It is no secret that Jake White wants back into the international coaching arena. The last time that he coached a national side, they went on to win the 2007 Rugby World Cup.
It’s been seven years since White last coached at the top level but in that time he has coached the ACT Brumbies close to a Super Rugby Championship, only falling in the final to the Chiefs. The Brumbies have won the title in the past but the years before White’s tenure they were floating in the lower part of the table.
Jake White’s legacy cannot really be argued. Ever since his days of coaching high school teams, he has made a success of each team that he has headed. But legacies are for the history books – what matters in rugby is what you can achieve now and in the future.
He did improve the Brumbies rugby and even this season, there is some residual White tactics in the Brumbies’ playbook. Peter de Villiers was also a benefactor of White’s residual coaching prowess, taking the Springboks to a British and Irish Lions Series victory and achieving a 100 per cent winning record over the All Blacks in 2009.
After that, de Villiers tried to change the way the Boks played and almost cost the team serious ranking positions.
Jake White almost has the Midas’ touch and can seemingly turn the tide in a team and take them to the top, and he has. But is he good enough for the modern game?
Arguably, New Zealand play a very modern game of rugby. All the teams in the New Zealand conference show the ability to adapt and strike from turnover and counter attack.
Most stats will show that tries are scored from fewer phases or set plays than continued phase work. New Zealand seem to highlight this fact by looking to counter attack as a first option.
I am not saying that phase play doesn’t work. Tries are scored from continuity and grinding the ball up the field, by the likelihood of a try being scored from lesser amount of phases is higher.
This is the modern approach to rugby. Again, look at the success of the New Zealand teams and the way in which they play.
Jake White’s coaching is very technical and tactical, which includes using the boot as a first option. There is nothing wrong with this tactic, but it has to be supported by good players and an accurate boot.
If this tactic fails, then plan B needs to be put in place – but judging from the recent Sharks’ performances, they have no Plan B.
To win games, generally, a team needs to score tries. Somehow this season, the Sharks are on top with scoring the second-least amount of tries.
I guess that you can look at the defensive effort of the team and claim that they haven’t allowed opposition teams to score either, although they have the worst tackle success rate in the competition.
They hold opposition to about 17 points a game, which is the league’s best.
The Stormers have done this in previous seasons, but haven’t been good enough to win the title.
When the Sharks played a New Zealand team, the Highlanders, they claimed to focus on defensive structures but still leaked four tries without scoring one.
The ability to attack with ball in hand isn’t a game plan that has been seen in the Sharks’ camp but this is the way forward to beat opposition.
Even though some teams have scored a good amount of tries and risk attacking runs, the teams that lack a defensive pattern have let through a lot of points themselves a la Cheetahs.
A balance of defensive patterns and the ability to attack needs to achieved for a successful team.
White has focused heavily on discipline and defence this season and the want and need to boot the ball away from the team’s own half. He hasn’t really coached an attacking or counter attacking approach and it is evident.
For the Sharks to begin winning the big games and beating Australasian opposition, an attacking format needs to be adapted.
Is Jake White good enough to adapt to this need for an attacking format? The current South African coach, Heyneke Meyer, has stated that rugby changes every six months, be it technical, rule enforced or tactical, so the need for a coach to change is also important.
So has White changed his approach to the game?
The answer is yes and no. He has emphasised his focus on defence but also de-emphasized the attacking ability of a team. He has changed his game plan, but is it good enough to become a championship team?
Time will tell on that one, but I don’t think that he is good enough anymore.
The game of rugby is now won with an array attacking portfolios and a strong, simple defensive line with the ability to scramble. The Chiefs, arguably the best team this year and defending champs, have a strong defensive percentage and equal highest amount of tries.
It is no coincidence that they are tipped to be in the finals. I know that the Sharks top the league, but the stats show a complete opposite of what is reality, but the Sharks haven’t played the Chiefs and they lost to the Brumbies, their closest rivals.
With the stats not really favouring the Sharks to make it past the play offs, I doubt that White will have an invitation to coach an international team in the South.
Maybe the north will knock on his door or Japan will offer a fat stack of cash, but with his tactics becoming seriously outdated and easily countered, I don’t think that he is good enough to coach the top five teams in the world at the moment.
