Northern Edition

Select Edition

Northern Northern
Southern Southern
Global Global
New Zealand New Zealand
France France

Aaron Smith's quest to make an unprecedented third World Cup as the starting halfback

(Photo by Adam Pretty - World Rugby/World Rugby via Getty Images and Phil Walter/Getty Images)

Halfbacks rarely make it to two World Cups in New Zealand, let alone three as the starting No 9.

Byron Kelleher did make it to three campaigns as his 12-year international career was bookended by World Cup years, but he was really only the starter for his last effort.

ADVERTISEMENT

At the 1999 World Cup, Justin Marshall started the tournament as the number one option, taking over from Graeme Bachop, who had started in the final four years earlier in South Africa.

Kelleher, Marshall’s deputy through the early stages of the World Cup, surprisingly took the starting job against France in their ill-fated semi-final loss which saw the All Blacks famously dumped out.

Video Spacer

The Breakdown | Episode 13 | Sky Sport NZ

Video Spacer

The Breakdown | Episode 13 | Sky Sport NZ

Four years later, Marshall had resumed the starting role again and Kelleher was the backup in the semi-final defeat to the Wallabies.

By 2007, it was Kelleher’s time to be the number one starter, with Brendon Leonard and Andy Ellis acting as back-ups.

The 2011 World Cup-winning side featured a trio of Piri Weepu, Jimmy Cowan and Ellis, none of whom lasted to see the Webb Ellis Cup lifted for second consecutive time by the All Blacks in 2015.

Instead, Aaron Smith, who will go down as New Zealand’s greatest ever halfback when he hangs up the boots, announced himself as an All Blacks starter in 2012.

ADVERTISEMENT

Smith’s era as the All Blacks’ No 9 has been long and glorious. He has won the Bledisloe Cup every year since his test debut, has been part of eight Rugby Championship-winning squads and was key in New Zealand’s 2015 World Cup success.

He has won 87 percent of his 101 tests, 93 of which he has started, forming an ever-reliable one-two partnership with TJ Perenara that has spanned two World Cup campaigns.

However, the big question stands as to whether Smith is the best option for the All Blacks as their starting halfback for a third World Cup in France next year. The first reaction from most will be of course he is, it is Aaron Smith.

But this is historically uncharted waters. Smith will turn 34 this November and will be 35-years-old a month after next year’s tournament finishes.

ADVERTISEMENT

Can he still play? Absolutely he can, but would his inclusion as New Zealand’s chief halfback be the best selection to win the World Cup? How many other tier one teams will be using a halfback nearly 35-years-old?

All Blacks boss Ian Foster and his fellow selectors could be sentimental about it, keep the faith and keep Smith in the job based on his storied and glittering career.

He would undoubtedly give his best effort, which is still a very high standard, but it can not be said that he is at his peak athletically.

That much is obvious. In terms of speed, elusiveness, and defensive capability, prime time Aaron Smith was a few years ago.

If he is still the first-choice All Blacks halfback at next year’s Cup, Smith will have to outplay 26-year-old Antoine Dupont in tournament opener.

He would then have to face either Faf de Klerk, who will turn 32 during the World Cup, or 31-year-old Jamison Gibson-Park in a quarter-final.

It seems like a lot to ask for a soon-to-be 35-year-old as those players will have the edge on Smith in terms of physical traits and stamina around the field.

The other halfback options that have been used under Foster are Perenara, Brad Weber and Finlay Christie, who – at the respective ages of 32, 31 and 27 next year – are all on the older side.

The young uncapped options are 21-year-old Cortez Ratima and 22-year-old Folau Fakatava, who still needs a World Rugby exemption to be selected by New Zealand.

Both of those young halfbacks are more explosive athletically and will be even better a year from now, while the others will all be a little older, a little slower, and a little less accurate with the pass.

To that extent, either Ratima and Fakatava should be fast-tracked into the All Blacks as soon as possible, at least to see how they take to international rugby and build experience to give the side a younger option.

The case with Smith is similar in multiple other positions where experienced veterans are holding onto starting roles.

It is true that the depth in New Zealand Rugby is not what it used to be, due to myriad of factors, which is why NZR has tried to extend the careers of a few experienced legends that, in years gone by, would have already been replaced.

The famous quote “hard times create strong men, strong men create good times, good times create weak men, and weak men create hard times” springs to mind when looking at the dilemma the All Blacks are now in. This saying isn’t about the players, rather the men tasked with making decisions.

The good times of back-to-back World Cup wins has softened the decision makers to some degree within New Zealand Rugby and the All Blacks, who used to rejuvenate the team all the time and players were forced to give up the jersey sometimes earlier than probably needed.

Has Foster had to really make any tough calls yet? This is still largely Hansen’s ’19 side with the pieces moved around or tried in new positions, with only Kieran Read missing due to retirement from the international game.

The loss in 2019 should have been the end of that era and a chance to restart, but they handed Foster, Sir Steve Hansen’s assistant, the head coaching role to keep continuity.

He then got a contract extension that will keep him in that role until the 2023 World Cup. That decision was rubber-stamped by New Zealand Rugby before any crucial tests – most of which the All Blacks lost – were played last year.

As such, Foster must now decide between making bold calls or weak and easy selections in key positions as the side looks to build into the France campaign, like at halfback where the stocks are getting older.

The public is not going to hang Foster for sticking with Smith, an all-time great of game. That is the point. The toughest calls are never easy, but they are sometimes required to get somewhere.

Does he stick with Smith all the way through to next year’s World Cup, or does he take a chance on a player like Ratima now and see what youthful athleticism, which Smith once brought to the All Blacks, can do for the team? Maybe there is still room for both at this stage.

It’s not just Smith either, there are others. But on Smith, he has done everything in the game and set the bar at a level that may not be reached by another halfback in New Zealand for a very, very long time. He is the best the country has seen, that will not change regardless of what happens now.

This purely about what is going to happen in 18 months time if the All Blacks rock up with largely the same team that didn’t win in 2019, who will all be four years older, and have been shipping losses to key opponents regularly.

The big difference between the group in 2015 that did win with experienced players like Kaino, McCaw and Carter is at no stage during the cycle did the All Blacks ever stop winning. That is not the case now.

Maybe Foster doesn’t know where this All Blacks team is going yet, but there is a feeling of resignation among the rest of us about where they are headed should change not be underway against Ireland in a couple months time.

ADVERTISEMENT

LIVE

{{item.title}}

Trending on RugbyPass

Comments

1 Comment
S
Shane 950 days ago

Fakatava needs to be included in the abs for sure

Join free and tell us what you really think!

Sign up for free
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest Features

Comments on RugbyPass

G
GrahamVF 29 minutes ago
Does South Africa have a future in European competition?

"has SA actually EVER helped to develop another union to maturity like NZ has with Japan," yes - Argentina. You obviously don't know the history of Argentinian rugby. SA were touring there on long development tours in the 1950's

We continued the Junior Bok tours to the Argentine through to the early 70's

My coach at Grey High was Giepie Wentzel who toured Argentine as a fly half. He told me about how every Argentinian rugby club has pictures of Van Heerden and Danie Craven on prominent display. Yes we have developed a nation far more than NZ has done for Japan. And BTW Sa players were playing and coaching in Japan long before the Kiwis arrived. Fourie du Preez and many others were playing there 15 years ago.


"Isaac Van Heerden's reputation as an innovative coach had spread to Argentina, and he was invited to Buenos Aires to help the Pumas prepare for their first visit to South Africa in 1965.[1][2] Despite Argentina faring badly in this tour,[2] it was the start of a long and happy relationship between Van Heerden and the Pumas. Izak van Heerden took leave from his teaching post in Durban, relocated to Argentina, learnt fluent Spanish, and would revolutionise Argentine play in the late 1960s, laying the way open for great players such as Hugo Porta.[1][2] Van Heerden virtually invented the "tight loose" form of play, an area in which the Argentines would come to excel, and which would become a hallmark of their playing style. The Pumas repaid the initial debt, by beating the Junior Springboks at Ellis Park, and emerged as one of the better modern rugby nations, thanks largely to the talents of this Durban schoolmaster.[1]"


After the promise made by Junior Springbok manager JF Louw at the end of a 12-game tour to Argentina in 1959 – ‘I will do everything to ensure we invite you to tour our country’ – there were concerns about the strength of Argentinian rugby. South African Rugby Board president Danie Craven sent coach Izak van Heerden to help the Pumas prepare and they repaid the favour by beating the Junior Springboks at Ellis Park.

149 Go to comments
J
JW 6 hours ago
Does South Africa have a future in European competition?

I rated Lowe well enough to be an AB. Remember we were picking the likes of George Bridge above such players so theres no disputing a lot of bad decisions have been made by those last two coaches. Does a team like the ABs need a finicky winger who you have to adapt and change a lot of your style with to get benefit from? No, not really. But he still would have been a basic improvement on players like even Savea at the tail of his career, Bridge, and could even have converted into the answer of replacing Beauden at the back. Instead we persisted with NMS, Naholo, Havili, Reece, all players we would have cared even less about losing and all because Rieko had Lowe's number 11 jersey nailed down.


He was of course only 23 when he decided to leave, it was back in the beggining of the period they had started retaining players (from 2018 onwards I think, they came out saying theyre going to be more aggressive at some point). So he might, all of them, only just missed out.


The main point that Ed made is that situations like Lowe's, Aki's, JGP's, aren't going to happen in future. That's a bit of a "NZ" only problem, because those players need to reach such a high standard to be chosen by the All Blacks, were as a country like Ireland wants them a lot earlier like that. This is basically the 'ready in 3 years' concept Ireland relied on, versus the '5 years and they've left' concept' were that player is now ready to be chosen by the All Blacks (given a contract to play Super, ala SBW, and hopefully Manu).


The 'mercenary' thing that will take longer to expire, and which I was referring to, is the grandparents rule. The new kids coming through now aren't going to have as many gp born overseas, so the amount of players that can leave with a prospect of International rugby offer are going to drop dramatically at some point. All these kiwi fellas playing for a PI, is going to stop sadly.


The new era problem that will replace those old concerns is now French and Japanese clubs (doing the same as NRL teams have done for decades by) picking kids out of school. The problem here is not so much a national identity one, than it is a farm system where 9 in 10 players are left with nothing. A stunted education and no support in a foreign country (well they'll get kicked out of those countries were they don't in Australia).


It's the same sort of situation were NZ would be the big guy, but there weren't many downsides with it. The only one I can think was brought up but a poster on this site, I can't recall who it was, but he seemed to know a lot of kids coming from the Islands weren't really given the capability to fly back home during school xms holidays etc. That is probably something that should be fixed by the union. Otherwise getting someone like Fakatava over here for his last year of school definitely results in NZ being able to pick the cherries off the top but it also allows that player to develop and be able to represent Tonga and under age and possibly even later in his career. Where as a kid being taken from NZ is arguably going to be worse off in every respect other than perhaps money. Not going to develop as a person, not going to develop as a player as much, so I have a lotof sympathy for NZs case that I don't include them in that group but I certainly see where you're coming from and it encourages other countries to think they can do the same while not realising they're making a much worse experience/situation.

149 Go to comments
TRENDING
TRENDING Sacha Feinberg-Mngomezulu suffers new injury setback Springboks flyhalf's latest injury worry
Search