Positivity

What a great opening weekend to the 6N. There's not much to fault and an awful lot to praise. When we look back at last year in terms of the rugby being played, there didn't seem much to cheer about in terms of the brand of rugby being played. Wales and England were the most consistent performers but it was simple rugby executed well. Nothing too adventurous or flashy but a good blend of solid defence and punching holes in the opposition line. England was a young team finding its feet and Wales was a team that had its senior players firing and after the narrow victory in Dublin, a team with momentum and confidence, which can only be found through winning.

Next came the June internationals and rugby sometimes is a case of the smallest margins. Like their narrow defeat to SA in the RWC the previous year, Wales brought a game that could find a win but just missed out at the final moments of the game. Ireland saw its best display against the ABs when they were able to play the game at their own pace and England lacked that experience in test rugby among their players and got taken out of the game through SA's physicality.

Cue the 4N and it was a similar story. Defence was the key as attacks found it exceedingly difficult to break the defensive line. Injuries that particularly afflicted Australia and SA may well have had a lot to do with that. It made sense to place an emphasis on defence because both sides were without integral attacking players. Yet beneath this veneer of defensive attrition, there was a subtle transformation undergoing. Argentina found a more integrated game and particularly made great inroads in their offloading game. It wasn't so much continuity and stringing phases together but rather trying to keep the ball alive and test the defensive line. NZ took a long time to develop its new game of playing the game at pace and committing as few players as possible to the rucks and trying to use an offload game to punch their way through the opposition line. SA dropped its incumbent Morné Steyn and went for a more refined approach than bombs away and capitalise on opposition mistakes. They retained their physicality but became more eager to keep the ball in hand and be more patient with possession.

The Autumn series didn't set the world alight. The game seemed to regress to a more defensive approach until the rugby world was turned on its head by the England performance against NZ. This year seems a continuation of that story but this time the successful sides this weekend and indeed the passages of play where the losing sides looked the best were all the teams who played with dynamism, that looked to offload in the tackle and keep the ball alive.

The breakdown laws are still a mess but the side that clears the ball away quickly seems to test the defensive line the most. It's true that all the games were played in benign conditions, perfect for handling and running rugby and this factor should not be underestimated. But I wonder how much of an influence these new rules of use the ball within five seconds or lose it is influencing play. It's my understanding that the clubs in the NH were already using these laws and seemed more comfortable now as a result with them than what their SH counterparts appeared to be last year. It's no surprise when Wales looked at their best was when they threw Howley's instructions out the window and kept the ball in hand and there was a sense of urgency at clearing the ball away. Ireland were given a ridiculously easy time of it on defence in the first half when things were far less dynamic and slower.

You still need to be able to control a game. I'm not suggesting that the game has suddenly become willy-nilly, helter-skelter, throw the ball around and put the kettle on rugby. The hard yards still need to be done up front and the set piece to provide a platform for retaining or winning possession. You still need the influential flyhalf and halfback positions to get quick ball and that little extra time to take the right options. Case in point Italy. Traditionally a very solid pack and not much to write home about out back. They looked a different team in the autumn internationals and far more comfortable in keeping the ball alive and asking questions of the defence instead of being wrapped up comfortably or kicking possession away. Orquera was a revelation at flyhalf and took the right options. That doesn't mean running the ball all the time nor does it mean kicking the leather off the ball. Holding the ball out with both hands, plugging for gaps, intelligent kicking and good awareness of space. The teams that looked most assured out there on the weekend had that control at flyhalf and the teams that suffered like Scotland, Ireland and Wales at different stages of the game were those who lacked that control.

There are still issues with drawing and passing and using space when you have numbers instead of running laterally or not passing instead of running. But I have to say the handling and keeness to offload in the tackle were exemplary on the weekend. Again, the weather may well have played a part but there does appear to be a willingness to not take the ball to ground and reform the lines. I envy how the 6N games are largely played during the day as night games, notably in NZ, are afflicted with handling issues simply because the ball is wet from the dew invariably on the ground. When conditions allow for it though, there are evident advantages to offloading in the tackle. When you keep the ball alive, you ask the opposition to tackle more and tackling tires you out, especially when you have to run back and reset the defensive line. Italy and Ireland held out heroically on their own lines but it's a lot harder to do in open play.

Early days yet but do you see a similar shift in the intent of teams? To keep the ball alive and drive holes in the defence and set the opposition on a back foot? There were tries scored for example by Ireland and Wales that looked more conventional like the Cuthbert and Zebo tries. But to me those were more a case of defensive issues than attacking prowess, regardless of how well they were both executed. It's going to be thrilling to see the next weekend's set of matches to see if the game is played with the same positive intent: maintain possession and keep the ball alive whenever possible and look to clear that ball away quickly from what is still a nightmare area, namely the breakdown.

yes the lions series and that of frances visit to the "land of the long white cloud" will have some way to go to top the opening weekend for excitement!

to my knowledge just two teams have been "pinged" for holding the ball to long on the "use it" call. can you believe it is new zealand and france? now there is a "turnip for the books" is it not?

Lions series is going to be a good one if the 6N start has anything to do with it. Injuries have plagued most sides over the last 2-3 years but this year Oz at least looks to have several- Pocock, JOC, Horwill, Genia, Beale etc all returning fresh.

Getting the Oz backline back to peak will ensure an exciting series on the fast grounds over there. Again it all depends on how the players come through the superxv, the killing ground for them last year.

SA still look to be carrying injuries at the start of the sxv so how they manage their players this year will be crucial for them

Excellent article.

It grates more with me that players who have broken the line or have an overlap don't convert. The coached part of the game is at it's zenith. However I yearn for coaches to be more French, that is to give the uncoached, even uncoachable part of the game its head. In Wales' game, Cuthbert had a one on one with Kearney. It pains me that the former sevens player tried a 'Maori sidestep' and tripped over the splatted Irishman. It's been a gripe of mine for two decades now (and I'm only 36!). I'm convinced that ditching the back foot law would tie up forwards in the tight and open the game up for the backs.

From a Lions point of view we just have to hope our best are not over worked prior to the tour causing too many injuries to form a great tour Down Under.

Three fantastic games, where really only Scotland's trip to Twickenham was a one sided game, in favour of the Home side. That Scots team have some fine players out wide, they can still raise a few Lions candidates.

Ireland started with a boom that sole the Welsh by about the fiftieth minute, Italy are a good team, good enough to beat a good French team, good enough to beat anyone else that gives them a chance. Their fast offloading game us a pleasure to watch

So posititvity? Definitely, this will hopefully be the closest challenged Six Nations yet, hopefully we will also see lots of scoring by all teams.

Scotland were not bad, they were good, but England were better. A few percentage points better but turned that into a 20 point advantage. You can only do that with positivity.

No - Scotland were poor. they allowed England time and space and did not contest the breakdown. Some of the scots individuals were good.