Does Super Rugby prepare players for Test Rugby?
-
Does Super Rugby Pacific sufficiently prepare its players for international Test rugby, as far as skills and tactics are concerned? Early evidence suggests a concerted effort across the tournament teams to increasingly mimic the game’s current trends, by emphasizing kicking and especially contestable kicking.
Rd. 1 SRP kicking: total kicks, contestable kicks and kicks retainedAt an average of more than 29 kicks per team, the first round of SRP saw a huge amount of kicking. Furthermore, almost 11 of those 29 kicks were contestable, with teams using a variety of box kicks, chips and wipers kicks to create a contest for the space by going to the boot.
[sidenote: my definition of a contestable is relatively broad. Any kick that sees a contest for the ball after a kick, I deem to be a contestable one. So grubbers, cross-field kicks and restarts are included in these numbers, which is different from how others interpret contestable kicks. See, for example, Brad Harris’ analysis on contestable kicking after the 2013 Rugby Championship; https://d26phqdbpt0w91.cloudfront.net/NonVideo/6a3d5727-707e-4970-abb3-ae926c7c9386.pdf]
Comparison with Six Nations
These numbers compare relatively well with those of the Six Nations’ sides, who employ a comparable rate of contestable kicking.
Comparison: Total and contestable kicking from SRP (rd. 1) and 6N (rd. 2) sides
Comparison: Contestable and retained kicks from SRP and 6N sidesAt the moment, it's only the Chiefs who are lagging quite a bit behind in terms of their contestable kicking. For them, it wasn’t so much that they didn’t want to kick contestably but rather that their kicks were consistently too long for any chasers to reach. Neither Roe nor Ratima were accurate enough with the boot for any meaningful kick chase, with only a few of Jacomb’s midfield bombs able to be contested (if unsuccessfully).
Other sides, like the Highlanders, Blues and Crusaders, were able to put up their fair share of contestable kicks, with a good bit of success as well (HIG: 44% retention rate; BLU: 58%; CRU: 40%). These kick retention rates compare favourably with the likes of England (31%), Ireland (54%), and Scotland (55%), all of whom have excellent kickers at their disposal.
The main differences
Still, some gaps between the two tournaments can be discerned. Two clear areas of improvement are, I think, the accuracy of kicking in SRP as well as its (lack of) attacking identity in relation to the kicking game.In terms of accuracy, the 6N sides are able to kick contestably at a higher rate in fewer kicks, while, at the same time, successfully competing more possessions as well. To put it more simply: the 6N teams are able to do more with less.
Comparison: averages of kicks (AK), contestables (AC) and retentions (AR), and rates of contestables (%C) and retention (%R) between SRP and 6N sidesIn addition to this, we see a further development of clear attacking identities in relation to the prevalence of kicking. For example, England kicks at a higher rate of contestables than anyone else (61%) because they have tied their own attack closely to their kick retention rate. When this kicking game falls flat – like it did against Scotland, with only a retention rate of 31% - much of their attacking game falls apart as well. So while this playing philosophy comes with a great deal of risk, you can at least see clearly what they are trying to do.
Similarly, France have completely organised their attacking game on the basis of the opposition kicking the ball to them, approaching the kick receipt as a set piece platform from which to launch their own back 3 strike moves. This is clearly visible when comparing the passing involvements of the French back 3 (Ramos, LBB, Attissogbe) to other teams in both the Six Nations and Super Rugby Pacific.
Attacking involvements from SRP and 6N fullbacks: Ramos is clearly playing a different game to everyone else
Attacking involvements from SRP and 6N wingers: the 6N wingers are currently working harder than their SRP counterparts, involving themselves more in the attack across the fieldRamos, Bielle-Biarrey and Attissogbe are not just faster and more skilled that their opposites, they are also far more involved than them, getting their hands on the ball both as carriers and as passers.
This is the key for the French transition attack: the back 3 of France rarely kicks (Ramos: 3.5 kicks/80) but instead of just carrying the ball back, they make sure to shift the point of attack, passing the ball between them and finding the weak point in the chasing defensive line. No less than 5 Welsh kicks immediately led to French line breaks.
In contrast, across the four NZ teams, just 2 opposition kicks (out of 136) led to line breaks in the first round (both Jordan breaks against the Highlanders). This means that kicking to a NZ team barely represents any threat whatsoever. Until NZ teams find new ways of making teams pay for kicking to them, opposition teams won’t hesitate whatsoever to pepper Kiwi back 3s with high balls, no matter how good they become in the air.
Playing multiple ball players across the back 3 – like France is currently doing with its 3 fullbacks in its back 3 – seems like the easiest current fix to what is a badly broken transition attack.
tl;dr
It seems like the SRP teams are trying to prepare their players more thoroughly for the international arena by integrating the attacking kick more into their arsenal. Still, there is a considerable way to go, both in terms of accuracy and developed identity. SRP teams need to be more creative, in terms of their tactics as well as their selection strategies. Putting together a back 3 of fullbacks, and getting them more involved in the attack, seems like a logical next step. -
Does Super Rugby Pacific sufficiently prepare its players for international Test rugby, as far as skills and tactics are concerned? Early evidence suggests a concerted effort across the tournament teams to increasingly mimic the game’s current trends, by emphasizing kicking and especially contestable kicking.
Rd. 1 SRP kicking: total kicks, contestable kicks and kicks retainedAt an average of more than 29 kicks per team, the first round of SRP saw a huge amount of kicking. Furthermore, almost 11 of those 29 kicks were contestable, with teams using a variety of box kicks, chips and wipers kicks to create a contest for the space by going to the boot.
[sidenote: my definition of a contestable is relatively broad. Any kick that sees a contest for the ball after a kick, I deem to be a contestable one. So grubbers, cross-field kicks and restarts are included in these numbers, which is different from how others interpret contestable kicks. See, for example, Brad Harris’ analysis on contestable kicking after the 2013 Rugby Championship; https://d26phqdbpt0w91.cloudfront.net/NonVideo/6a3d5727-707e-4970-abb3-ae926c7c9386.pdf]
Comparison with Six Nations
These numbers compare relatively well with those of the Six Nations’ sides, who employ a comparable rate of contestable kicking.
Comparison: Total and contestable kicking from SRP (rd. 1) and 6N (rd. 2) sides
Comparison: Contestable and retained kicks from SRP and 6N sidesAt the moment, it's only the Chiefs who are lagging quite a bit behind in terms of their contestable kicking. For them, it wasn’t so much that they didn’t want to kick contestably but rather that their kicks were consistently too long for any chasers to reach. Neither Roe nor Ratima were accurate enough with the boot for any meaningful kick chase, with only a few of Jacomb’s midfield bombs able to be contested (if unsuccessfully).
Other sides, like the Highlanders, Blues and Crusaders, were able to put up their fair share of contestable kicks, with a good bit of success as well (HIG: 44% retention rate; BLU: 58%; CRU: 40%). These kick retention rates compare favourably with the likes of England (31%), Ireland (54%), and Scotland (55%), all of whom have excellent kickers at their disposal.
The main differences
Still, some gaps between the two tournaments can be discerned. Two clear areas of improvement are, I think, the accuracy of kicking in SRP as well as its (lack of) attacking identity in relation to the kicking game.In terms of accuracy, the 6N sides are able to kick contestably at a higher rate in fewer kicks, while, at the same time, successfully competing more possessions as well. To put it more simply: the 6N teams are able to do more with less.
Comparison: averages of kicks (AK), contestables (AC) and retentions (AR), and rates of contestables (%C) and retention (%R) between SRP and 6N sidesIn addition to this, we see a further development of clear attacking identities in relation to the prevalence of kicking. For example, England kicks at a higher rate of contestables than anyone else (61%) because they have tied their own attack closely to their kick retention rate. When this kicking game falls flat – like it did against Scotland, with only a retention rate of 31% - much of their attacking game falls apart as well. So while this playing philosophy comes with a great deal of risk, you can at least see clearly what they are trying to do.
Similarly, France have completely organised their attacking game on the basis of the opposition kicking the ball to them, approaching the kick receipt as a set piece platform from which to launch their own back 3 strike moves. This is clearly visible when comparing the passing involvements of the French back 3 (Ramos, LBB, Attissogbe) to other teams in both the Six Nations and Super Rugby Pacific.
Attacking involvements from SRP and 6N fullbacks: Ramos is clearly playing a different game to everyone else
Attacking involvements from SRP and 6N wingers: the 6N wingers are currently working harder than their SRP counterparts, involving themselves more in the attack across the fieldRamos, Bielle-Biarrey and Attissogbe are not just faster and more skilled that their opposites, they are also far more involved than them, getting their hands on the ball both as carriers and as passers.
This is the key for the French transition attack: the back 3 of France rarely kicks (Ramos: 3.5 kicks/80) but instead of just carrying the ball back, they make sure to shift the point of attack, passing the ball between them and finding the weak point in the chasing defensive line. No less than 5 Welsh kicks immediately led to French line breaks.
In contrast, across the four NZ teams, just 2 opposition kicks (out of 136) led to line breaks in the first round (both Jordan breaks against the Highlanders). This means that kicking to a NZ team barely represents any threat whatsoever. Until NZ teams find new ways of making teams pay for kicking to them, opposition teams won’t hesitate whatsoever to pepper Kiwi back 3s with high balls, no matter how good they become in the air.
Playing multiple ball players across the back 3 – like France is currently doing with its 3 fullbacks in its back 3 – seems like the easiest current fix to what is a badly broken transition attack.
tl;dr
It seems like the SRP teams are trying to prepare their players more thoroughly for the international arena by integrating the attacking kick more into their arsenal. Still, there is a considerable way to go, both in terms of accuracy and developed identity. SRP teams need to be more creative, in terms of their tactics as well as their selection strategies. Putting together a back 3 of fullbacks, and getting them more involved in the attack, seems like a logical next step.@Mauss Excellent analysis as always mate, though the conclusions are pretty grim in several ways - both for the game in general and for the ABs.
It is good to see the French taking up what used to be our approach of making the opposition fear kicking to us - to me that is the better approach than us trying to beat them at their own game (not saying we shouldn't improve e.g. our below par kick accuracy, just that a focus on countering it rather than copying it would be nice).
While there has frequently been a bit of talk on here about using AFL coaches to upskill the kick accuracy and ability to contest, one that doesn't get a mention is the way their smaller guys will flood the area around contests at pace to pick up loose ball and immediately distribute it - that is where I think we have a lot to gain, as if you can do that then there are great counter-attack opportunities to be had (and I think the positioning and static nature of our supporting players is one of our biggest weaknesses in this part of the game). -
@Mauss Excellent analysis as always mate, though the conclusions are pretty grim in several ways - both for the game in general and for the ABs.
It is good to see the French taking up what used to be our approach of making the opposition fear kicking to us - to me that is the better approach than us trying to beat them at their own game (not saying we shouldn't improve e.g. our below par kick accuracy, just that a focus on countering it rather than copying it would be nice).
While there has frequently been a bit of talk on here about using AFL coaches to upskill the kick accuracy and ability to contest, one that doesn't get a mention is the way their smaller guys will flood the area around contests at pace to pick up loose ball and immediately distribute it - that is where I think we have a lot to gain, as if you can do that then there are great counter-attack opportunities to be had (and I think the positioning and static nature of our supporting players is one of our biggest weaknesses in this part of the game).@reprobate said in Super Rugby 2026:
Excellent analysis as always mate, though the conclusions are pretty grim in several ways - both for the game in general and for the ABs.
It is good to see the French taking up what used to be our approach of making the opposition fear kicking to us - to me that is the better approach than us trying to beat them at their own game (not saying we shouldn't improve e.g. our below par kick accuracy, just that a focus on countering it rather than copying it would be nice).
While there has frequently been a bit of talk on here about using AFL coaches to upskill the kick accuracy and ability to contest, one that doesn't get a mention is the way their smaller guys will flood the area around contests at pace to pick up loose ball and immediately distribute it - that is where I think we have a lot to gain, as if you can do that then there are great counter-attack opportunities to be had (and I think the positioning and static nature of our supporting players is one of our biggest weaknesses in this part of the game).Yeah, I think the French are, in many ways, influenced by the 2010s AB attack, where players like Ben Smith and Israel Dagg would take up similar roles in setting up the counter-attack. Another similarity is that this current French team is loaded with excellent link players, both amongst the backs and the forwards, which makes any attacking shape way more dangerous.
The NZ Super teams aren't exactly overflowing with these types of linking players in the back 3 right now, although I do think they are out there. A player like Jona Nareki is now most likely considered to be too old for the ABs but he's always had an excellent skillset and distribution game for a winger. Hopefully, players like Nareki will get more of a shot with the new coaching group.
-
i think the worst kick i saw in any game all weekend was late in the Friday game where the Landers 10 should have cost them the game with what was little more than a slightly high chip kick in teh 22 that was caught uncontested. The end result of the turnover was the Crusaders hitting the front. Just a bad option executed badly.
The point about the French is bang on, they've decided to make that particular contest a launching point. Not only has LBB admitted to working really hard on it, they appear to have dropped the otherwise excellent Penaud for a player more skilled in this area. They get players around the drop zone to pick up spilled ball and immediately move it away. And yes, it helps having the world's best fullback who is brilliant at bringing other players in to the game.
The ABs are locked in to Will Jordan in one back 3 spot (his positives are too good to ignore really when we're not exactly overflowing with excess talent), but he is completely unable to link and bring other players in to the game, what Will does well Will does for Will.
What Mauss's post does highlight is once again we look to be trying to win the last war when others have already moved on.
-
"Ramos, Bielle-Biarrey and Attissogbe are not just faster and more skilled that their opposites, they are also far more involved than them, getting their hands on the ball both as carriers and as passers."
Just furthering this, the entire French team is extremely switched on to getting the ball to these guys when there's a turnover or a suggestion of space. Kick or pass it's been drilled into them to just get the ball out as quickly as possible. The recognition of where the space makes me very envious compared to our lot last year. It helps to have guys like Jalibert and Ramos who can sum up the numbers, space and options in a microsecond.
Gaultier has rethought their entire strategy since the Autumn games and adapted the team and personnel to fit it. Impressive.
-
their space isn't clogged with fucking forwards taking far too many touches, holding the ball too fucking long, and dragging the defence to them as well.
-
their space isn't clogged with fucking forwards taking far too many touches, holding the ball too fucking long, and dragging the defence to them as well.
@mariner4life said in Does Super Rugby prepare players for Test Rugby?:
their space isn't clogged with fucking forwards taking far too many touches, holding the ball too fucking long, and dragging the defence to them as well.
You're right. Our offence has been far too fussy. We don't make the ball do the work
-
i think the worst kick i saw in any game all weekend was late in the Friday game where the Landers 10 should have cost them the game with what was little more than a slightly high chip kick in teh 22 that was caught uncontested. The end result of the turnover was the Crusaders hitting the front. Just a bad option executed badly.
The point about the French is bang on, they've decided to make that particular contest a launching point. Not only has LBB admitted to working really hard on it, they appear to have dropped the otherwise excellent Penaud for a player more skilled in this area. They get players around the drop zone to pick up spilled ball and immediately move it away. And yes, it helps having the world's best fullback who is brilliant at bringing other players in to the game.
The ABs are locked in to Will Jordan in one back 3 spot (his positives are too good to ignore really when we're not exactly overflowing with excess talent), but he is completely unable to link and bring other players in to the game, what Will does well Will does for Will.
What Mauss's post does highlight is once again we look to be trying to win the last war when others have already moved on.
@mariner4life said in Does Super Rugby prepare players for Test Rugby?:
Not only has LBB admitted to working really hard on it, they appear to have dropped the otherwise excellent Penaud for a player more skilled in this area.
It’s pretty noticeable how cutthroat the top coaches like Erasmus and Galthié currently are in terms of selection. In contrast, a player like Jordan can stagnate in certain crucial areas of back 3 play, yet it seems unimaginable that he would be dropped.
I mean, I like Jordan. I think he’s one of the most talented rugby players in the world. But he runs away from his support and his passing just isn’t up to scratch for what the attack requires right now. A player like Ratumaitavuki-Kneepkens might not have the kind of game- and line-breaking ability Jordan has but what he does have is linking ability and a good understanding of space. I’m not sure the Highlanders would’ve scored their first try if Jordan was the one making the final pass.
Watching the French break the line for fun against both Ireland (13) and Wales (18) (double the line breaks the ABs were able to make against these teams, 6 and 9 respectively) has solidified my feeling that players like Ratumaitavuki-Kneepkens and Damian McKenzie need to be in the back 3. I’m not sure who the third is; but they need pace, distribution skills and a willingness to get involved.
-
@mariner4life said in Does Super Rugby prepare players for Test Rugby?:
Not only has LBB admitted to working really hard on it, they appear to have dropped the otherwise excellent Penaud for a player more skilled in this area.
It’s pretty noticeable how cutthroat the top coaches like Erasmus and Galthié currently are in terms of selection. In contrast, a player like Jordan can stagnate in certain crucial areas of back 3 play, yet it seems unimaginable that he would be dropped.
I mean, I like Jordan. I think he’s one of the most talented rugby players in the world. But he runs away from his support and his passing just isn’t up to scratch for what the attack requires right now. A player like Ratumaitavuki-Kneepkens might not have the kind of game- and line-breaking ability Jordan has but what he does have is linking ability and a good understanding of space. I’m not sure the Highlanders would’ve scored their first try if Jordan was the one making the final pass.
Watching the French break the line for fun against both Ireland (13) and Wales (18) (double the line breaks the ABs were able to make against these teams, 6 and 9 respectively) has solidified my feeling that players like Ratumaitavuki-Kneepkens and Damian McKenzie need to be in the back 3. I’m not sure who the third is; but they need pace, distribution skills and a willingness to get involved.
@Mauss I agree that McKenzie is exactly the sort of guy who can both run himself and put people into space which we need in the back 3, but I think he's also (and moreso) needed at 10.
Or are we stuck waiting for Mo'unga still?In Jordan, Clark and Tangitau we have 3 guys who are all potentially devastating runners, but none are really noted distributors.
-
@Mauss I agree that McKenzie is exactly the sort of guy who can both run himself and put people into space which we need in the back 3, but I think he's also (and moreso) needed at 10.
Or are we stuck waiting for Mo'unga still?In Jordan, Clark and Tangitau we have 3 guys who are all potentially devastating runners, but none are really noted distributors.
@reprobate said in Does Super Rugby prepare players for Test Rugby?:
I agree that McKenzie is exactly the sort of guy who can both run himself and put people into space which we need in the back 3, but I think he's also (and moreso) needed at 10.
Or are we stuck waiting for Mo'unga still?I think, with the new coaching ticket, it’s likely that we’ll see someone else at first five. It could be a fresh face (Love, Reihana, Jacomb) but I think it’s most likely that Mo’unga will be given the keys for the run-up to the World Cup.
I think a Mo’unga-McKenzie combination could work quite well: Mo’unga is a very classic first five who likes his hands on the ball a lot at first receiver (similar to someone like George Ford but with a better running game) while McKenzie is one of the world’s best attacking players at second receiver. Who plays 10 and who plays 15 there is also rather fluid in today’s game: while Jalibert is wearing the 10-jersey for France, he is mostly attacking the line at second receiver while Ramos is the one with the ball in his hands first. It’s all pretty pragmatic.
In Jordan, Clark and Tangitau we have 3 guys who are all potentially devastating runners, but none are really noted distributors.
Jordan-Clarke-Tangitau could be a lethal back 3 but then you have to adjust your game plan accordingly. Emphasizing transition attack with these players isn’t a great idea because, as you say, none of those players are renowned for their passing.
Tangitau showed this very neatly on one occasion against the Crusaders where the Landers had numbers on the right. After Tavatavanawai is able to get the ball away in contact, the only thing Tangitau needed to do was make sure to move the ball along the chain. Instead, he clogs up the space by taking a few steps forward, gets caught man and ball by Ennor and the ball is turned over at the ensuing ruck.
Numbers and space on the right. If the Landers score here, the game would’ve been over much soonerPlayers like Tangitau and Clarke would be great in a Schmidt-style possession game where they’re allowed to roam behind the rucks, looking for gaps either in tight or out wide. They would also be great at using their pace for finishing strike moves from set piece, similar to Jordan’s score against Ireland in the World Cup quarter final.
So, I’d be fine with either, as long as selection matches strategy.
-
@reprobate said in Does Super Rugby prepare players for Test Rugby?:
I agree that McKenzie is exactly the sort of guy who can both run himself and put people into space which we need in the back 3, but I think he's also (and moreso) needed at 10.
Or are we stuck waiting for Mo'unga still?I think, with the new coaching ticket, it’s likely that we’ll see someone else at first five. It could be a fresh face (Love, Reihana, Jacomb) but I think it’s most likely that Mo’unga will be given the keys for the run-up to the World Cup.
I think a Mo’unga-McKenzie combination could work quite well: Mo’unga is a very classic first five who likes his hands on the ball a lot at first receiver (similar to someone like George Ford but with a better running game) while McKenzie is one of the world’s best attacking players at second receiver. Who plays 10 and who plays 15 there is also rather fluid in today’s game: while Jalibert is wearing the 10-jersey for France, he is mostly attacking the line at second receiver while Ramos is the one with the ball in his hands first. It’s all pretty pragmatic.
In Jordan, Clark and Tangitau we have 3 guys who are all potentially devastating runners, but none are really noted distributors.
Jordan-Clarke-Tangitau could be a lethal back 3 but then you have to adjust your game plan accordingly. Emphasizing transition attack with these players isn’t a great idea because, as you say, none of those players are renowned for their passing.
Tangitau showed this very neatly on one occasion against the Crusaders where the Landers had numbers on the right. After Tavatavanawai is able to get the ball away in contact, the only thing Tangitau needed to do was make sure to move the ball along the chain. Instead, he clogs up the space by taking a few steps forward, gets caught man and ball by Ennor and the ball is turned over at the ensuing ruck.
Numbers and space on the right. If the Landers score here, the game would’ve been over much soonerPlayers like Tangitau and Clarke would be great in a Schmidt-style possession game where they’re allowed to roam behind the rucks, looking for gaps either in tight or out wide. They would also be great at using their pace for finishing strike moves from set piece, similar to Jordan’s score against Ireland in the World Cup quarter final.
So, I’d be fine with either, as long as selection matches strategy.
@Mauss I remember an article from Nick Bishop a few years ago explaining exactly that re. McKenzie and how much more effective the chiefs attack was with Ioane at 10 and McKenzie at 15.
Imo Dmac does not offer enough due to his physical size to attack the line at 10 in international rugby. If he’s running at the set defence of South Africa, England, France, the players know his only real option is to pass or kick, which puts massive pressure on the receiver.
We need a 10 that can at least hold parity in contact and has the sideways movement to beat defenders in a congested contact zone
-
@Mauss I remember an article from Nick Bishop a few years ago explaining exactly that re. McKenzie and how much more effective the chiefs attack was with Ioane at 10 and McKenzie at 15.
Imo Dmac does not offer enough due to his physical size to attack the line at 10 in international rugby. If he’s running at the set defence of South Africa, England, France, the players know his only real option is to pass or kick, which puts massive pressure on the receiver.
We need a 10 that can at least hold parity in contact and has the sideways movement to beat defenders in a congested contact zone
@jimmyb said in Does Super Rugby prepare players for Test Rugby?:
We need a 10 that can at least hold parity in contact and has the sideways movement to beat defenders in a congested contact zone
That's probably the strongest argument for putting a player like Love at first five. He made 4 line breaks from his five games at 10 last season, which is a very solid return. His injuries worry me, though. He needs time in the saddle more than anything else. I thought it was noticeable that he hadn't played a lot of first five during the '25 season; he was often quite late to be in the position he needed to be.
If he's able to get through a lot of minutes during Super Rugby, I do think players like him and Reihana are genuine options. But they would both need to be paired up with a playmaker, either at 12 or 15. Neither of them are game controlling 10s (yet). But with Roigard and someone like McKenzie in the backline, perhaps they don't need to be.
-
@jimmyb said in Does Super Rugby prepare players for Test Rugby?:
We need a 10 that can at least hold parity in contact and has the sideways movement to beat defenders in a congested contact zone
That's probably the strongest argument for putting a player like Love at first five. He made 4 line breaks from his five games at 10 last season, which is a very solid return. His injuries worry me, though. He needs time in the saddle more than anything else. I thought it was noticeable that he hadn't played a lot of first five during the '25 season; he was often quite late to be in the position he needed to be.
If he's able to get through a lot of minutes during Super Rugby, I do think players like him and Reihana are genuine options. But they would both need to be paired up with a playmaker, either at 12 or 15. Neither of them are game controlling 10s (yet). But with Roigard and someone like McKenzie in the backline, perhaps they don't need to be.
@Mauss said in Does Super Rugby prepare players for Test Rugby?:
@jimmyb said in Does Super Rugby prepare players for Test Rugby?:
We need a 10 that can at least hold parity in contact and has the sideways movement to beat defenders in a congested contact zone
That's probably the strongest argument for putting a player like Love at first five. He made 4 line breaks from his five games at 10 last season, which is a very solid return. His injuries worry me, though. He needs time in the saddle more than anything else. I thought it was noticeable that he hadn't played a lot of first five during the '25 season; he was often quite late to be in the position he needed to be.
If he's able to get through a lot of minutes during Super Rugby, I do think players like him and Reihana are genuine options. But they would both need to be paired up with a playmaker, either at 12 or 15. Neither of them are game controlling 10s (yet). But with Roigard and someone like McKenzie in the backline, perhaps they don't need to be.
Well exactly. With Roigard and a play making 15, all we need is a 10 that can kick, pass, and square the defence up.
But also what is desperately needed is a 12 that can break the line. J Barrett is a great player but does not offer the line break ability that is needed. That get out of jail ball to a 12 that can make metres when the pressure is on is needed
-
@Mauss said in Does Super Rugby prepare players for Test Rugby?:
@jimmyb said in Does Super Rugby prepare players for Test Rugby?:
We need a 10 that can at least hold parity in contact and has the sideways movement to beat defenders in a congested contact zone
That's probably the strongest argument for putting a player like Love at first five. He made 4 line breaks from his five games at 10 last season, which is a very solid return. His injuries worry me, though. He needs time in the saddle more than anything else. I thought it was noticeable that he hadn't played a lot of first five during the '25 season; he was often quite late to be in the position he needed to be.
If he's able to get through a lot of minutes during Super Rugby, I do think players like him and Reihana are genuine options. But they would both need to be paired up with a playmaker, either at 12 or 15. Neither of them are game controlling 10s (yet). But with Roigard and someone like McKenzie in the backline, perhaps they don't need to be.
Well exactly. With Roigard and a play making 15, all we need is a 10 that can kick, pass, and square the defence up.
But also what is desperately needed is a 12 that can break the line. J Barrett is a great player but does not offer the line break ability that is needed. That get out of jail ball to a 12 that can make metres when the pressure is on is needed
@jimmyb said in Does Super Rugby prepare players for Test Rugby?:
But also what is desperately needed is a 12 that can break the line. J Barrett is a great player but does not offer the line break ability that is needed. That get out of jail ball to a 12 that can make metres when the pressure is on is needed
Quinn Tupaea?
-
@jimmyb said in Does Super Rugby prepare players for Test Rugby?:
But also what is desperately needed is a 12 that can break the line. J Barrett is a great player but does not offer the line break ability that is needed. That get out of jail ball to a 12 that can make metres when the pressure is on is needed
Quinn Tupaea?
@nostrildamus said in Does Super Rugby prepare players for Test Rugby?:
@jimmyb said in Does Super Rugby prepare players for Test Rugby?:
But also what is desperately needed is a 12 that can break the line. J Barrett is a great player but does not offer the line break ability that is needed. That get out of jail ball to a 12 that can make metres when the pressure is on is needed
Quinn Tupaea?
Or TT
-
@jimmyb said in Does Super Rugby prepare players for Test Rugby?:
We need a 10 that can at least hold parity in contact and has the sideways movement to beat defenders in a congested contact zone
That's probably the strongest argument for putting a player like Love at first five. He made 4 line breaks from his five games at 10 last season, which is a very solid return. His injuries worry me, though. He needs time in the saddle more than anything else. I thought it was noticeable that he hadn't played a lot of first five during the '25 season; he was often quite late to be in the position he needed to be.
If he's able to get through a lot of minutes during Super Rugby, I do think players like him and Reihana are genuine options. But they would both need to be paired up with a playmaker, either at 12 or 15. Neither of them are game controlling 10s (yet). But with Roigard and someone like McKenzie in the backline, perhaps they don't need to be.
@mauss so if we are waiting for Mo'unga for the WC, would the coach want to chuck a newbie in for the SA tour, or go with McKenzie as a more conservative place-holder? I guess if one of them has a storming Super season maybe - but right now Love is injured, Reihana may well share game time with Kemara, and Jacomb is mostly going to be on the bench - so it might be a stretch. (I would say that Mo'unga + McKenzie was always the one dual playmaker option that looked like it might work to me though).
Pairing one of the young guys with a playmaking 12 I'd say yes great, but question who our international quality playmaking 12s actually are? (apart from the near-mythological Higgins). Is Jordie that guy, or are the long levers just a little too slow? Our Super starters seem like Tupaea, Tavatavanawai, Havili and Ahki... Which then makes it look a bit like the loose forward situation: just pick an unnamed big hard-hitting, hard-working ruck-hitting lineout option guy to pair with Savea and Sititi, oh wait...
@jimmyb The Hurricanes had Roigard at 9 and a solid basics 10 in Cameron with a playmaking Love at fullback, and were pretty well beaten by the Brumbies last year. Roigard is good, but he has tended to go into his shell a bit at times - I don't think he is consistent enough to take enough of that playmaking load on himself at international level (yet) to make an e.g. Reihana work. I also don't think our other AB halfbacks really play the game the same way (very unfortunate the Pledger injury) - which also means a change in plan at 60 minutes, and big problems if/when Roigard is injured. And if you want a bruiser at 12, that is likely to increase the playmaking load on 10 too, because a Ma'a Nonu doesn't come around every couple of years.
-
@Mauss said in Does Super Rugby prepare players for Test Rugby?:
@jimmyb said in Does Super Rugby prepare players for Test Rugby?:
We need a 10 that can at least hold parity in contact and has the sideways movement to beat defenders in a congested contact zone
That's probably the strongest argument for putting a player like Love at first five. He made 4 line breaks from his five games at 10 last season, which is a very solid return. His injuries worry me, though. He needs time in the saddle more than anything else. I thought it was noticeable that he hadn't played a lot of first five during the '25 season; he was often quite late to be in the position he needed to be.
If he's able to get through a lot of minutes during Super Rugby, I do think players like him and Reihana are genuine options. But they would both need to be paired up with a playmaker, either at 12 or 15. Neither of them are game controlling 10s (yet). But with Roigard and someone like McKenzie in the backline, perhaps they don't need to be.
Well exactly. With Roigard and a play making 15, all we need is a 10 that can kick, pass, and square the defence up.
But also what is desperately needed is a 12 that can break the line. J Barrett is a great player but does not offer the line break ability that is needed. That get out of jail ball to a 12 that can make metres when the pressure is on is needed
@jimmyb said in Does Super Rugby prepare players for Test Rugby?:
But also what is desperately needed is a 12 that can break the line. J Barrett is a great player but does not offer the line break ability that is needed. That get out of jail ball to a 12 that can make metres when the pressure is on is needed
Just in an effort to try and get this back on topic: if you look at the current 6N lineups, the crash ball off 12 isn’t a massive priority for most teams. Dingwall (ENG, 91 kg), Marin (ITA, 88 kg), Brau-Boirie (FRA, 98 kg) and Hawkins (WAL, 98 kg) are anything but typical crash ball merchants, with most of those players having experience of playing 10 as well. Sione Tuipulotu (SCO, 104 kg) should probably be categorized as something between a playmaker and a carrying threat, while the one side who still picks big, carry-first 12s, Ireland (McCloskey/Aki), is currently struggling to get their attack going (17 points scored on average after 2 rounds).
Instead, what a lot of teams are doing is putting their most dominant gainline back at 13, like England (Freeman/Lawrence), France (Depoortère), Wales (Eddie James), and Italy (Menoncello). (You could argue that Huw Jones belongs in this list as well.) A player like Garry Ringrose – 1 line break after the first two rounds, 33% gainline – bucks this trend but he has been rather anonymous so far, compared to, for example, his performances at the 2023 World cup (1.6 line break per 80 min).
The reason for this shift by teams is pretty simple, I think: you get an extra playmaker at 12 who can facilitate moving the ball away from the point of contact quickly and accurately while you have your dominant carrier running into space instead of into crowded areas.
Quinn Tupaea’s increased effectiveness at 13 is a good example of this. While he carries more often and makes more metres at 12, he is a bigger linebreaking threat at 13 at Test level, while also able to beat more defenders.
Tupaea’s averages from 3 starts at 12 (FRA 3, SCO, ENG) and 2 starts at 13 (AU 2, IRE) for carries, metres made, defenders beaten and line breaksHaving a player like Tupaea, Fainga’anuku or even Tavatavanawai at 13 seems to offer some real advantages: all of these players have the ability to bust through tackles as well as offload in contact, allowing them to set free their outsides. Their chances of creating a line break, either for themselves or for others, are currently higher on the outside edges than in the spaces close to the ruck.
Turning back to Super Rugby Pacific, it’s clear that the SRP sides aren’t particularly eager to follow this trend. Apart from the Blues, who have stuck with AJ Lam (105 kg) at outside centre, most other teams have resisted putting a big body at 13, with the Crusaders preferring Ennor (94 kg) to Fainga’anuku (109 kg) and the Chiefs putting Rona (94 kg) at outside centre rather than putting Tupaea (102 kg) out one wider. With the lack of efficacy from Proctor during the 2025 Test season and the (attacking) success of Tupaea and Fainga’anuku there, it lays bare another area in which there’s not a great deal of alignment between Super Rugby and Test rugby.
As far as 12 is concerned, I think Jordie Barrett still has a head start to the jersey. He’s got a skillset which suits the role of the playmaking 12 well (13.3 passes per 80 min), while not being short of physicality himself (2.2 defenders beaten per 80 min).
Jordie Barrett’s averages from the 2025 Rugby Championship: carries, metres made, defenders beaten, line breaks, passes and kicksIn Super Rugby Pacific, most Kiwi teams retain their dominant gainline back in the 12-jersey (CHI, HIG, BLU), with only the Crusaders and Hurricanes employing a more traditional playmaking second five (equal to or more passes than carries).
Numbers for this week’s starting 12s (stats are from previous SRP season or Champions Cup, in the cases of Barrett and Ahki): carries, post-contact metres, passes and percentage of accurate passingIt would be interesting to see a bit more experimentation from SRP sides in terms of selection, although the Blues’ decision to go for a double gainline midfield is one of those experiments worth keeping a closer eye one. If they can shows signs of clicking, it might pave the way for a similar midfield for the ABs.
-
all your posts show how dated the AB attack has been. a non-distributing lump at 12, a centre playing on his shoulder with no room to distribute, generally a loose forward between the centre and the winger. A non-distributing 15, a 10 who sat in the pocket and passed.
