Select Edition

Northern Northern
Southern Southern
Global Global
NZ NZ

Rugby Is A 23 Player Game: How The All Blacks Bench Has Become Their Biggest Weapon

By Scotty Stevenson
bench

The All Blacks bench has been given plenty of praise for its performance against the Welsh last week, but as Scotty Stevenson discovers, it’s not all about the final twenty minutes. It starts much earlier than that.

ADVERTISEMENT

So much has been said about the final twenty minutes of the first test between the All Blacks and Wales, and with good reason: the last quarter has become New Zealand’s shining time, a period of the match when ‘the closers’, as the bench has become known, get to wreak merry havoc with tiring opposition defences.

Today the eight men on the bench have become fundamentally important to the team’s chances of success, so much so that Beauden Barrett – a preternaturally gifted ball player who starts every game at franchise level – has been transformed into the world’s finest finisher by the All Blacks coaches and seems destined to remain there for the foreseeable future.

As rugby has morphed from a 15-man game to a 23-man effort, the All Blacks have continually tinkered with their bench timings. Early in the substitution age there was almost a blanket policy that changes were only made for the final quarter, but that has been refined by the New Zealanders in recent seasons, and Saturday night at Eden Park provided a perfect illustration of how much responsibility the bench has now assumed.

To wit: the All Blacks bench played a combined 205 minutes in the first test, whereas the Welsh bench only managed to total 130 minutes. That is a massive difference in game time for the respective sub squads, and shows the coaching staff have enormous faith in all 23 of their playing roster.

The respective front rows are a case in point: Charlie Faumuina (38 minutes) and Wyatt Crockett (36 minutes) each were given the chance to the play almost an entire half of the test, while their two opposites, Rob Evans (19 minutes) and Tomas Francis (12 minutes) barely took the field for a quarter each. In other words, Crockett and Faumuina got to take advantage of their own fresh legs and tiring opponents for almost twenty minutes.

Moreover, that twenty minutes allowed their bodies to tune in to the scrum, and the pace of the game. By the time Evans and Francis finally made it to the party, their effectiveness was always going to be limited, and that of Crockett and Faumuina was going to be at its peak.

ADVERTISEMENT

And these timing differences are not limited to the front row. The All Blacks had, in fact, made five changes before Welsh coach Warren Gatland went to his own bench for the first time. As well as Crockett and Faumuina, Patrick Tuipolotu (31 minutes), Ardie Savea (23 minutes) and Beauden Barrett (41 minutes) had already been injected into the game, each of them in key positions.

When the Welsh team did make changes, they were wholesale. The first four substitutions – two front rowers, a fullback and a midfielder – all entered the game with 19 minutes remaining. Jake Ball, the lock, made his entrance a minute later, and then the last three changes were all made with 12 minutes to go.

All up, every Welsh change was made over a seven-minute period of the final quarter. Contrast that with the All Blacks who never once made multiple substitutions and spread their own changes out from the 39th minute to the 71st, or 32 minutes.

The upshot: the All Blacks bench returned close to 100 metres with ball in hand, made 14 tackles, beat four defenders, made two offloads and two try assists, and nailed a try of their own thanks to Nathan Harris. The Welsh bench, meanwhile, collected 27 metres, made eight tackles, beat two defenders, made no offloads and created no tries.

ADVERTISEMENT

Sam Warburton, the Welsh Captain, believes the players ran about a kilometre and a half more in the test at Eden Park than they usually would in a Six Nations match, such is the pace and width and adventure of the southern game. That being the case, if the Welsh want to compete with the All Blacks over the next fortnight, they must find a way to get fresher legs into the game faster, without disrupting the core of the team.

The All Blacks at the moment have found the formula for finishing the big games: put eight closers on the bench, and start them earlier.

ADVERTISEMENT

Join free

Aotearoa Rugby Podcast | Episode 6

Sam Warburton | The Big Jim Show | Full Episode

Japan Rugby League One | Sungoliath v Eagles | Full Match Replay

Japan Rugby League One | Spears v Wild Knights | Full Match Replay

Boks Office | Episode 10 | Six Nations Final Round Review

Aotearoa Rugby Podcast | How can New Zealand rugby beat this Ireland team

Beyond 80 | Episode 5

Rugby Europe Men's Championship Final | Georgia v Portugal | Full Match Replay

Trending on RugbyPass

Comments

Join free and tell us what you really think!

Sign up for free
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest Features

Comments on RugbyPass

A
Adrian 42 minutes ago
Will the Crusaders' decline spark a slow death for New Zealand rugby?

Thanks Nick The loss of players to OS, injury and retirement is certainly not helping the Crusaders. Ditto the coach. IMO Penny is there to hold the fort and cop the flak until new players and a new coach come through,…and that's understood and accepted by Penny and the Crusaders hierarchy. I think though that what is happening with the Crusaders is an indicator of what is happening with the other NZ SRP teams…..and the other SRP teams for that matter. Not enough money. The money has come via the SR competition and it’s not there anymore. It's in France, Japan and England. Unless or until something is done to make SR more SELLABLE to the NZ/Australia Rugby market AND the world rugby market the $s to keep both the very best players and the next rung down won't be there. They will play away from NZ more and more. I think though that NZ will continue to produce the players and the coaches of sufficient strength for NZ to have the capacity to stay at the top. Whether they do stay at the top as an international team will depend upon whether the money flowing to SRP is somehow restored, or NZ teams play in the Japan comp, or NZ opts to pick from anywhere. As a follower of many sports I’d have to say that the organisation and promotion of Super Rugby has been for the last 20 years closest to the worst I’ve ever seen. This hasn't necessarily been caused by NZ, but it’s happened. Perhaps it can be fixed, perhaps not. The Crusaders are I think a symptom of this, not the cause

6 Go to comments
T
Trevor 3 hours ago
Will forgotten Wallabies fit the Joe Schmidt model?

Thanks Brett.. At last a positive article on the potential of Wallaby candidates, great to read. Schmidt’s record as an international rugby coach speaks for itself, I’m somewhat confident he will turn the Wallaby’s fortunes around …. on the field. It will be up to others to steady the ship off the paddock. But is there a flaw in my optimism? We have known all along that Australia has the players to be very competitive with their international rivals. We know that because everyone keeps telling us. So why the poor results? A question that requires a definitive answer before the turn around can occur. Joe Schmidt signed on for 2 years, time to encompass the Lions tour of 2025. By all accounts he puts family first and that’s fair enough, but I would wager that his 2 year contract will be extended if the next 18 months or so shows the statement “Australia has the players” proves to be correct. The new coach does not have a lot of time to meld together an outfit that will be competitive in the Rugby Championship - it will be interesting to see what happens. It will be interesting to see what happens with Giteau law, the new Wallaby coach has already verbalised that he would to prefer to select from those who play their rugby in Australia. His first test in charge is in July just over 3 months away .. not a long time. I for one wish him well .. heaven knows Australia needs some positive vibes.

21 Go to comments
B
Bull Shark 7 hours ago
Jake White: Are modern rugby players actually better?

Of the rugby I’ve born witness to in my lifetime - 1990 to date - I recognize great players throughout those years. But I have no doubt the game and the players are on average better today. So I doubt going back further is going to prove me wrong. The technical components of the game, set pieces, scrums, kicks, kicks at goal. And in general tactics employed are far more efficient, accurate and polished. Professional athletes that have invested countless hours on being accurate. There is one nation though that may be fairly competitive in any era - and that for me is the all blacks. And New Zealand players in general. NZ produces startling athletes who have fantastic ball skills. And then the odd phenomenon like Brooke. Lomu. Mcaw. Carter. Better than comparing players and teams across eras - I’ve often had this thought - that it would be very interesting to have a version of the game that is closer to its original form. What would the game look like today if the rules were rolled back. Not rules that promote safety obviously - but rules like: - a try being worth 1 point and conversion 2 points. Hence the term “try”. Earning a try at goals. Would we see more attacking play? - no lifting in the lineouts. - rucks and break down laws in general. They looked like wrestling matches in bygone eras. I wonder what a game applying 1995 rules would look like with modern players. It may be a daft exercise, but it would make for an interesting spectacle celebrating “purer” forms of the game that roll back the rules dramatically by a few versions. Would we come to learn that some of the rules/combinations of the rules we see today have actually made the game less attractive? I’d love to see an exhibition match like that.

29 Go to comments
TRENDING
TRENDING 'I didn't think it would happen this early': Carbery on Munster exit 'I didn't think it would happen this early': Carbery on Munster exit
Search