Consistency breeds Confidence. Confidence Impacts on Performance.

Looking at the game yesterday between NZ and Australia, there wasn't the gap in performance you'd expect when you look at the results of both sides this year. NZ, unbeaten and chalking up their 30th consecutive home victory, and Australia with just two wins against Argentina and a narrow victory over the Lions.

You can talk about the squads and the individual talent but talk of there's NZ and SA then daylight between the rest is nonsense. The margins between the sides are not so clear cut. What intimidates a team is not so much the squad of players at their disposal or their individual talents. It's their record. When a team is consistent, confidence and self belief run strong through the squad. That inevitably has a positive impact on performance. The Welsh captain Warburton commented that his team needs to start experiencing success against SH sides. What does this mean? Do the players believe that the SH sides are much better than them? Unlikely. It means there is self doubt at the back of their minds due to their inability to beat those sides.

Australia did not play badly yesterday. In fact, much like SA two weeks ago they played quite well and posted their highest score on NZ soil. A fact not achieved since the 1970s. Contrast yesterday's performance with the defensive minded performance we got at the start of the RC. Australia may have scored a lot of points in the opening test but the mindset was different. They kicked a lot of possession away whereas yesterday they played with the ball a lot more in hand. They allowed their backline to express itself. You could argue that the game didn't have much in the motivation stakes and Australia had nothing to lose much like SA had two weeks ago. But to me the reason they played so well is that they had renewed confidence.

The third test against the Lions had a sapping effect on Australian confidence. They were soundly beaten after being within a score in the second half. Two games up against NZ was hardly the best way to regain that lost confidence. A home game at Brisbane gave them hope with SA having never won there, but they have shown this year that their consistency has made them a different beast. Unbeaten on their autumn tour last year and this year they didn't allow Argentina or Australia to stall their consistency. They played NZ accordingly with a confidence and an attacking mindset that we haven't seen from them previously or at least only shown in brief glimpses. You don't go toe to toe with an opponent playing them at their own game if you don't think you can last the distance.

Australia thought the Brisbane loss was their low point but their confidence drifted even lower. A one point squeaky bum win over the Pumas in Perth and the knives were well and truly out. It's one thing to lose to SA and NZ but it's another thing to play so poorly against an Argentinian side yet to find their consistency playing away as they do at home. Even though they were soundly beaten by SA, I liken their second half performance to that of Wales against Ireland in the 6N. South Africa were quickly up with two tries in no time and a hammering was on the cards. Australia dug deep, denied SA a four try bonus point and in many ways finished the stronger team, despite losing. Wales similarly ended up losing the game to Ireland but you could see the doubt that was very much evident in the first half from the previous horror season vanished and the self belief they gained set up their crucial and hard fought win in Paris.

Many pundits believed Argentina would chalk up their first win with their last home game. They thought along the same lines last year. The fact that Australia not only chalked up a convincing win but did so in a style that Aussie fans had been calling for ever since McKenzie took over from Deans once again lifted the side's confidence. They may have approached the game yesterday with a we've got nothing to lose attitude but the key was that boost in confidence they got from their emphatic win in Argentina. Suddenly, Australia now approach the Autumn Tour not with a sense of deep foreboding as was felt in the middle of the RC but with a renewed sense of hope. Has the squad changed? A few minor tweaks here and there but really what has changed is the mindset.

This is what makes NZ such a challenging opponent. It's not so much the talent they have throughout the squad. It's their headspace. You look at Wales' performances against NZ, for example, in recent years. The scorelines have been quite close. They've got more than enough talent to stay in touch. What has let them down is that lack of confidence you get when you find yourselves in positions where you need to score when it counts. To make the passes stick or to hammer home the advantage when it counts. When you build up a series of wins, you build up the experience of knowing what you need to do in the key moments. When you get in a habit of losing, the mental demons come out and you do inexplicable things. Basic errors creep into your game. You lack composure. Conversely, when you get in the habit of winning, confidence brings self belief. You trust in your systems and you make the most of your opportunities.

I think many European teams were looking forward to playing Australia after their Perth test. Now they might be second guessing that enthusiasm. The Wallaby squad is largely the same. What is different is that this Australian squad has now some confidence. Quade Cooper or Genia are examples of players no longer fighting for their positions. They're playing with more confidence. It's no coincidence that the team looks a lot sharper for that renewed confidence.

SA and NZ have confidence and consistency. A double edged sword but the former is a result of the latter. They are even more of a threat than Australia because their belief is a lot stronger due to the results they've enjoyed over the last year. England and Wales have the best consistency in the NH but their record against the SH teams is not where they would like it to be. England has the confidence of an emphatic victory against NZ last year but their last true test (the Argentinian tour was pleasing but didn't see either team play their best available squad) was against Wales. It's going to be intriguing who can raise their performance and who can be the most consistent in their performances. If Wales beat a SH side or two, if England beats NZ or SA or both, think of the benefits they will gain in performance based on that confidence they can derive from knowing they can foot it with the top sides. Conversely, think how performance might suffer if they fail to put in a performance good enough to win. There's always something to play for in test rugby whether you win or lose. Only the top ranked sides can build the consistency that will have a positive impact on performance. Trying to disrupt your opposition's confidence and build your own can only come from consistency. Without victory, you not only lose consistency, you lose confidence.

I fear you may have written too many words for the average attention span of a 606er which seems roughly equivalent to that of a gnat.

consistency works in both directions too. ie consistently pants breeds confidence that's likely to continue.

consistency, in order to be positive, needs to be paired with good results.

I think you'll find those points covered quins.  

Feel free to talk about the weather GE.  

I suspect quins didn't read as far as when you made that point.

I agree.

The problem is that consistency does breed confidence but it is relative to
the sides concerned.
IF you are an All Blacks Coach you have a very short lifespan IF your side
starts losing regularly.1998 and 2009 are classic examples no excuses you
win OR.
Expectations for a NH test side is an overall win record of just over 50%
against all comers.
ALL sides have there bad patches how they play during them is important.
Fans are very fickle England post SCW for example sacked two coaches
with a better win/loss record than SCW to the point he was sacked.
The last time England won the 6Ns was 2011,there record since in the
6Ns was losing just two matches.
Versus SH sides much more patchy,EVERY side should face EVERY match
with the idea.WE can win this match whoever were playing IF not it is
pointless playing the game.
When SH plays NH such is the history that wins against SH sides are lauded.
BECAUSE Stats say SH win more of there games versus each hemisphere.
BUT those are just stats based on history when on the day its 15 v 15 and
ANYONE can win.
Incidentally the examples quoted are just that not biased against any other
teams.
As another example Wales versus England no matter how they play in
other matches.Against each other there records are virtually identical.
Perceived wisdom that the RWC is the be all and end all and that sides
or players that have not won one.
Are some how inferior beings is just not so Wales have shown great
consistency at NH level.3 Grand slams in 5 years back to back 6Ns
champions but not cracked SH heads much recently.
Boks have been very consistent since 2009 only dropping one match
to NH sides.But dropped 14 or so games versus SH this year only the
AB`s have beaten them.

Good article.

I agree consistency breeds consisteny, and so through that success.

What's stunning is successful teams ability to almost engineer that consistency, even when bringing in new players, dealing with injuries or traveling all over the world. The top team(s) just aren't fazed and don't allow it to effect their consistency. This then makes all those things easier which makes staying consistent easier whick then makes those hardships easier to deal with which makes them more consistent and so on and on and on

Consistency gives coaches breathing space, that's true Alan. It's like a band nowadays. It's not like the Beatles or the team under CW that were allowed to grow into their roles. You need to produce results right away.

When you don't win you start to feel more concerned about results rather than setting more long term goals.

Kia, I totally agree The top two inches in a sport that is filled with super athletes is by far the most important requirement for success.

However this is how I usually explain performance and success in a sport or work place environment.

Think about these three statements.

Know
Know that you know
Be known for what you know.

Know

Everyone that is a professional rugby players knows how to play the game, they have skills, physicality and specific processes and plans in how to execute every aspect of their game, be it a scrum, breakdown, line out or whatever.

Know that you know.

None of the above means anything unless you know or believe that you possess these necessary qualities. It is by regular training and execution that we get to know that we know, or believe that we have the necessary execution and skills to perform. I think this is where Kia's point is most pertinent.

The consistent execution and performance gives us the knowledge, belief and confidence that we can perform at the highest level.

Be known for what you know.

This is the reputation part, this is where the opponent is awed, intimidated, and the reputation of your performances influence the way in which the opponent sees or measures their chances against you.

I want to add core values. Or in this case team culture.

motivation is strongest when it comes from within, external motivation doesn't last, you might be able to get a team mentally ready and boosted for one game, but to truly achieve consistency it has to come from within, it has to become team culture.

A team that is not cohesive or has underlying negatives that impact on that team culture will not perform, talent alone will never be enough.

I think if we look at Australia in specific the culture of the team had some issues in the last few years of Deans' tenure, the three Amigos, the "toxic" environment comments, the ill discipline had more negative impact than the lack of depth or talent Australia has.

I think the negative results that McKenzie has had thus far did more good than harm to his team.

They had to reach the lows, they had to get rid of the negatives, otherwise the culture within the team could not have been changed.

I don't think they are there yet, but I think if we were able to see within the team culture, it would be dramatically improved from where it was a year ago.

I expect Australia are beginning to turn a corner, and they will perform better than anyone expects this November.

Nice post BB. With Australia is their ability to punch above their weight that is intimidating. What'll be interesting to see is how teams will perform against them as they see SA improved and extremely challenging. Will deference be paid to Oz or will there be confidence. Australia are often more dangerous when they're discounted than when they're paid respect.

It was interesting to see the question of the Grand Slam raised in the press conference. McKenzie rightly dismissed such talk but from 3 wins out of 10 tests suddenly the expectation is there again because Australia to be on an upward curve. If the question had been raised in Perth,link would've thrown his shoe. The question is raised now because people see the team trending higher and the squad's confidence is growing. That's not to say they won't fall to the ground with a thud.