48 hours: Braindead players way off the mark

By RICHARD BOOCK

It's a sobering thought that the further New Zealand marches down the pathway of professional sport, the less tactically aware our country's young hopefuls seem to be.

Never mind the new-fangled video-coaching technology, the countless hours of analysis, the trainers, the shrinks and the minders, New Zealand's sporting heroes appear to be becoming thicker.

The latest example was in yesterday's league test at Huddersfield, when the Kiwis began the second half badly, couldn't work out what they were doing wrong, and ended up blowing their lead and - probably - any chance of making the Tri-Series final.

Ironic, isn't it, that while most of the Kiwis could probably dismantle and reassemble an Xbox blindfolded, few seemed to have any idea about Counter Strategy in Real Life?

It's not only the league players suffering from the brain drain.

At times our cricketers have shown all the intuition of a chocolate-chip cookie, careering along mindlessly until reprieved by a break, a cluster of coaches and one or two reams of computer printouts. Ditto for the All Blacks, who have looked just as bereft of tactical acumen over recent years, and especially in this season's Tri-Nations - when they paid the ultimate price after refusing to change from their shallow backline.

There used to be a time when initiative and instincts were more apparent on our sporting fields, when players would have the confidence to make a call on the spot, and know their team-mates would quickly adjust and support.

They were the days when pre-game and halftime tactics were viewed as just that; an opening strategy for the start of a contest and a game-plan which would be followed only if paying a tangible dividend.

The idea that a team should follow a clearly fatal strategy until further advised had gone out with Sir Douglas Haig.

This modern incarnation of sport might be promoted as the professional, and therefore superior, model, but it's also in danger of becoming so institutionalised that many of the participants stop thinking for themselves.

Certainly, it was hard to put aside that feeling yesterday as the Kiwis succumbed to 40 minutes of dreadful blundering in the main event of the weekend (outside the cockfight between Paul Holmes and TVNZ).

There is a theory around that, because our sporting stars are now being identified earlier and shipped off to academies, they are losing out on many valuable experiences and, as a result, tend towards a one-dimensional style of thinking.

There are also concerns that the academy process can produce a sameness about the "graduates", who are all fed the same party line, coached in the same methods and techniques by the same people, and often end up playing the same way.

It brings to mind that famous old saying from Caribbean author CLR James, who once asked: "What do they know of cricket, who only cricket know?" - as if to suggest life skills were always the most important ingredient.

Probably the nearest New Zealand team sport to James' ideals is netball, in that most of the players have fulltime jobs and have needed to develop relationship and decision-making skills in general life. It's probably no coincidence they eventually overcame what was once an all-conquering nemesis and won the world championship.

High point

The timeless test between Holmes and TVNZ. Punch and counter-punch, sledging, legal threats; the first three days have had it all and neither combatant seems to be tiring. What will today bring? Has the Fraser-Ralston tag team a second arsenal? Can Paul deliver a knockout blow at his age? Will Judy enter the fray, and for which side?

Low point

For the second time in two tests, the Kiwis receive a mention for again raising hopes all around the country and then sending us to our cornflakes in dark despair. The only possible rival for the award was the Sky telecast, although in hindsight the initial lack of commentary turned out to be a blessing in disguise.