Glory be to the All Blacks, hallowed be their name, who with a year to go to a Rugby World Cup tournament are once again considered to be the best team on the planet.

It’s familiar territory for the All Blacks being all-conquering in the years between the World Cups only to come a cropper when they tournament takes place.

This year there’s a slight change to the theme in that while the rest of us are quite vocal about their peaking between World Cups the All Blacks and their extended family (coaches, former players, media) are taking it on the chin and openly talking about the unease that comes with wearing the crown and the pressure that will come to bear in a home World Cup.

Sean Fitzpatrick and John Kirwan, for instance, who have recently visited these shores, feel it is no bad thing to be rated No1 and are adamant that not only can the current All Blacks get better but that they have a mindset that dictates that they will.

They were impressed with the so-called “ball-in-hand” method of their team but, unlike less stellar commentators, shied away from the “glory be unto this great team” approach going viral in blogdom.

My stated view is that this is not a great All Black team, because they would need better props, locks and scrumhalves and be less reliant on Ritchie McCaw and Dan Carter to rank with previous winners of the Webb Ellis Cup, but I have nevertheless been fascinated by the extent to which a change of law interpretation could alter the fortunes of a rugby team.

The All Blacks utterly dominated the Tri-Nations while the Springboks went from the glory of providing both finalists in the Super 14 to plodders.

And all it took was a tweak of the breakdown law; the stipulation that states that the man making the tackle must let go of the man he has brought down; that in the pictographic phrases referees are so fond of “there had to be daylight between the tackler and the tackled.”

Even though this was pretty much the interpretation in force during the Super 14 the Springboks were all at sea and the All Blacks flourished, although Paddy NoBrain (as the IRB head of referees is referred to on a local website) did issue an instruction for the stipulation to more strictly enforced in the Tri-Nations,

I had a theory about it which was confirmed by studying PVRs of the tests. “Plod” was a good word to use for the Boks earlier on in this column because there is no doubt a key reason for their struggles is because they fell off the pace; whether through a lack of fitness or simply the physical incapabilities of the players picked.

With the ball “coming loose” quicker, pace was the name of the game and the Springboks simply were not up to it; accustomed as they were to tying the ball up, slowing it down and kicking it in behind. With the ball suddenly moving away from contact, again and again, the Boks just did not keep up. This became patently clear when watching a game analytically rather than with a mindset clouded by the desire for victory.

The All Blacks, by contrast, found the new law absolutely to their liking for it reawakened their old rucking instincts of getting numbers to the ball, adopting low body positions, blowing over it leaving it ready to play. Time and again the All Blacks did not play “to the ball” but “past the ball,” to keep it on their side and take opponents away. Often this was done illegally but always so fast and in such numbers that referees invariably gave them the benefit of having momentum or going forward.

It was also apparent that the All Blacks were best at one of the oldest doctrines around – first prophesized by the guru of Natal rugby Izak van Heerden in the late 1950s and 1960s and subsequently adopted by Brumbies and Australian sides under Rod Macqueen and Eddie Jones – the triangle or diamond of support.

Van Heerden was a great advocate of having support runners on either side and behind the ball carrier and the All Blacks have advanced, whether by accident or perceptive coaching, this method of ensuring the safety of the ball.

Call it the Holy Trinity if you will but the All Blacks are extremely aware of sealing off the ball and have a way of going into the tackle in threesomes – the ball carrier and two “outriders” on either side and in close contact with him. It’s the attacking form of the gang tackle, where greater numbers make all the difference.

Watching the re-runs it was noticeable how seldom the All Blacks put the ball at risk – always channelling the ball to where they had more numbers or breaking in such a way that the outriders could go in and provide an untrammelled channel for the ball to be fed back. They seldom tried for the spectacular break at the risk of becoming isolated, whereas the Boks often committed this error.

It’s a simple philosophy actually which can be condensed to: The Ball! The Ball! The Ball! Get the ball, keep the ball, use the ball.

There is little doubt that the game has become faster and the All Blacks came out on top because they had the players who could run faster, run for longer, stay on shoulders more often than either the Boks or the Wallabies.

It’s a phenomenon the Springbok selectors will have to bear in mind as they ponder forthcoming selections. Pace is the ace in the All Black pack and if referees remain consistent in the way they control the breakdown we’re going to need it too.

Coutesy of danretief.com