Nick Cain: Leave the subs on the bench for better results

There is a ‘tinkerman’ alive and kicking inside every coach, so here’s a plea to Stuart Lancaster, Andy Farrell and Graham Rowntree as the autumn series gets underway: Every time you get an itch to go to the bench to make pre-ordained changes en bloc, don’t do it. Especially don’t do it if the bloke you are taking off is going well and is fit to continue.
Trust your instincts more than the GPS tracker stuck between his shoulder blades. And definitely don’t meddle unless you are absolutely convinced that the bench man will do better than the first choice England player you are taking off.
Which begs the question, why didn’t the head coach select the replacement in the starting fifteen in the first place?
Every time a player comes off the bench and makes a match-winning contribution my first thought is that the head coach got his selection wrong. He should have been on for the full 80.
The inability of some players to be asked to play for the full 80 minutes begs another question. Are they trained to produce peak performance for 80 minutes, or just for the 50 to 60 minutes asked of most international front row forwards?
We are told that players have never been faster, stronger – and fitter. However, if they are unable to play a full game at the top of their capabilities, then the training regime is deficient. What’s more, it takes out the attritional element of out-lasting and out-performing the man opposite, which has been embedded in rugby union culture since the game began.
One of the detrimental realities of 23-man Rugby Union is that an eight-man bench militates against good selection, mainly because it gives coaches a get-out clause – which encourages them to tinker and meddle with replacements, especially in the last half hour of matches.
One of the worst aspects of the modern game is the way that matches can swing in favour of a side that is being stuffed through no merit of their own. Instead, they are given a leg-up by a coach who thinks his side has the game won and he can therefore afford to empty his bench.
This distorts the competitive framework of a match, sometimes utterly. Even when the initiative isn’t handed to the opposition, contests lose shape, momentum and, frequently, dramatic tension when coaches take off units en bloc through pre-determined substitutions.
The most common ploy is to replace a complete front row 15 minutes after half-time, and it is one that Lancaster and his England forwards coach, Rowntree have used regularly.
However, no player is immune from coaches wielding the shepherd’s crook, and the most nonsensical element is when the rotation merry-go-round continues into the last five minutes of matches with the players sent on having next to no chance of making any worthwhile contribution.
The dangers of rotation in knife-edge battles of the sort that England will be embroiled in this autumn were highlighted starkly to Lancaster – especially in terms of predetermined substitutions – in the recent Heineken Cup clash between Saracens and Toulouse at Wembley.
The rot started when the Saracens director of rugby, Mark McCall, decided to change his entire front row with 18 minutes remaining.
Up until that point Saracens were ahead narrowly, and their scrum had struggled manfully to keep the hugely powerful Toulouse pack in check. However, with Mako Vunipola, Schalk Brits and then Matt Stevens giving way to Rhys Gill, Jamie George and James Johnston, the balance tilted decisively towards the French club.
Within a few minutes of coming on cold Gill was unfortunate enough to lose the ball in a tackle, and when Saracens were unable to resist the Toulouse surge at a five metre scrum, Louis ‘The Iceberg’ Picamoles picked up from the base to score the winning try.
Afterwards McCall justified his decision by pointing to the way Guy Noves, his Toulouse counterpart, had no hesitation in replacing his own front row. The difference was that Noves did so from a position of strength, confident that the six front row forwards he could field had the measure of any combinations Saracens picked. Furthermore he made his changes piecemeal rather than in blocks.
Another massive Heineken Cup momentum shift came at Sandy Park when the Exeter Chiefs’ supercharged display against the Cardiff Blues looked destined to end in a record victory for the English club.
Exeter were unstoppable, and, early in the second half had already run in six tries for a 41-3 lead – but then their impressive coach, Rob Baxter, made a rare mistake. His decision to send on six replacements spiked his own side’s guns so completely that the Blues were able to claw their way back to claim a losing bonus point.
Baxter admitted later that the magnitude of the Exeter lead had given him the opportunity to give his bench precious European exposure.
Being able to change your entire front row is important for safety reasons in the event of an injury, but giving coaches the capability to change over half their team during the course of a match is a licence too far.
At the moment the eight-man replacement allowance is doing more harm than good. It is making a mess of the game, and detracting from it as a spectacle. Outside the front row replacements, there should be only two further substitutions allowed.
Cut the bench, bring back the war of attrition.