Not long after the horror of the Great War, Winston Churchill said ‘battles are won by slaughter and manoeuvre. The greater the general, the more he contributes in manoeuvre, the less he demands in slaughter’.
This November brought plenty of slaughter with South Africa flirting with a running game but ultimately returning to their form of slaughter as RWC 2015 rolls up. England, through their scrum elected for similar methods in taming the Wallabies who themselves created untold amounts of manoeuvre which enthralled me throughout their tour.
But with their new general, Michael Cheika, settling in they will be adding suitable levels of slaughter thus making them a real challenge next year.
Ireland have five competitive games plus five warm-ups (including the Barbarians) before facing Canada on September 19th, 2015 which leaves precious little time for tinkering, especially considering Six Nations rugby is our key tournament.
But do Ireland need tactical turnarounds? In 2014 this Irish team secured the Six Nations and two massive Southern Hemisphere scalps. We are blessed with a great general (Joe Schmidt) who found the manoeuvre and slaughter balance brilliantly in Leinster. He has brought plenty of Irish manoeuvre also; much of it through the excellent Irish half backs' kicking game.
Immense technique
Alan McLoughlin who is studying Sports Science and Health in the Institute of Technology, Tallaght has introduced me to the concept that ‘Culture will beat scheme everyday’. In fact it’s a direct quote from Chip Kelly the Philadelphia Eagles head coach. The Wallabies are on my mind because of Chip Kelly.
The Wallabies have a culture of immense technique which I witnessed in Thomond Park when Munster defeated them in November 2010. It was a miserable night and clearly they had no interest in being there. Munster, sensing this, went for the jugular. But the Wallaby technique around the ball, lines of running, offloading, tackle technique and post -tackle technique were superb.
Not many of those Wallabies survived but their technique certainly has. However there are other aspects to their culture that also fascinate as they continue to reinvent.
John Mitchell will testify to the challenge Wallaby culture places on coaches as too will David Nucifora from his Brumbie days. In the main, Mitchell notes “they don’t have much respect for authority and constantly challenge you to relinquish your leadership, even when it involves ideas and strategies”.
But Mitchell also notes: “Australian players like to take ownership quickly”. This concept of ownership is central to the Australian psyche and lends itself to self-regulating and creative thought within the playing group. It also places enormous demands on the coach. It’s a concept very alien to Irish rugby where players have long been too patient with poor coaching.
Like Ireland the Wallabies kick the ball too; but against the Six Nations teams it is generally half as often as their opposition (104 kicks to 62 during November). The passing stats are similar – 396 to the home nations versus double that, 794 to Australia. Metres run on the ball again favours the Wallabies who outran their opponents by 64 per cent.
In losing to New Zealand in October by just one point (28-29) Australia kicked the ball a paltry nine times to New Zealand’s equally limited 14. The difference? Up here we manoeuvre through the boot; down there it is through running. So in the ten matches remaining before we meet Canada, do Ireland alter their current technique to prepare for the World Cup play-offs.
And in answering the question we must embrace the RWC final as a legitimate goal.
Playing differences
Will Ireland require a broader game to negotiate the World Cup and if so who will demand it? With just five competitive games remaining the short term can only be achieved through the provinces accommodating this style; where there currently exist clear playing differences.
The famous try scored by the Babas' scrumhalf Gareth Edwards from an outrageous circle pass from Tom Davids carries the danger of errors – as when Simon Zebo made a similar pass in the exact same position against Australia.
Australia made plenty of errors this November and lost matches. Ireland have proven that by limiting errors allied to many other positive aspects (defence etc) victories follow.
But what does one sacrifice by limiting errors? And how does this question account for variant national styles ? Australia concede two cheap scrums inside their 22 and are punished by a pummelling English scrum to the tune of 14 points; pressure, field position plus subsequent errors equal points!
If Ireland dilute their kicking game then advancing is per the lineout maul (which is superb), the scrum (at present an evolving attacking too), metres carried through counterattack (which is evolving but limited), phase attack and general play.
Positive systems allied to '2 v 1 offloads' are what Australia thrive on; Ireland to mimic. Allied to this 2 v 1 ability is Wallaby inside centre Matt Toomua who is of crucial importance to their ability to explode narrow and wide.
A creative second man like Toomua who has played at ten, one out, with Johnny Sexton controlling at ten could really get Ireland manoeuvring through the slaughter, making for an Ian Madigan showdown.
PS. Considering last week's Australian cricket Phillip Hughes tragedy and the World Sports Team you may be interested in http://www.stickybottle.com/ and former Irish international rower turned international cyclist Paul Giblin's urgent appeal for bone marrow donors.
liamtoland@yahoo.com
