Leicester Fainga’anuku experiment could fit into Dave Rennie’s All Blacks plans – Gregor Paul
The decision by the Crusaders to play outside back Leicester Fainga’anuku at openside flanker was not necessarily the practical triumph it was widely claimed to be, but it did, however, signal the possibilities that exist if the game’s leaders are brave enough to reimagine how New Zealand can play on the world stage.
Fainga’unuku was the man of the match in Christchurch, but his selection was more a victory for innovative thinking.
It may even be the first hint that the game in New Zealand is about to undergo a renaissance, where it identifies and amplifies its natural skillsets, athletic advantages and ingrained rugby intelligence.
It would be harsh to brand the past two years as the Dark Ages, but it is undeniable New Zealand needs to grind itself into a more open mindset that demonstrates a collective appreciation that modern rugby is being adapted and influenced by new trends.
Inevitably, some commentators got carried away in their evaluation of Fainga’anuku’s performance at openside against the Waratahs, while others felt it was a gimmick, a selection designed to win headlines rather than turnovers.
Both views have a foundation of truth, but it’s the symbolism of the Crusaders being willing to try something radical that matters more than the practical outcomes it delivered.
To win consistently on the international stage, New Zealand has to be more adaptive and flexible in its selection approach, and more imaginative and intuitive in its game plan conception.
It also has to be cognisant of how it can shape and manipulate test matches by picking players that can deliver on its strategy.
This may sound like coaching 101, but it was an endemic failing of the previous All Blacks regime where former supremo Scott Robertson was stuck in an old world of 5-3 bench splits and picking a 23 that was designed to cover every injury possibility rather than create strategic options to change or enhance the game plan.
Meanwhile, the No 1-ranked Springboks have been willing to use a 7-1 bench split on occasion, and develop hybrid options such as Andre Esterhuizen, who can play in the back row and midfield, and Grant Williams, who can play halfback and wing.
These are genuinely smart innovations that represent the clarity of the Boks’ thinking – their key asset is the size, strength and power of their forwards and ability to weaponise their scrum and direct ball carrying.
The 7-1 bench split has given them 80-minute capacity and how often in the past few years has South Africa changed the complexion of a test in the closing 25 minutes through the destructive power of their scrum, unstoppable mauling and difficult to resist force at the collision area?
It is selection and game plan in perfect unity and perhaps the Fainga’anuku experiment is a signal that the message is filtering down into Super Rugby Pacific from new All Blacks coach Dave Rennie that he will be leaning into New Zealand’s natural athleticism and ability to generate a high-tempo game on the back of their speed, micro skills and ability to offload.
Rennie’s priority, it seems, will be to quickly and emphatically build an identity and whatever faults have entered the New Zealand development system, there is no question it remains the world leader in unstructured attack.
It doesn’t do trench warfare as well as the Boks, but New Zealand does excel in guerrilla warfare and Rennie must be thinking that the way to re-establish his All Blacks team is to have a two-prong strategy of creating chaos and then exploiting it.
Just as the Boks have doubled down on their power game, the All Blacks can commit to their high-tempo, offloading game and this is where Fainga’anuku becomes a symbol of change.
There is no world in which he will start a test on the openside as there are so many more seasoned (and emerging) campaigners – Ardie Savea, Peter Lakai, Du’plessis Kirifi, Anton Segner – who are better sevens.
But Fainga’anuku on the bench gives Rennie an explosive, high-impact player who he can inject into the back row, while providing world class cover if there is an injury in the midfield or back three.
What it really does is open the prospect of the All Blacks simultaneously operating with a 7-1/6-2 bench split, and provide the weaponry to align with a game plan designed to turn the last quarter into an unstructured, aerobic contest.
A starting back five of Scott Barrett, Fabian Holland (once he’s returned from injury), Tupou Vaa’i, Ardie Savea and Peter Lakai could be supported by a bench that includes three front-rowers, Patrick Tuipulotu, Josh Lord, Wallace Sititi, Fainga’anuku and Damian McKenzie.
That would be a healthy mix of set-piece acumen and direct ball-carrying punch, combined with speed, offloading ability and open-play skills.
If the All Blacks can finish games with Fainga’unuku, Sititi and Savea in the forwards, and McKenzie, Quinn Tupaea, Ruben Love, Caleb Clarke and Will Jordan in the backs, then potentially they can generate a chaotic, offloading attack that breaks down the defensive structure of the opposition and plays to New Zealand’s natural ability to pass, catch and run.
The additional innovation in this set-up is to not bother with a specialist halfback on the bench as Cameron Roigard is so influential and better than his peers that there is no tactical value in replacing him.
McKenzie can cover halfback if there is an injury or Roigard runs out of steam, but the mindset has to be about picking a 23 that amplifies the strategy rather than mitigates against injury.
New Zealand’s natural game is built on explosive athletes with natural ball-playing ability and a collective ability to intuitively know what to do against an unstructured defence.
Gregor Paul is one of New Zealand’s most respected rugby writers and columnists. He has won multiple awards for journalism and written several books about sport.