Applying pressure

NZ has gone unbeaten since their 3N defeat in Brisbane. Their only stumble also came in Brisbane when they put in easily their worst performance and came away with a draw.

The NZ public is very demanding. It is not enough to win. The ABs must win well. The expectations on the team are too high and we fans are too demanding. I for one well remember being incensed after the Dunedin game against SA. My feeling was we were lucky to come away with a win on that day. Strangely after the Brisbane draw, there was just a hollow feeling that the consecutive streak was over but more so because an AB team that commits so many errors doesn't deserve to win.

NZ rugby is not complicated. It's just executing the basics well and doing so at pace. It just seems more complex than it appears because unbelievably many teams don't do the basics right. Take yesterday for example. Two attacking penalties and Priestland kicks both out on the full and ABs are relieved of any pressure placed upon them. Take Wales' two tries though and you see that if you can apply sustained pressure for long enough periods, you can make this AB side look beatable.

If you look at the games where the ABs have been placed under the greatest pressure, it's a familiar tale. Australia in Brisbane, Ireland in Christchurch, SA in Dunedin, Australia in the first half in Auckland and to an extent the whole bizarre match in Sydney, Argentina in the first 60 minutes in Wellington, even Italy for much of the first half. What you have to do is hold your line and put pressure on the ABs by ticking the scoreboard over. SA did that in Soweto but only for the first half hour. Argentina at home scored the first try. But any pressure they were able to apply all too easily went out the window when NZ were able to score.

Scotland and Wales and even Italy had periods of the game when they were on top. They controlled possession well and NZ is only able to score when they have the ball. But it's pointless to speculate if this had happened and we played this way we would have won. The fact is you none of those sides played long enough with nearly enough continuity. Basic errors let them down and when NZ had the ball, they made their opportunities count. It's not rocket science but executing things well and doing so at pace. 33 - 0 up yesterday and Wales did well by themselves to prevent a massacre and finished the better side. But unfortunately it was all too late by then. The damage was done.

If you're going to have any aspirations of beating NZ you don't necessarily need a complete 80 minute performance. There will be times when NZ is able to gain ascendancy. But what you must do is limit their scoring opportunities when they are dominating proceedings. You must also make the most of your opportunities when you have a one man advantage. Take the points on offer when they are presented to you. 0 next to your name is psychologically damaging. Even if you're trailing by more than 7 take the 3 points. Keep that scoreboard ticking over instead of searching for the 7 points and you can apply pressure. It's not that difficult to get into the opposition half and get yourself into a scoring position.

The thing that frustrates me about the games NZ have played this year is that they have played well in patches. They have scored enough points to do the damage and then drifted in and out of consciousness for the rest of the match. That mentality harks too much back to the 2007 team where their mentality was we will score more points than you. That is a dangerous mentality to have because eventually you will come up against a side that matches you in the forwards and puts points on the board at regular intervals.

That said, there is much to be positive about Hansen's side. It is unfortunate that this tour has been blighted by two ugly incidents because it detracts from their otherwise satisfactory performances. The gap is not as much as people would claim between NZ and the rest of the world. What is hampering NZ's opposition is their inability to apply genuine, sustained pressure. Whether that stems from discipline, poor handling, poor defence, high error rate, the problem remains the same. If you allow enough opportunities to this NZ side they will take them and if you start trailing by more than 7 points, each score against you breaks you exponentially and takes the game away from you.

The one thing I always thought about a ABs side was that they were ruthless... they never dropped the intensity once the game was won.. they always rubbed salt into the the oppositions wounds.

However the recent matches have made me think a little differently.

Perhaps the players are lacking a bit of motivation?

It has been a long season mind but what more can guys like Nonu, Carter, McCaw win??? They're the kings of the sport at the moment... they hardly even get challenged these days. What more is there to play for? Another RC in '13... to sit with the 6 in 8 they've won already?

When they were taken to an inch of a loss against IRE they backed it up with a 60-0 drubbing the next week but since then they've just been going through the motions.

Until someone takes them that close I doubt we will see NZ tear teams apart like they did before. I think the boks may give them this challenge next year injuries pending no one else.

To be honest, if ENG wanted an ideal time to play NZ.. its now. Last game of the test season, NZ lacking a bit of their killer instinct, they don't have the pressure of having to fight for the rankings position because thats lost already and they have a point to prove.... could be an interesting match (with a obvious NZ victory come the end).

You've hit the nail on your head fa0019. I want to find out what this team is really made of. I want us to come up against genuine opposition that draws the best out of us like the Soweto game in 2010.

I haven't been convinced by this AB team. We've gone to sleep in too many games and even though our defence is one of the strengths of this side, they have shipped in a lot of points.

Boohoo many would say and fair enough. I really hope SA recovers well with their players who were injured this year. The same for Australia. Because from what I've seen up north, there are too many basic errors to genuinely challenge this side. I really hope England proves me wrong next week. The frustrating thing though is when I see them play other sides, they look more assured. It's a shame France isn't on this tour but I am excited about the 3 match series next year.

The best thing for NZ rugby could be a loss to ENG to put fire in their bellies again... I don't see it myself, they have the players, the quality etc but not the composure.

The best thing for NZ rugby is a tough 3 match series against France and an equally tough RC series with Australia and SA having their best players available. Losing to a side that doesn't have the same talent available for the sake of stoking the fire isn't what's needed. Having opposition who can take the game to the ABs and put them under pressure is.

It puts me in mind of 2007 as well, but as a Tigers fan rather than a New Zealand fan. Not to suggest that the Tigers were near as good, New Zealand were and are quicker and slicker and the Tigers breaks were more based on powerful runners than quick distribution, but the principle was the same. Good pack, good ball and for the most part getting the basics right. The thing that really stuck out was the effort that went into support breaks, as a Tigers fan I often got the feeling that every break would result in a try - and I get the same thing watching New Zealand now. The support always seems to be there and get used. But I can see New Zealand struggling if a team really hits them with their defence - much the same as Tigers in the Heineken Cup final with Wasps.

Can't see England doing it though. Not yet. As I've said elsewhere our tight 5 are very very good given their age, but as fa0019 says composure isn't there. I

Love it the All Blacks are human too,don`t have that ruthless edge?Just won 3 games by over 20 points each.With 3 different teams and developing players along the way.
Not convinced about this team etc?,New Coaching team,New ideas trying things
not really coming off sometimes.
It is more like 2006 than 2007 not quite knowing your best team now at the end of the year the injuries are mounting.
The sign of a good side is NOT carrying on winning in style against faint hearted opposition.It is by winning when other sides make it tough for you winning ugly if needs be.
Next week you may well see the 3rd and fourth choice Hookers playing.Piri Weepu starting at 10 with Tom Taylor on the bench. Hosea Gear given a run
Alan Thomson his last match at 6,Crockett starting for Woodcock.
I have no fears about the forwards most[hookers excepted] are as good as any in the world including the Bench.
The 10 position with all 3 starters looking doubtful is another thing and two very young 9`s starting.
England have a chance against a much weaker team than anticipated. BUT I still take the AB`s to win and win well.
Maybe Nz fans in Nz would prefer a 1998 or 2009 scenario when they lost 5 and 4 matches respectibvely.
Beginning of the season there was speculation about post-RWC burnout like others have suffered.
Result NOTHING,they didn`t break the record run of games BUT they are still unbeaten.
Other AB sides,GREAT sides have averaged 2 losses in 15 matches per year since the 14./15 formatt started.
So sides have huffed and puffed and put the AB`s`s under pressure.BUT they
unlike other sides have patiently defended,absorbed the pressure THEN struck.
WHEN this side starts losing,and to teams like Argentina,Samoa,Italy,Tonga THEN start whinging unrtil then give credit where it`s due and that includes the opposing side.

I just think rugby is a little boring lately- Faa I dont understand what you mean by saying the ABs wont thrash sides any more when theyve been doing it all year. None of the AIs have been less that 20 diff- the matches effectively over by half time half of our matches this year.

Frankly the injuries to Oz and SA have reduced those sides to around the levels of the NH and the gap between the AB's and the rest has possibly never been greater in history. Even the tier 3 sides are pushing from the other end of the scale.

Teams are just not playing good rugby- even against each other.

I just think rugby is a little boring lately- Faa I dont understand what you mean by saying the ABs wont thrash sides any more when theyve been doing it all year. None of the AIs have been less that 20 diff- the matches effectively over by half time half of our matches this year.

Frankly the injuries to Oz and SA have reduced those sides to around the levels of the NH and the gap between the AB's and the rest has possibly never been greater in history. Even the tier 3 sides are pushing from the other end of the scale.

Teams are just not playing good rugby- even against each other.

Well if you want my two cents worth it is the laws that is to blame.

Teams are so intent on territory and not being isolated at the rucks for the fear of misinterpreted laws that they play low risk rugby (territory by kicking and keeping the ball close to the forwards for support) that the adventure has been removed from most teams.

Yeah that could be it. Something will need to be done then as if it continues then those sides wont develop handing wins to sides like the ABs by default. its easy to play the territory and big D game but its near impossible to rely on scoring tries from it. This year there have been many situations where a side goes into the last 20 10 or more points behind where they abandon the goal kicks and start running everything at the line in desperation, ironically ending up doing what they failed to do for the rest of the game- try to score tries.

Possession and territory will only give you one thing- the ball. What they do with it is whats lacking. Teams have just got to get into the business of scoring tries through skill rather than attrition, where the 'breakdown' is removed from the equation as much as possible.

Are we seeing with the "New"variations trialled over the last few months teams going back to a 2009 scenario.Being negative,defend,kick for territory etc.
Penalties are occuring a lot now in the Scrum and breakdown,Offside hardly policed at all.
The Season is to jumbled,to long,to many matches meaning more injuries more changes etc.
When you have commentators pillorying a teams captain for making decisions that are decided in an instant?
Robshaw is supposed to have lost both matches due to his poor decision making.It is easy with hindsight to say what if,fans myself included assume penalty kick is a Goal.A kick to the corner a try in both cases it is an ATTEMPT not a certainty.
IF you have good Goalkickers,the kick is within his range,then early in the game attempt them.IF you are 5 or 6 away and you think you can score a try go for the corner.
There are of course other considerations if points difference means bonus points
then take them if you can.
I wonder what the stats are for converting kicks to the corners into tries not that good i`d have thought.

I actually agreed with the decision as being the best of two tough and unlikely outcomes in the same way I disagreed with Carter taking the DG against Oz in Brisbane.

England were not likely to score a try against SA in the final two minutes as they're not a team that scores tries easily. The ABs are the only side capable of pulling off a try in that situation with any confidence. And SA certainly are not the side you want to be trying to get one in the dying minutes against.

Its a situation thats happening all too commonly these days with sides battling head to head up front trading penalties and one side going 10 points ahead with 15 to go. Then theres the inevitable dilemma of taking shots or going for tries, Scotland another victim of it against SA.

So I agree there Alan, a return to 2009 but rather than giving the ball away in fear of isolating the ball carrier theyre holding onto it for long periods but doing nothing with it.

Phases that go for 10=15 should always result in some form of gain on the scoreboard. But these days they often get rewarded with a ten yard gain, maybe less, and ended with a knock on or penalty for one of the many reasons available.

The good thing for the ABs is they learned from this in 2009 and have made sure they dont lack in options, don't have limiting gameplans.

Stating the obvious IF a decision in the last few minutes by the Captain wins the game.He`s a hero lose and it`s oh well he got that one wrong after the event is easy.Take this weekends Wales game apart from the disgraceful act by Hore which should have been Red Carded.
Lets change the scenario Wales instead of going for the Grandstand play take the conservative option.Every time they get a penalty they opt to kick at goal
assuming those were converted.
The Scoreline was say 23-12 at half time the whole second half scenario changes.The All Blacks are now under some pressure the last quarter player in the bin,Cruden off,Weepu kicking.THEY take the 3 or 4 penalties at goal score is now 45-12 and so on.
Wales were written off before the match but performed well the unique Grandstand play got them a try.The AB`s setting themselves up to deal with the standard catch and drive.Something they defend better than any other team in the game.The Grand stand play was a one trick pony IF they had mamaged a 7 pointer early then kicked at goal.Then the dynamics of the game had swung with them.
By falling between two stools they failed the ABs have all this year ,been patient
relied on Defence.
Absorbed pressure then struck ruthlessly and clinacally finished,only in the first Bledisloe.Did the back 3 loosies acting as a single unit blitz the breakdown area.
To judge this AB side wait until 2013 and ALL the 4Nsides are at full strength because this side.Is not a one man side BUT McCaw,Carter,and Conrad Smith as yet have`nt been replaced.

The ABs are just too far ahead these days...... its all become a bit boring, they are almost coasting through games.

We desperately need some credible challengers to their crown... France and SA look best placed to do it but the ABs just look out there on their own right now......

I'm sure they'll all catch us up by 2015 and catch us napping in the 2015 RWC.

My criticism is not to do with the ABs but to do with the gap you point out rodders. But really there shouldn't be a gap if teams just got the basics right. I think the quality of the RC was a let down this year. That's understandable with all the injuries SA and Australia have. I just hope next year there will be a more level playing field.

But also I hope there is a rise in the fortunes of Wales, England, Ireland and Scotland. They seem to have regressed to varying degrees and Scotland seems to have taken a large step back. Italy seems more competitive with their new coach.

There are certainly some mouth watering prospects next year. A Lions tour in Australia, a 3 match series for France in NZ and let's hope the standard rises across the board. Maybe the rules are a part of it but so too it seems are doing the basics well.

Good on you England for showing the way. Ireland, SA and Australia the most showed the vulnerable side of this NZ team but they made them look like boys out there today with simple mistakes. That's what pressure does.

Saw a comment from BB today and made me look at this thread. England did indeed beat NZ and made them look ordinary for a grand share of the game last year. Definitely the motivation is there for the fixture in November at Twickenham.

The match was disappointing last year because SA was applying pressure on NZ and NZ was soaking up the pressure and keeping their noses ahead. The decision came and the pressure was relieved.

The leadup was very much evident that SA posed a threat and even though it made me nervous I was also excited by the challenge. The revenge match at Ellis Park as it's been called adds more pressure to that match. Great. Bring on those challenges. That's what tests a team and makes them stronger. kia kaha

true Kia.... there is not much bigger in rugby then a 2nd lions test.... because whatever happens, for one side, if they lose again thats it. Pressure from a campaign is greater than one off match.

Not always fa. 2005 saw a win in Wellington and that was it.

It's still the one off match that counts. Look at a RWC campaign. Doesn't matter how good you are throughout the campaign. It's what you bring to the one match that counts.

pressure builds throughout the tournament though... its doesn't necessarily need to be the same sides faced.

That's off-field pressure though and I agree that has important psychological effects. France was not the same in the RWC final as they were in the pool play last RWC.

But I'm more interested about the pressure applied during the game rather than leading up to it. Ireland nearly snatched a victory in the second test in 2012 by scoring and applying pressure on the scoreboard. The narrow win had a motivating effect on NZ in the leadup but Ireland's inability to apply pressure in that 3rd test saw the game turn into a blowout.

It's all very well to say our scrum was better or we looked better at the breakdown or lineout. You need to convert that supremacy into chances and then take those chances. Pressure is applied through scoring. Look at the first 10 minutes in Auckland. SA were all over NZ and menacing them across the park. A poor kick and a good one from Nonu, a defensive lineout and SA never looked composed defending and NZ score. All the first few minutes of domination count for nothing and NZ apply the pressure on the scoreboard. SA came back with an impressive maul and they got themselves back into the game. Then the yellow card decision and regardless NZ apply the pressure and make the advantage count. Disappointing as the game was balanced nicely to that point but it's just conjecture what would have happened if Du Plessis had stayed on the ground. SA at the end did the same to NZ with their man advantage as what NZ did to them with theirs. There wasn't enough time.

So now we wait to Ellis Park.

More confident about Ellis than Eden park to be honest. We confirmed there are still gaps in the SA game and I think we'll expose them more. Of course if we do lose itll confirm Eden park really was about the card- thats a gimme, but I'll bet those skill deficiencies will have been cleaned up as well. For me its back to the one dimensional gameplan that needs a little bit of good fortune to go well, and the ABs know how to play it.