Merts views on the impact of the 10 jersey

Putting this in the International section as I believe the comments are as valid in todays International arena and comment on this in that regard. Its not rocket science that the 10 has a major influence but Merts hits the right buttons with this one...

http://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby/opinion/9837946/Team-man-in-Number-10-jersey-key-to-success

Is it coincidence that the winning side just happened to have the best 10 in Sexton, fulfilling the same areas of confidence, decisiveness and direction that Merts so accurately describes here.

Is it coincidence that the Ozzies suffered through the Lions matches and RC without a 10 and finally performed when Cooper was on song during the AI's. And how much of the AB 100% record is due to having probably the best two (in DC and Cruden) and possibly 3 best 10's in the world?

Now there will be games where the rule doesn't apply but the link between a successful 10 and its sides success has probably never been more true.

In looking at the Boks with Morne Steyn who didnt do too badly last year, but how much better could they have been if he wasnt so 'pedestrian' in comparison. Same with Farrell for England, Priestland for Wales. At best steady, will kick goals and the line and move the ball but can those countries afford up to another 1200 minutes (say roughly 80 mins x 15 matches- Ive no idea how many there are) between now and next years world cup with those players at 10? Possibly too little time left to come up with a Sexton or Cruden with the time left but the argument sure is compelling.

It was a good piece Tman, but what else would you expect from Merths. I especially like the nod to the axis - 2,8,9,10,15. Have those players play well ad with confidence and you'll see your team perform well.

Taylorman I think it does depend on whether you play from nine or ten, South Africa makes most of their plays and decisions from 9, the reason why Morne Steyn looked better (still not great) last year was Fourie du Preez.

Steyn doesn't like responsibility, and when he has a nine that can take that responsibility from him he does better.

Besides that, what does Morne Steyn really do?

He doesn't attack the line, he isn't flat enough to do that, so he either passes the ball or kicks it.

Merths was a bit of a character off the field. Looks like he has a kindred spirit in Cummins: http://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby/super-rugby/9835582/The-greatest-post-match-interview-ever

Might need subtitles for the NH folk who might struggle to understand a word he says.

You say that England and Wales need to come up with a Sexton.

Jonathan Sexton is a 28 year old. He is probably in the prime of his career now. Despite his overall good form at the moment, composure has abandoned him at times like vs England in the 2nd half and he missed two straightforward penalties vs France.

England have in Farrell, a 22 year old who is not that far off Sexton these days with Ford, a 20 year old waiting in the wings to get his opportunity too. I would say England are in good shape.

10 is not an area as an England fan I am too worried about.

beshocked wrote:You say that England and Wales need to come up with a Sexton.

Jonathan Sexton is a 28 year old. He is probably in the prime of his career now. Despite his overall good form at the moment, composure has abandoned him at times like vs England in the 2nd half and he missed two straightforward penalties vs France.

England have in Farrell, a 22 year old who is not that far off Sexton these days with Ford, a 20 year old waiting in the wings to get his opportunity too. I would say England are in good shape.

10 is not an area as an England fan I am too worried about.

I say Sexton because hes the better of the NH 10's but admittedly hes taken a while to get to where he is. Cruden and Barrett are much younger and are playing with a greater confidence and range. Ford I keep hearing about and am looking forward to his progress. I guess 'not worried about' isnt Merts message here. Its leading from the position and Farrell is definitely not in that mould yet, and I'm not sure he ever will be, and my point was what will England gain from another 1200 or so minutes of the same? It could be an area of missed opportunity.

Biltong wrote:Taylorman I think it does depend on whether you play from nine or ten, South Africa makes most of their plays and decisions from 9, the reason why Morne Steyn looked better (still not great) last year was Fourie du Preez.

Steyn doesn't like responsibility, and when he has a nine that can take that responsibility from him he does better.

Besides that, what does Morne Steyn really do?

He doesn't attack the line, he isn't flat enough to do that, so he either passes the ball or kicks it.

yes agree with the impact of having a solid 9 and we are the same. Ellis and DC at the Saders, Cruden and Aaron Smith at Manawatu and Cruden and kerr barlow at the Chiefs, Perenara and Barrett at the Canes have also meant our improvement in our 10's is surely partly due to a new crop of good 9's alongside them.

I noyice Merts does single out Lambie in the same light but more in tandem with F Steyn. Thats possibly because Lambie hasnt always imposed his presence, is not seen as a 'go to' man by his whole side. Whereas Steyn has that aura around him. Morne Steyn does run the line at times but more out of variation in routine than as a targeted move designed to shock, or break open the attack.

Just think theres a lot of 'doing the basics' in the role and thats just not enough at this level.

Ex-fly half thinks Fly half is the most important position? I am surprised...

Taylorman wrote:

beshocked wrote:You say that England and Wales need to come up with a Sexton.

Jonathan Sexton is a 28 year old. He is probably in the prime of his career now. Despite his overall good form at the moment, composure has abandoned him at times like vs England in the 2nd half and he missed two straightforward penalties vs France.

England have in Farrell, a 22 year old who is not that far off Sexton these days with Ford, a 20 year old waiting in the wings to get his opportunity too. I would say England are in good shape.

10 is not an area as an England fan I am too worried about.

I say Sexton because hes the better of the NH 10's but admittedly hes taken a while to get to where he is. Cruden and Barrett are much younger and are playing with a greater confidence and range. Ford I keep hearing about and am looking forward to his progress. I guess 'not worried about' isnt Merts message here. Its leading from the position and Farrell is definitely not in that mould yet, and I'm not sure he ever will be, and my point was what will England gain from another 1200 or so minutes of the same? It could be an area of missed opportunity.

Farrell certainly lead the side from 10 when England gave NZ a good old fashioned beating. He is not looked out of place when taking on your side so to be honest I am not too worried.

Don't forget you're a NZ fan. You have very lofty expectations of a 10.

I have been very pleased with Farrell. He's better than 12 months ago - he could get better. He might not but I am happy with the progress so far.

I like 10's who can boss the game not just in attack but in defence - a 10 the forwards can believe in. A mental resolve necessary to succeed.

Farrell has not made too many noticeable errors in the 6 nations in my opinion. Not been blowing opposition away with silky running etc but he's given England that reliability at 10. Someone who won't give away stupid interceptions, won't miss touch with a penalty or fluff the kick off.

He's far from perfect but he's been working really well with Care, doing a pretty understated decent job. Putting in some nice passes, a break here and there, some excellent goal kicking, some excellent tackling - particularly covering.


Cruden is 25. That's 3 years older than Farrell and 5 years older than Ford.

Ford has been hyped for his potential, perhaps he could offer another option in contrast to Farrell.

Oh and Sexton had an opportunity to beat the ABs but did not take it.

good points.

I think the point will be pressed home with the tour here this year, NH 10's not having a lot of fun in recent years here, so he'll be an obvious target.

Ford you mean? Yes. I expect NZ to definitely target him. NZ away for your first start is definitely trial by fire. By the way I am making the assumption that Sarries make it to the AP final (perhaps wrongly).

Targetting a 5,9 fly half just over 13st is a bit easier than one 6,2 and over 15 st. Especially when you compare international experience.

I just hope Ford can cope well because he will be an important player both on the tour to NZ but probably next year in the RWC too.

The interesting question I suppose is who will be the back up to Ford. Could Cipriani rise from the ashes like Care has?

Thing is, the risk with targeting Ford is that it gives space for the cut out pass to the centres or for Danny to run

No I was actually meaning targetting Farrell. For these reasons:

-England, for kiwis, probably pose the biggest threat of all the NH sides in the 2015 WCup, despite the French enigma and the recent Irish win. England at Twickenham in a one off vs a coach who really does know his stuff, is more daunting a prospect.

-Its fairly well known here that NH 10's generally dont go well vs AB's, Sexton the latest to do things he wouldnt normally, missing a crucial yet relatively straightforward goal to win the match. ROG, Stephen Edwards are two particularly that have had consistently poor matches vz NZ sides, with none of their sides winning. Simply, strangle the 10's confidence, latitude and ability to lead the side and the rest follows, and Irish and Welsh sides have generally always had poor performing 10's in the pro era. (And look at the times when they were good...71 for example)

-Farrell is the last 10 to have any sort of success vs NZ and is the gateway to the attacking threat if the Tuilagi etc bandwagon get on a roll- there are real benefits for putting his game off. Wilkinson was the last before him, and we dealt to that post 03 onwards, Wilko never having a good match vs NZ after that.

So although this years series vs NZ has little relevance to next years world cup, one of the real tangibles NZ could get out of it is to unsettle Farrell in such a way that he personally becomes intimidated by the sight of the AB jersey, that he leaves NZ in such a way that he has nightmares over his performances. He may go on to play well versus others, but simmering in the back of his mind, is dreading the next match versus the ABs.

A bit overly dramatic but that is posibly the best outcome for NZ after a series win, because it plants the seed for something in the future, and most of all keeps Farrell from joining the list on Merts article of those who make the real difference.

Don't think Farrell's the type to get psyched out like that, suspect it would leave him with a point to prove

ChequeredJersey wrote:Don't think Farrell's the type to get psyched out like that, suspect it would leave him with a point to prove

Doesnt matter if he is or not to the ABs- its the process that counts, and applies to any 10, possibly more than any other position. Noy many wins vs NZ had bad 10 performances so its only logical to take that approach.

That is also why we go for very confident 10's- to be ready to repel that sort of threat- the Cruden/ DC/ Barrets of today know the value to their side of a confident and leading 10, making it that much more difficult for the opposition to apply the same.

England's current managent have largely tried to replicate what the All Blacks do. It's written all over their apparent preference for more athletic locks at the expense of the scrum, the attempt to find more creative backs, to have Lawes act as a wing link. To be more professional in their game management and to look to break open the game from the ruck rather than shut it down. The selection of a wing back and strike runner to operate in rotation with the FB and an attempt to emulate the nonu/smith midfield is all straight from the Wayne smith/Steve Hansen book of rugby.

Overall, the Buddhist third way between bludgeoning Neanderthal and willow-the-wisp.

The question will be - can they become as good at it as NZ are?

Initial signs are encouraging, but they're yet to win anything. And the acid test will come in adversity. The Lancaster way is new and has been carefully stage managed this far.

A humbling by a rampant SA pack, or another out flanking move by NZ or Australia or France could send the nodding dog back to the glove compartment.

Tend to agree with that GE. The start of Englands last matches have looked very similar to the ABs in terms of pace and I think are building a more solid platform despite not getting all the results they would like. Thats why keeping Farrell in doubt is important- ie get to him ad you get to the others.

I suspect targeting Farrell TOO much will provide space elsewhere however, and we are shifting towards a playmaker at 9 approach

ChequeredJersey wrote:I suspect targeting Farrell TOO much will provide space elsewhere however, and we are shifting towards a playmaker at 9 approach

Yep that's exactly the response that should happen and its how effective that is that is the measure here. Obviously I'm not suggesting all guns are after Farrell but cutting his lines, pressuring the touch kicks, all the things you'd expect a 10 to be subjected to with 2 possibly 3 tests to do it in. Cruden himself has become adept at scoring tries through charging down the opposite 10- DC twice so far from memory.

All I'm suggesting is its a good environment for the AB's to get a good look at him.