Bruce Holloway and Adam Julian
New Zealand still has plenty of schoolboy rugby talent, but how that talent is managed needs addressing.
That’s the view of former All Blacks centre Craig Innes, these days working as a rugby agent with Wasserman (primarily in Hawke’s Bay) in the wake of New Zealand Schools conceding a horrific 136 points in two humbling losses to Australia u18s.
Innes, who earned selection for the New Zealand Schools side which beat Japan (44-13) and Australia (18-8) in 1986, and was among those who travelled to Canberra to watch the two matches against Australia, was troubled by the stinging defeats.
“I’ve been thinking a lot about it since watching,” Innes said.
“Our boys got towelled up quite badly and it made me wonder about the structure that they’ve got in place at the moment.
“I hate to be one of those guys that talks about ‘back in my day’, but what I do remember – which was great, and they don’t do it now – is that from U16s onwards we used to pick a group of guys from around the country and we would spend the first week of the holidays at Lincoln University or somewhere in a rugby-camp type of environment.
“It was the same group of guys, some would come and go, but there was a core group that basically, from under 16s, went through New Zealand under-17s, New Zealand schools, New Zealand under-21s, and then on.
“By the time we got to playing New Zealand Schools we knew each other.”
Innes cited his second year of New Zealand Schools when Jason Hewitt was halfback, Walter Little was first five-eighths, Sean Fitzsimons was second five-eighths, he was centre, with Jasin Goldsmith at fullback, Inga Tuigamala on one wing and John Timu on the other wing.
But given New Zealand Schools were also beaten by Australia last year, he suspected we were seeing a snapshot of bigger issues within rugby on these shores.
“What worries me is things like, there’s no more Roller Mills [provincial U13] rugby or the Gwynne Shield [Year 7 and 8] which we had in the Waikato. Those teams were just so important when we were kids, but it’s all gone.
“But what worries me the most, I guess, is that the under-fabric that made us different to everyone else in the world has just been worn away.
“I just wonder what actually makes us any different to anyone else these days. Throw into the mix rugby league and you only have to watch the NRL grand final and all the razzmatazz around that, and the kids are looking at that.
“Why wouldn’t you want to be part of that? Now everyone wants to be Reece Walsh.
“So, I think rugby’s got some massive issues and I just wonder where it’s all going to be in another five, six years unless people are prepared to firstly face it, and be prepared to make some huge changes.
“It just really worries me, the fact that any New Zealand team can have 80 points put on them. A few weeks before we’d watched an All Blacks team disintegrate like I’ve never seen, ever. This is starting to happen a little bit more often than it should be.
“Losing to Ireland and stuff like that, is one thing. But New Zealand teams disintegrating - there’s obviously bigger issues that need to be addressed.”
However, Innes defended the Schools players beaten in Canberra (and also declared that he acts as an agent for four of the players).
“There are some very talented footballers in that team... and by the second half, in the second game, you could see that they were actually starting to settle into themselves.
“In the first game, it looked like the players had never met each other and there were some very talented Australian players, but we still managed to put 40-odd points on them too.”
Australia had a lot more structure in both tests.
“In the first half of the second game I thought, “Oh my God, it’s going to be insane,’. But then in the second half, you could see that the combinations were starting to fit.”
A lot of New Zealand’s play in the two games suggested there was little understanding of what teammates were trying to achieve or what they would do next. There was a lack of cohesion, perhaps reflected in the fact their squad was drawn from 17 different schools, meaning a dearth of natural pairings.
By contrast, Australia had an entire Reds U18 front row, and almost an entire Reds tight five, while there was a Waratahs U18 loose forward trio and halfback combination. There was also a Reds U18 10-12-15-combination where they all seamlessly ran the ball.
But New Zealand were all over the show, seldom finding any meaningful combinations.
With Australian rugby having regular U16, U18, U19 and U20 Super Rugby matches, along with a cohesive development programme, they are well poised to repeat their dominance in seasons to come.
Innes stressed he was not pointing the finger at the New Zealand coaches, headed by Blues assistant coach Paul Tito.
“I think the coaches have got their team for three or four weeks. I mean, what are you going to do in that time?
“Though then again, you could ask why are you bringing in Super Rugby coaches to coach a New Zealand Schools team? There are guys around the school network that are working at this level every week.
“There is a question of familiarity when you’ve got such narrow timeframes to work with people. It’s tough and I think that’s something that could be looked at.
“We came close to being an U18 team rather than a New Zealand schoolboy team last year, but to be honest, what would that mean? A couple of players at best?
“But schoolboys, U20s – we haven’t won that World U20 tournament for quite a few years now either. It just seems like we’re kind of chasing the pack a little bit.”
St Patrick’s Silverstream coach John Herbert believed New Zealand would have been stronger if they selected the best U18 players regardless of whether at school or not – and saw defence as a major issue.
“Watching the games I thought we looked under-prepared,” said Herbert, who coached Silverstream to an unbeaten Wellington Premiership success this year, while Wellington Centurions U18s were also unbeaten under his guidance.
“It was clear that the focus was on attack, and it was clear we could do that as we did score a large number of tries, just not as many as Australia.
“What was evident was that we were poor on defence. Three areas stood out. Firstly our physicality was variable and at times absent. We often sat and waited for them, we did bring line speed on occasions but often we were passive and let them dictate terms.
“Secondly we were not connected, there were gaps and you could drive through and this was very evident in our midfield. Players seem unsure of their roles and defended space as if they had been thrown together the day before.
“Lastly, workrate or GPE [getting into position early]. This is the foundation of any defence system – and, just like our physicality, it was variable. Sometimes we folded and kept our line integrity, other times we had players bunched up behind the ruck and we could not fill the field with defensive bodies.
“Defence wins games, attack determines by how much.”
Meanwhile, on social media, Darren Firmin, a 1999 New Zealand Schools player reflected on mixed emotions as his son, blindside flanker Justice Taumoepeau, represented Australia U18 with distinction, calling it ‘a sad but proud moment’.
“In 1999 I was called into the New Zealand team due to one of the boys getting injured,” Firmin said. “That environment and experience was amazing. It stemmed down from the coaches and management. I would play out of my skin for that Black jersey.
I feel that only some wanted to play and leave everything out on the field by watching some of the [New Zealand] defence.
“Aussie U18s are mostly schoolboys identified early in their teens and included in academies. Only a few had left school. My son, Justice, turned 17 this year but is in his last year at college/high school.
“If he is fortunate to be selected again next year for the U18s, he’ll be in the class of ‘Not at School’ category. Something needs to change back home in New Zealand.”
Another credible voice on social media was former Rotorua Boys’ High School coach and teacher, Gordon Hunt, who also highlighted how the Australia U18 team was also mostly schoolboys, but with the benefit of having come through five years of development together from U14s up.
“New Zealand Rugby have moved away from having junior rep rugby as a priority, tournaments and then trials.
“Our boys only get that Super resource coaching at U18 level whilst the Aussie players start at 14s. That’s a big the difference.
“We also don’t pick kids who have signed league deals. That’s so many kids because league scouts cast a massive net to get those couple of gems. I bet several of those Australia boys switch or have already signed to league.”