How are World Cups won?

[GC]

Kicker will be James O'Connor. Off night last night but 80% + this year.

Plenty of ways to win a cup - even if previous teams haven't discovered them.

Defensive was the only way to play cricket world cups until Sri Lanka came along in '96 and completely changed the game.

Australia are not favourites, nor should they be. They should play the team & structure that suits them and the conditions most. Maybe it'll be the point of difference that gets them over the line.

 

[Richard D. James]

So, it's the RWC final and I have two choices on which to bet the farm.

Plan A. Monster pack, granite defense, ace kicker.
Plan B. Pack that at best holds its own, with glimpses of dominance, but can disintegrate under pressure. Ability to score beautiful tries from anywhere. Hot and cold kickers (note plural - who is Australia's goal kicker?).

Bets anyone?

Not saying Australia can't win but I am saying you can if a full strength pack takes the field in the RWC and someone kicks the goals else I say you are no chance to get past the semis. Scoring tries a big cherry on top but is not what will make the difference. The opposition will in all likelihood play a defensive pattern so tries will come at a huge premium.

The history is there in black and white.

I would bet the farm on A as well, but the problem for Oz rugby is we don't have A, we have B.

So we need to do the best we can with what we have.

Besides, World Cups finals are always low scoring trench warfare until one isn't. Just like the sun revolved around the Earth until we found out it didn't.


edit to add: The Reds games last year against the Bulls and Stormers are probably the closest I've seen to how we can win the WC.

They weren't try fests, but were played at such a fast tempo the opposition couldn't keep up.

 

[Hawko]

1. Benn R 2. TPN 3. Slipper
4. Horwill 5. Sharpe
6. Rocky 7. Pocock 8. Palu
9. Genia 10. Cooper
11. Drew 12. JOC (James O'Connor) 13. AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper) 14. Diggers
15. Beale

16. Moore 17. Palmer/Kepu
18. Simmons 19. Hodgo 20. Higgers/Mowen 21. Gits/Burgess 22. Shepherd/Turner/Gerrard

Go the 5/2 bench split. Gits and Turner can cover every position in the backline.

The 15 you quote would be mine too. I agree that for some games a 5:2 split is very effective, especially the ones at the pointy end and Giteau's flexibility is very useful.

I have indicated where I have unresolved options in bold. The only certainty I have right now is that Shepherd is a better option than Turner based on form this year. Its a given that all the others would in my opinion be in the squad and therefore available to be picked. This would be based on form in the rest of the Super comp and depending on who we were playing (eg I would always play Palmer against great scrummagers like England and France, despite his field limitations and if its wet and windy Gerrard would at least be on the bench.)

In my opinion, this pack is closer to A than B and the backs are closer to B than A. An ideal mix.

 

[The_Brown_Hornet]

Blue, I would say our best pack is somewhere between A and B. It isn't like the great packs of England and South Africa in the last two RWC's. However, the first choice group does more than get parity. They supply a consistent amount of quality ball to a backline that is very talented and scores points. At the very top level (i.e. semi's and beyond in the RWC), it's hard to gain the total dominance that you see at provincial level. You have to get to the semi's first, of course, but I think we have the squad to do it.

 

[kiap]

Burgess will struggle big time, no fast ball to anyone would lead to us not getting over the advantage line. When barnes gets concust what are you going to do, and he offers nothing in attack otherwise. Drew is a good choice. Carter should never ever be picked for Australia, and as such 13 14 and 15 are irrelevant because they will never get the ball

Agree. Genia over Burgess, but Phipps is an enticing prospect now - ahead of Burgess at the moment IMO. Carter is too limited, AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper) is not in form but would still edge him out for mine. Stirling at his current pace is a better option.

 

[Groucho]

Kicker will be James O'Connor. Off night last night but 80% + this year.

Plenty of ways to win a cup - even if previous teams haven't discovered them.

Defensive was the only way to play cricket world cups until Sri Lanka came along in '96 and completely changed the game.

Australia are not favourites, nor should they be. They should play the team & structure that suits them and the conditions most. Maybe it'll be the point of difference that gets them over the line.

I agree. When you're weaker, your best bet is to play an unusual style. If you try to beat a stronger team at their own game because that's the 'winning formula' you will almost certainly lose.

 

[gone]

We have been playing Robbie Rugby for three years now.

Bruce can you please define “Robbie Rugby”. As a big fan of Robbie Deans I’ve taken an interest in his career and I struggle to define one style that Robbie coaches to. I assume “Robbie Rugby” refers to the high pace ball retention style the Wallabies have played the last 2 years which looks to shift the ball away from the contact zone and provide 1 on 1 opportunities for the steppers in the Australian backs with less mobile opposition forwards. This was incredibly unsuccessful in 2009 after a clean out in playing staff but in 2010 some better results were achieved and the Wallabies jumped ahead of the Springboks in the world rankings after beating them 2 out of 3 times. Your insertion that we have been playing “Robbie Rugby” for the last 3 years confuses me because the style the Wallabies played in 2008 was very different to now. It was more kicking and defense based with less emphasis on ball retention, this was dictated by the law interpretations at the time which favoured the defending teams.

If this is what you mean by “Robbie Rugby” can you please tell me what you call the style the 1997 NPC winning Canterbury team played who were also coached by R. Deans. The Canterbury team was largely an untalented one and came up against one of the great Auckland teams in the semi final. They played a style based on offensive defence and the boot of Andrew Mehrtens. The Canterbury and Crusaders team of the late 90’s was often derided by opposition fans as boring and the game plan was essentially the one you want the wallabies to play. Deans was the coach of the Canterbury team and heavily involved with Crusaders as the team manager. It might surprise you that the 12’s for those teams were Mark Mayerhoffler and Daryl Gibson, both definitely inside centres as opposed to second five-eighths. Mayerhoffler was one of the great defensive 12s of the time. So "Robbie Rugby" doesn't necessarily involve a 2nd playmaker at 12.

If we look at the Crusaders over Deans’ reign, the game plan has changed from year to year depending on laws and relative strength. Look at the undefeated season of 2002, a game plan based on forward dominance and structure in the backline and was the first time he used a 2nd playmaker at 12 by shifting Aaron Mauger from 10. Look at his last season 2008 where he was the first coach to exploit the new rules introduced by relying heavily on high kicks landing just outside the 22.

Deans’ tactics have adapted over time depending on rule interpretations and personnel but you can apparently cover it in a 2 word definition. The current Wallaby style is based on the relative strengths of Australian rugby currently. We don’t have the forward pack to dominate NZ, South Africa or England. We don’t have a big 12 who has the skill or speed to play effectively at test level. We do however have a lot of fast small backs and mobile forwards which lend them to a high pace ball retention game. Will it work? I don’t know but I would trust Deans to get the best out of the players available. And I think the current approach is better than try to take on the teams mentioned above at their own playing style with lesser players. Just because everyone else has a big 12 doesn't mean we have too. It's the beauty of rugby there are a lot of different variables and a lot of different ways to play the game.

You have touched on the problem right here:

Coupled with forwards who are unaccustomed to and certainly not being physically prepared for the realities of trench warfare.

Apart from TPN and Pocock can you name any Australian forwards who will ever be up to competing on the International stage at trench warfare? I can’t... and therefore In my opinion we are better off trying to avoid it.

 

[Bruce Ross]

We have been playing Robbie Rugby for three years now

Bruce can you please define “Robbie Rugby”.

In a word, thatguy, no. I have been around for far too long ever to get suckered in by someone demanding, "How do you define that?"

I try to write so that the meaning of words and phrases is evident from the context in which I have used them. I also am known to resort on occasion to irony and flippancy. Perhaps you may not have picked that up.

The phrase, "Robbie Rugby", appealed to me because of its alliteration and the fact that I was being deliberately disrespectful of our national coach. I agree with you that he has had a superb record as a provincial coach but I feel that he has been steering Australian rugby in the wrong direction.

You yourself seem to be dismissive of the Wallabies' results in 2008, concede that the team "was incredibly unsuccessful in 2009", and state that "in 2010 some better results were achieved". I agree totally with those assessments but we seem to be at odds on the significance of them.

One area where I have been openly critical of Deans is in the physical conditioning of our national players. Like many people I was expecting a totally different approach to be adopted, akin to what the Crusaders' S & C, Ashley Jones, has done and is still doing with that team. This expectation was heightened by the fact that our inadequacies at the breakdown had been so clearly exposed at the 2007 World Cup.

Obviously Robbie Deans will persist with the policies he has been pursuing thus far, and we will all be in a better position to judge their worth after the World Cup.

 

[qwerty51]

Apart from TPN and Pocock can you name any Australian forwards who will ever be up to competing on the International stage at trench warfare? I can’t... and therefore In my opinion we are better off trying to avoid it.

Daniel Vickerman.

 

[I like to watch]

One area where I have been openly critical of Deans is in the physical conditioning of our national players. Like many people I was expecting a totally different approach to be adopted, akin to what the Crusaders' S & C, Ashley Jones, has done and is still doing with that team. This expectation was heightened by the fact that our inadequacies at the breakdown had been so clearly exposed at the 2007 World Cup.

Obviously Robbie Deans will persist with the policies he has been pursuing thus far, and we will all be in a better position to judge their worth after the World Cup.

If Deans was responsible for the conditioning of the Crusaders,doesn't that mean that the Australian franchises are responsible for their players conditioning?
I thought that the players went back to the franchises after the end of year tour & stayed with them until they were out of the Super competition?How can you blame Deans for their conditioning?

 

[Gagger]

What type of rugby are New Zealand playing?

They're scoring more tries than anyone else and are the hot favourites for the cup, no?

 

[Bruce Ross]

If Deans was responsible for the conditioning of the Crusaders,doesn't that mean that the Australian franchises are responsible for their players conditioning?
I thought that the players went back to the franchises after the end of year tour & stayed with them until they were out of the Super competition?How can you blame Deans for their conditioning?

I stand to be corrected by those with real knowledge of the New Zealand system, but my understanding is that Ashley Jones has worked quite closely with the All Black conditioners and has been involved on occasion with conditioning the national team. In recent decades most Kiwi provincial sides have made regular use of heavy strength work.

In Australia the national S & C coach, Peter Harding, has authority over the conditioning that nationally contracted players do at the franchises. In the blog section of this site we have seen an extensive interview with Harding detailing his methods when the national squad is assembled. There have also been newspaper articles which I quoted when I posted a couple of articles on this subject in the blog section.

 

[BackStalls]

A couple of things:

Surely, a lot will depend on how the Cup is referreed. If referees continue applying the new rule interpretations, favouring the attacking team and quick ruck ball, teams that can take advantage will surely profit. I think one of the keys with playing an expansive game is that players are confident in doing so, believe in and back themselves and have the skills such that playing in this manner is second nature. When the pressure is on, you want to know that you can execute.

Secondly, if the way to win World Cup's is to play tight, defensive footy, why do you think England have changed their game plan so dramatically. Clearly, they believe a conservative approach won't get them where they want to go. Interesting isn't it?

 

[I like to watch]

Bruce,
Why are you blaming Deans and not Harding?

 

[waratahjesus]

robbie rugby = like the crusaders but not quite due to the lack of skill and talent in the australian ranks.
Robbie Rugby plan b = work in progress, but he has a nice new notepad and three different colored pens and he is sure to come up with something any day now.

 

[Bruce Ross]

Bruce,
Why are you blaming Deans and not Harding?

Obviously, iltw, because the head coach has overall reponsibility. I'm presuming that he is satisfied with the type of conditioing that is being done. If he were not then presumably he would have had it changed.

 

[The_Brown_Hornet]

I'm not quite sure how to put this adequately into words, but it seems the consensus is that in order to win at the RWC, you have to play a style that looks and smells like glorified 10 man rugby. If that's the case, then I think we're buggered, as it's not our natural style of game at all, nor do we have the players to do it.

Or am I getting the wrong end of the stick?

 

[Groucho]

I'm not quite sure how to put this adequately into words, but it seems the consensus is that in order to win at the RWC, you have to play a style that looks and smells like glorified 10 man rugby. If that's the case, then I think we're buggered, as it's not our natural style of game at all, nor do we have the players to do it.

Or am I getting the wrong end of the stick?

I don't think it's a consensus, Hornet. It's currently the Bruceians vs. the Robbians, and both sides are represented.

Like you I don't think we can win playing traditional RWC rugby, so it behooves our cattle to demonstrate it is not really the case.

 

[Newter]

To win a world cup you need:
1. Luck with injuries.
2. Luck with the draw.
3. A 90% goal kicker.

 

[spikhaza]

This is the year that the status quo for how world cups are won changes. I don't know what it will be yet, but the law interpretations have changed the game. No longer will say, england be penalized for not releasing the ball right in front of the posts when they're center slips over. Instead they will keep the ball or earn a penalty for the tackler not rolling away / releasing the tackler. Providing this is true, Defensive orientated world cups are about to become a thing of the past. As far as I can see, a radical change has happened over the past year. Up and unders are still relevant yes, but significantly less so - and this is the goal, to make rugby a balance. Each defensive law (penalty) is balanced with an attacking one. Outweighed in some instances by an attacking one yes. Which means only one thing. Teams are going to score tries, or teams are going to get men sent to the bin.

Teams Playing Attacking Rugby (in order from most to least)

Australia (yes we have the most attacking flyhalf, attacking gameplan)
New Zealand
England (slightly less of late)
Ireland (more of late)

Teams that are playing Defensive (kicking)Rugby:

Scotland, as much as i hate to say it
South Africa?

South Africa's position is questionable. With Peter the clown they want to play defensive, but it seems halfway through the game when they've been ****ed they change and play they're own little sortie.. A mix of individuals i guess.

France are so ****ing unpredictable they're nowhere.
Marc Leivremont is a nutter, blames everyone for a loss ect. He thought that defensive rugby involving big slow defensive hulking centres / flyhalfs was the way to go about winning a world cup, as he showed when he put that team out against Aus. That team was outclassed in every way possible except the scrum in the first half. Every other way was just rolled. This is what is going to happen come world cup time. With consistant pressure, teams WILL score tries. If teams play defensive against AUS and NZ, so be it. But it will be bloemfontine at 25'. And in a world cup q/s/f, they won't be allowed back into the match, because the defense in world cups is too good for a defensive side to score tries.

And that is the IRB's objectives.

So here's how it's going to roll this world cup:

pool:
A: New Zealand, France
B: England, Argentina
C: Australia, Ireland
D: South Africa, Wales



QF1 Aus V Wales, Aus by 12
QF2 France V England England by 10
QF3 South Africa V Ireland republic by 1
QF4 All Blacks V Argentina All blacks by 20

SF1 Australia V England
SF2 All Blacks V Africa

F = Running Rugby

On that prediction only one team that has been guilty of not playing running rugby will make it past the QF's. AND that means that ladies and gentlemen, they're will be running rugby, all the way up till the finals. Even then Africa looks shaky. Point is, in the past there has been one team playing running rugby - all blacks. This year there is 3 teams playing a definitive "running" style - AB's england and Aus. Any other team can play this kind of style at times. There will be running rugby in the finals of the rugby world cup.