar about the current situation for Australian teams in Super Rugby Trans-Tasman did I proceed to study in detail the main indicators of the game of attack, defence and management.
First of all I would like to analyse the keys to the performance between Australians and New Zealanders.
If someone were to ask me at this point where I find the game difference between Aussies and Kiwis, I would answer without hesitation that it is found in all phases of the game. To be more precise, we could analyse the framing and execution of the breakdown as well as the resolution of try situations or with possible points gain in the opponent’s 22 metres.
Let’s go by part. So far the most effective performance in the Australian ruck has been Waratahs (96.6 per cent). Although the percentage difference with the best New Zealand ruck is only 1.5 per cent – Blues have the best effectiveness, with 98.1 per cent – we see that the issue acquires special relevance when addressing another combined indicator, which presents the average number of successful rucks that occur before losing control of the game.
Thus, the Australians lose one ruck after executing 20 successes whereas the New Zealanders take that same account to 36. It’s a notable difference in attack control.
Game planners would say that it takes patience and concentration to successfully execute a plan of attack. I would add that it also requires the highest level of skills to ensure the success of an attack in contemporary rugby.
The tool with the greatest application in the game today is the movement of the ball at speed. The basic skill is structured from the race and the relationship between volume and quality of passes made. Is Australian rugby ready today to reduce the difference of almost five per cent that separates it in the number of passes made compared to New Zealand?
The challenge for Australian coaches today would be to increase and sustain the volume of play of their teams through the proliferation of passing speed as a way to provide pressure and territorial gain from possession.
Identical observations could be made regarding the kicking game, whose technique would be working at half power – after the kick is executed, the pursuit of the ball is inefficient in Aussie teams – and the ability to transform possession and territory into tries and points.
These asymmetries with Kiwi work are evident, especially the visit 22 opposition tries ratio that places New Zealand on average 16.3 per cent higher
In defence and in game management we can also see differences since the effectiveness of the Kiwi defences over those of the Australian teams is clear. A simple combined attack and defence indicator shows us that for every successful tackle we are opposed on average 0.9 carries in New Zealand compared to 1.2 in Australia.
This shows that we need a much more effective Australian tackle to stop a ball carry from the New Zealand side.
As it is, a fast helmsman is needed to change the game plan and work the wrong sequences. However, it is not happening in Australian rugby. Perhaps it is a cultural archetype that determines and conditions the style of Australian rugby; overcoming it would take time and effort in the basic work of clubs, schools and rugby unions since we cannot demand from the game something that it cannot in truth offer us today.
The challenge is open, and volunteers are urgently needed.
Francisco Roldan
Roar Rookie
Thank you Moaman..! We are here to crystallize our small contribution to the great rugby of the southern hemisphere. It really was great rugby :rugby:
moaman
Roar Guru
High-quality article. I am looking forward to more from you Francisco. :thumbup:
Francisco Roldan
Roar Rookie
How are you Soapit ...! Without a doubt, physical fitness makes the difference in the rugby we are playing around the world. In Argentina in particular, we have had an empowering experience from Los Pumas during a physical preparation they did in Pensacola (USA) in the months leading up to a RWC. There they were able to strengthen the ties between the players themselves and strengthen the societies that intervene in certain functions during the game. An all-terrain experience with one goal: to develop physical endurance and a winning and fighting mentality.
soapit
Roar Guru
thanks for the aericle francisco, cant help but think fitness is a factor. maybe ra should run boot camps for all squads to stop them slipping
Francisco Roldan
Roar Rookie
Hello Guess …! My impression is that if you achieve speed and precision at the top level, you would be in a different register than many teams. Even New Zealanders. Blues, for example, has shown during 2021 a fabulous attack combinatorial based on the kicking game of Otere Black and the young Zarn Sullivan. It was Aotearoa’s best attack and it would be, so far, the best of TransTasman: he is one step ahead of the rest, and that based on the optimal combination of the 3 basic skills in kick, passes and carries.
Francisco Roldan
Roar Rookie
good morning Cheika_mate ...! As I mentioned in another post, both RED and WAR are showing a good level, but intermittently and sometimes empty in the defensive game. Both have shown good goals scoring 12 and 13 tries respectively. What are they missing to be really protagonists ...? In my opinion, I think that the famous affective component in the game should take more participation. Today, with the level of play seen in AUS, it takes fire to face a Kiwi team and not die trying. No Australian franchise has the successful defense rate as that of Western Force (83.9%) although it contrasts with its effectiveness in the resolution of the attack (20%) and in the management of territory (it demands 18 carries to reach opp 22 against to 11 of RED, for example). Not all teams have it all, but some like RED and WAR have some of what it takes.
Guess
Roar Rookie
Also speed. Basics at higher speed. Grassroots yes, pointless to talk about it on SR level
Francisco Roldan
Roar Rookie
Lara ...! To provoke surprise and variation in the pattern of the game, many teams prefer to give up possession of the ball, as England does at the level of national teams or Jaguars in the old SuperRugby. To structure the attack we need to deconstruct the defensive instance. This is what we call 'status change'. Australian teams may feel more comfortable in a comfort zone in which they defend strongly and react immediately to the change in status. In my opinion both RED and NSW have shown quite a dynamic attacking game that has paid them some dividends over the course of matches and could easily be strengthened with a more forceful defense. We can consider a good indicator of that greater dynamism in the attacking game to the number of passes made by RED and NSW evaluating only among Australians. Although we are faced with a background situation that speaks of reconfiguring the basic and advanced skills training program, each team is a configuration in itself: its own configuration.
Francisco Roldan
Roar Rookie
Thanks for your SSS considerations ...! Sometimes I doubt if it is spontaneous attack formations in the face of a turnover granted or if we are in front of a luxurious machinery that builds the best and most efficient against attacks in the world. Most of the time I lean towards the second thought. It is also true that this speed and speed to build the solidity of the attacking game is usually paid for with a high rate of penalties conceded (182 of the NZL teams vs 165 of AUS) and turnovers (they are almost equal to the ratios of the Australian teams. ). For the rest, I think that developing tremendous precision and speed work over 80 minutes requires a perfect match between the physical capacities and the technical skills we are talking about.
Francisco Roldan
Roar Rookie
Good Morning jcmasher...! I agree with you in these of the basic skills. I approached the subject indirectly by mentioning that "Perhaps it is a cultural archetype that determines and conditions the style of Australian rugby; overcoming it would require time and effort in the basic work of rugby clubs, schools and unions ..." Faults or omissions in the training process of a player are usually paid dearly. And worst of all for us fans and analysts: they are obvious ...
jcmasher
Roar Rookie
Nice article and while I agree with a lot I think you missed out on basic skills. All the Kiwis can pass accurately to the left and right. All of them can catch and pass well. Passes are more likely to go to where the player is going to be rather than where he was. The ball always beats the man but the Australian passing is so laboured that’s not true when they’re in possession
SSS
Guest
Francisco. Enjoyed the read, a bit of structured thinking without any emotional overtones that tend to play out in this forum. As a long term rugby watcher, think decades, the playing aspect that impresses me the most is the NZ teams' ability on attack to form a structured attacking structure in seemingly seconds, with no player out of place and all clear on who gets the next ten passes, with minimal fumbles and dropped balls and no ambiguity about who is the next receiver. I appreciate that there are always exceptions to that aplenty, however it seems to this slightly biased observer that of recent the coaching processes have lifted significantly in intensity, precision and skill to the results that you correctly observe.
The Late News
Roar Rookie
Fabulous article Francisco! Speed and accuracy plus power. It's a wonderful combination. Frankly I am so impressed by they way the kiwis play...we can reach that level now and then of course but need to learn how to be more consistent.
Lara
Guest
Basics. The kiwi teams can play really simple rugby, get the basics right and the rest will come. Simple example....loose ball on the ground....they will 90% gather the ball , get up immediately and wait for help. The other 10% is....can I score a try or gain territory....risk n reward...n this is decision is done immediately. The players are taught at a young age about decision making, but their basics are so sound.....starts at grassroots.
Cheika_Mate
Roar Rookie
Nice read Francisco. The difference between the aus and nz sides is stark. skills size and depth. The kiwi sides are well drilled, have a much higher skill level and their player depth is crazy. Look at the Chefs. They lose their 10, but his replacement was no slouch and boy did they get bang for their buck with their bench. Qld lost cohesion as soon as their bench was introduced. They bombed a try and luckily Loto had his best game in a while to deny the Chefs the win with strong defence. The NZ sides play with in your face line speed and their off load game is crazy. I think Loto and Qld gave a bit of a secret in how we can beat them...well occasionally beat them. Big bodies with controlled aggression. Qld are playing their biggest and probably their best pack against NZ sides with Liam Wright at 7. Wilson has taken his game to another level, and credit to Scott Young his tough. The tahs although the score line blew out also had probably their biggest and best pack on the field (other than Whetton who is here on a contici holiday) and at at times challenged the Crusaders. Dempsey at 7 had his best game in years. Get past our top 23 at each aus side and we struggle.No easy fixes however id like to see more fire in the belly, fast in your face defence and we hold the ball. The aimless kicking is killing us.