Lee Stensness: All Black depth has become the centre of attention

The old adage of not changing a winning team is old thinking.

Player rotation, squad development, 'horses for courses', burnout prevention - call it what you will - has come to the All Blacks and I'm sure it will trickle down through New Zealand rugby.

The All Black management have made it clear that they will bring in and leave out players, irrespective of form, with a view to the long-term goal of winning the 2007 World Cup.

The silence of opposition from fans and pundits has been deafening. Everybody agrees with their thinking. The memories of the last two World Cup campaigns are evidence enough to validate the argument that depth is needed all positions. The situations that occurred in 1999 and 2003 of not playing a specialist centre at centre in World Cup semifinals must not be repeated. This is why difficult calls must be made now, to avoid the need for improvisation in the future.

The selection calls will be more difficult for the players involved, less so for the coaches. Although these coaches have been loyal to many players during their careers, the long-term goal of the World Cup will override personalities and necessitate rotation. Players will have to put their egos aside for the collective good, all very nice team stuff, but top rugby players generally have big egos - that is part of what gets them to the top.

Being 'dropped', 'rotated' or 'rested' or however it is phrased will not go down well, especially if their form is good. Affected players will just have to take it on the chin, a bit like Justin Marshall had to at the end of last season. Gradually players will make less noise as it becomes accepted practice. A policy of squad development will certainly keep players on edge and eager to perform, especially if there is a viable alternative in their position.

The perfect example of the need for development of others is in the position that caused a lot of the trouble in 1999 and 2003, the position of the current captain, centre. By 2007 Tana Umaga's age and thus levels of wear and tear will in all likelihood be an issue, so carefully managing and rationing his appearances will benefit both him and the team.

Some tests are more meaningful than others and, if Umaga misses the less important tests, his longevity will be more likely, while at the same time another centre and captain can develop. Both playing centre and being captain are roles where experience is a valuable commodity so Umaga's absence in certain tests will actually help the team.

I note that Umaga has greeted news of a potential rest in the Tri Nations with a demand that he plays. It will be interesting to watch this new concept as it develops - the management seeking to broaden player depth and the players' natural reaction not to give up their spot.

However, it is still likely that Umaga will be rested at home - traditionally where the All Blacks are strongest.

Umaga may be the test case for this policy but what happens if the All Blacks lose a test or two?

How keen will the selectors be to rest the captain or other key players if campaigns or series are still on the line?

Will the new adage become 'don't change a losing team'?

- HERALD ON SUNDAY