Hi Nick,

I remember speaking about this with you in an email chain I think it was about a month ago. I wanted to ask, is this something you and Stuart have been coaching at Leinster?

http://the1014.com/how-to-make-the-all-blacks-perfect-part-1-brumby-mode/

I finished this article around April time and it got released just before the French series, though the other 4 are currently on ice for the Rugby Championship, but I did note Leinster against Saracens using the Rod MacQueen Brumbies pattern of yesteryear Post 6N, something that England used against Wales in the build up to their second try to great effect.

Ford is no Larkham, who as a runner was beautiful and brought so much to this. Which on a different note is something I think Hansen now requires from his 10’s before they can play for the AB’s. Barrett, MacKenzie and Mo’Unga are all former 15’s who have the speed to exploit the transition zone as the second receiver once the 3 pod has constricted the defence. We saw this from MacKenzie especially on the final 2 tests against the French. Tis a great launchpad for the All Black backline and a great counter to the Rush 13 D.

But, back to Leinster. Is this something you’ve seen can be effective against Line Speed defences? As it certainly was against Sarries, with some of the Leinster play off 9 being sublime to watch.

Great article Nick!

I’ll concede i’ve been incredibly disappointed with England’s performance and mindless, mindless penalties. Players who consistently do this should be made droppable to teach a lesson or two. Though you have to wonder what goes on in training in order to foster this attitude on the pitch.

In regards to Owen Farrell though, we can’t have him as Captain. He’s not a Captain, screaming at the referee. Its not calm, cool leadership. Its just going to antagonise the officials. Thinking Launchbury would be a great call. Guy is level headed, calm, leads by example, a really high quality player, can be the Ying to Maro’s Yang, and yet by all accounts can be absolutely terrifying in the changing room to jolt players into a performance.

Players just don’t follow or listen to Farrell, or aren’t scared enough of him. I think Launchbury/Hartley are the real options going forward. What do you think?

Its not the players but the systems i’m referring to here T Man. The Wallabies used the fringes to great effect against seasoned All Blacks in the Bledisloe tests last year. 2 of their tries in Bledisloe 2 came from it. Its better with Gifs, but the AB’s do have problems in this area in particular. Regardless of whether the Pillar D defenders were strong or not, due to their spacings.

Its simply more players attacking a thinner portion of the line quicker and quicker. Numbers game with patience eventually wins.

Thanks mate, and no worries about the Irish assumption. I’m hoping I can get my hands on the Irish Geese attack a bit! They run a 1-3-3-1 currently but alignment and the options to hand are quite predictable. Gotta work on varying that first. After which the detail comes to play 🙂

Thanks mate. I’d agree. Their top down structures is highly indicative of their success at international level.

Maybe started at the Graham Henry years would you say?

And a bunch of other sarky points as well Jacko! Including rubbishing the article as Fiction, poisoning the All Blacks, being bitter at referees, ignoring the haka, being French. Really Intellectual and debatable points you put forward their Jacko. Inspired.

Maybe a 7th can be put in there. And that’s not playing into their hands and attacking their weak points in their defence. (WHICH THEY DO HAVE). All teams do. The field is too big to defend all of it. And different skillsets and alignments can exploit any space regardless of where it is. Of course. If you disagree with that. Well then there is no hope for you whatsoever.

Thanks mate. Appreciate it

Designed to offend and silly articles huh?

If you were only capable of intelligent debate and had a shred of humility. You might actually take the correct lesson from this article.

Instead you cling to a notion that me describing areas where the All Blacks have conceded ground in the past is offensive. When the reason behind it is done to simply exemplify the lessons of Sun Tzu!

The fact that you can be offended by a mere discussion about some weak points in the AB team is pretty sad. And the plenty of other kiwis who have read This, thankfully haven’t shown half of your insecurity.

Fandabididozy mate. Keep believing you don’t have weaknesses.

Over-Arrogance breeds losing. So thankfully for You, and yet simultaneously, entirely unlike you. The All Blacks aren’t.

Were they. And believed they were the perfect team. They’d stop trying. Be caught be out of the game. And find themselves at 2nd pretty quickly.

Maybe your stigmatised attitude that i would ever claim the Abs have weaknesses, that you choose to ignore causes this. But McQueen, the coach in charge of that same Oz side. Was my hero. And for a reason youve taken thats entirely different to the point intended by my article. You’ve decided to get sarky.

Next time. Try spark some intellectual debate on the article, rather than typify a NZ fan whos arrogant to a fault and bitter about past referreeing decisions. Shoulda woulda coulda mate. That goes for all teams. You can’t deal with unforseen circumstances and lose that’s your problem. Not the refs. Should’ve played better with the ball.

I don’t mate. I’m English. Only my coaching heroes are Rod Macqueen and Joe Schmidt. Both of whom I’ve taken a bit of inspiration from.

And I used to coach my battalion team. But next season im joining London Irish Wild Geese as an assistant attack coach. Part of their amateur teams and 2 levels down from the premiership. Which I’ll take for now! 🙂 so you may get a lil conflicted this summer then an trust? 😉

Thanks mate. Appreciate the comment.

Not just the Paddys mate. The Pumas, Wallabies have got change out of these points. I know a bit about Rugby. But I nowhere said that teams will beat the All Blacks using these points. But only more likely too. Being drawn into a wide running offloading game invariably helps NZ. As their counter and dynamic of Aaron smith to it is set for teams that do this.

Also. Yes it wouldn’t surprise me if Schmidt was being brought back to NZRU. He’s one of my coaching heroes.

I think England will get to the quarters/semis. Though it will be hard due to the group. But we have a good team. The recent blip (down to exploiting our 2 man pods) should’ve been fixed earlier. But wasn’t. Thankful it happened now rather than next year.

Ok. So waking up this morning and reading the comments here. Is pretty much the opposite of what I wanted to achieve.

I am an admirer of the All Blacks. And maintain they are the best rugby side in the world in terms of history, excellence, style of play, legacy. So on and so forth.

However. It’s not a crime to want to debate where they can be beaten. That’s not what this series was about. But the simple fact is at any one time you can only have 15 men on the field. There is space. And that space is exploitable. Instead of sparking healthy debate like “box kicking and a quick kick return could be effective, or Ryan Crotty is key to the ABS in attack and defence”. People have just seemed to come out and slander this article for me pointing out the possibility that NZ have weaknesses, without any thought for the main point behind it, which is the comments and philosophies on Sun Tzu.

P.S: If you can’t see that the ABs, even without some of their 1st XV in Chicago. That Ireland didnt have clear set tactics that Schmidt focused on. That’s just closing your eyes. That day was a masterclass in coaching by Schmidt. And more along the lines of what I think he’s building his team along the lines off.

I am actually. I think they’re a great rugby side. With great history, excellence in their victories and humility. But there’s nothing wrong with trying to discuss views on rugby and toppling the best. As everyone wants to.

I’m an England fan. Of course I want to see England win this year, but it doesn stop me admiring the ABs and AB play.

Thanks for this comment mate. One of the nicer ones on here!

It certainly seems it mate! Unfortunately a lot of them seem to be very resistant that NZ for have weaknesses. Which is fine if they want to believe it. But they do. And teams that have played in certain ways and attacked certain areas have succeeded. Ill pop ot up before the French series. With Gifs it’s a lot easier. But can’t get them up here yet.

Unfortunately there were multiple instances highlander. Early In the second half when we were on their 5 metre line and Robshaw took himself out of the game. Leaving Ford to form the ruck against a back row. We deserved the counter ruck that we got. An Instance where Robshaw and Itoje combined and they literally stepped over.

In general the entire breakdown play was awful, and helped Scotland. In the second half we tightened up our pods and played with more intensity. Plus we started doing 4-8 entry, so we shifted the jackal off far more efficiently. But. Our players were still pretty slow.

As for our best back row, for balance… I really like either Underhill, Curry, Vunipola or Underhill, Simmonds Vunipola.

Simmonds is so fast hes on the ruck immediately, he powers through players, I reckon he can beat Hooper for pace, can step backs, and is a very good jackal. Billy V has the power, and Underhill is a tackle machine and has immense workrate. Just run into him and you stop. No matter who you are. Apparently he even sat Billy V down in training a few times.

But, in the overall play, Robshaws link play helps England a LOT. And is why hes referred to as a glue player. I think unless Underhill gets that, which he should develop at Bath. Robshaw will stay in. But Underhill, Simmonds and Billy have everything. Speed, power, mobility, Breakdown nous and great work rate. Its a potent combo.

The big problem with Englands breakdown against Scotland is the clean-out techniques they used.

I’ve wriiten an article that i’ll release probably next week, but. England operate a 2 man pod system with their forwards. The problem, is that Robshaw and Itoje, lack in the technique needed to shift poachers. Therefore, they Croc Roll. And that, was a massive, gargantuan problem against the Scots. Every ruck Scotland stationed Breakdown options around.

This caused an issue as by Croc rolling, Itoje, and Robshaw took themselves out of the game, as well as one Jackal. This either meant a back had to go in to form the ruck against back row and lock forwards, as such they were counter rucked easily. Or, as happened A LOT. Once the roll had happened, because of the two man nature, there were no other forwards nearby, with a carrier on the ground completely unprotected.

Scotlands poachers stepped in (literally) to an unprotected ball and had a field day. We shored it up in the second half. But our performance was pretty terrible in this facet, and will be being worked on 100%

http://the1014.com/scotland-v-england-what-will-eddie-jones-be-coaching/

Hi All.

I had gifs in for this but they were not included.

Please refer to this article for the correct gifs and demonstrations.

Conor

Love this article Nick! Cheers! The kicking options England have are a very big tool to Englands belt. Especially against OZ last year. In regards to the make up of the back 3, I really like Daly on the wing with Watson and Brown at 15 for his positioning and defensive work. Is there any other wingers or combo you feel would offer more for England in that regard?

I know Shag loves to use 2 full backs in his back 3 as the aerial game plus the counter is so important now, but do you think Englands back 3 are designed differently?

Thanks Nick. Great point about structure. Especially today. My god that was a nail-biter.

And I didn’t actually know that. Nomads in the structure in themselves? I think i’ve seen the Hurricanes use something similar. Or is that brought over from the AB’s do you reckon?

Haha, Thanks Chaz. I won’t say i’m near Nicks level at all! But glad you enjoyed it. My god it was nail-biting!

Cipriani and Burns? That says it all doesn’t it. I credit CW for bringing England to the 21st century and into the professional era, but he had a sensational group of players to choose from.

Choosing Cips and Burns over Ford and Farrell is an absolutely idiotic call, the gulf in quality between the pairs are huge. Feel he’ll have to come up with better selections then that if hes getting back into coaching.

Awesome article as always Nick.

Great to see you evaluation of the England plays from set piece also, was very surprised that Scotland didn’t adjust to it. But what I like is that EJ seems to have ditched the notion of a starting crash centre and focused on his 1st Five/2nd Five 10/12 combo quite solidly. Sir Clive however was making me Sick. Saying its needed at this level as if he invented it with his original JW and WG combo. Doesn’t want to tell anyone he got it from playing with Manly.

Its got to the point where Jones took Joseph off whom was having a scorcher for T’eo. Instead of either Ford or Farrell.

That says to me how valuable he views their combination. And I’m kind of glad hes picked it, as i love the distribution that its brought to the team. I also think that Ford and Farrell are both playing so flat to the line, that off set piece it almost eliminates the need for a crash centre, as they’ve already sucked in enough defenders, and if they needed a crash option they’ll deploy Billy V or Nathan H off Ben Youngs as a decoy or trucker.

Saw in all tries that both of them too the ball so flat to the line, they’d committed at least 3-4 defenders with the tailgunner included, allowing Joseph luxurious amounts of space. The pass’s made by both to Joseph were so flat there was no time to react from any of the Scottish defence. Though they should’ve adjusted. Penny for your thoughts Nick, remember you saying if England in SL’s day were to deploy a crash option it’d be outside Ford and Farrell, do you think thats the way Jones is going? And. Will such an option ever be the mainstay start for this team?

I fully hope for most of those eventualities Machooka!

Except the last one. That one we can leave. Think 3/3 is asking too much of the Rugby Gods, but 2/3 sounds a right blessing to me!