The All Blacks selectors have named a 36-man squad for the Grand Slam tour, using dual-listings to increase versatility.
Scott Robertson emphasises versatility, but the strategy is seen as more about presentation than practical outcomes.
Critics argue New Zealand’s approach lags behind South Africa’s development of hybrid athletes for strategic flexibility.
The real triumph for the selectors in picking their 36-man squad for the All Blacks’ Grand Slam tour is in their slick accounting, which has enabled them to take a book value of 40 players to the US and Britain.
In a quite literal stroke of genius, theAll Blacks selectors have boosted the squad’s versatility by listing three first five-eighths, six midfielders, seven outside backs, five locks and two fullbacks.
Specifically, this has happened by naming Samipeni Finau as a loose forward/lock; Beauden Barrett and Damian McKenzie as first-fives/fullbacks; Leicester Fainga’anuku and Rieko Ioane as midfielders/outside backs; and Ruben Love as an outside back/first five-eighths.
This dual-listing formula is new, with previous regimes (including the current one until now) naming players under one position heading.
This departure from the historic norm is intriguing because it illustrates the value head coach Scott Robertson places on versatility and his determination to sell to the media just how far that theme has been developed on his watch.
But it feels more like a victory for presentation than hard graft and successful outcomes, and so there is also a concern New Zealand is labouring under an old interpretation of what constitutes versatility – one that is lagging behind the new hybrid athletes being developed by the South Africans.
With Tupou Vaa'i (left) injured, Samipeni Finau has been listed as a possible lock in the All Blacks squad. Photo / Photosport
Writing in a press release that Finau can play in the second row when he’s never actually done it for the All Blacks seems either disrespectful or naive to the realities of playing lock at the international level.
The fact the first game on the Grand Slam tour is against Ireland in Chicago is apt in this regard because it was at Soldier Field in 2016 when the All Blacks learned the hard way that loose forwards don’t easily convert to locks.
Jerome Kaino was asked to play at lock nine years ago after injuries to Sam Whitelock and Brodie Retallick and a personal issue for Luke Romano, and he had a tough time playing with No 5 on his back instead of his usual No 6.
The conclusion the coaching panel in charge of that decision reached was that it’s hard but possible to take a mobile and athletic lock such as Scott Barrett and occasionally use them as a loose forward, but it’s almost impossible to take someone who mostly or always plays in the back row and use them at lock.
Most locks at international level are between 120kg and 125kg and throwing someone at 110kg into the role leaves them with too big a physical gap to bridge – especially when it comes to scrummaging and cleanouts.
Equally, it seems to be overplaying his proven capabilities to label Love a first five-eighths, given he’s not played one minute of test rugby in that role.
He’s an obvious talent and handled the No 10 role for the Hurricanes when he was used there this year, but listing him as a first five-eighths for the All Blacks seems designed to artificially inflate the perceived versatility value within the squad.
Barrett and McKenzie are genuine first-five/fullbacks and Ioane has split his test career between wing and centre, and while Fainga’anuku has spent more time at club level playing in the midfield, his All Blacks appearances to date have been on the wing.
Beauden Barrett (left) and Damian McKenzie can both run comfortably at No 10 or No 15. Photo / photosport.nz
But his dual listing is interesting because it could potentially have said midfield/outside back and loose forward after having spent a bit of time playing in the back row for his French club Toulon.
And it’s the fact Fainga’anuku has not been listed as a loose forward that confirms Robertson is pushing the wrong narrative as regards versatility.
There’s a compatibility in all the dual-listings – mostly standard and logical pairings of 10s who can play 15 and wings who can play centre.
This sort of versatility has perceived value when it comes to World Cups and being able to cover short-term injuries. It also creates a level of flexibility when it comes to picking the bench.
But this alludes to New Zealand’s prevailing mindset that the bench is primarily about covering all possible injury permutations, whereas South Africa are building players such as Andre Esterhuizen, who can play second five-eighths and flanker, Kwagga Smith, who can play openside and wing, and Grant Williams who can play halfback and wing.
This is higher-value versatility as it has enabled the Boks to successfully utilise their 7-1 bench split, and they could just as easily go 4-4 if they wanted to.
It’s readily forgotten that they didn’t have a recognised, specialist hooker on their bench for the 2023 World Cup final but instead used loose forward Deon Fourie.
They are building versatility to create a vast array of strategic options, while New Zealand are doing it for peace of mind and the reassurance that all the deckchairs can be reshuffled in case of an emergency.
That would be more aligned with where the game is heading and it would enable the All Blacks to start building a higher-impact bench that has a deeper strategic rationale than covering injuries.
