Rugby: Injuries pointed reminder

Ali Williams. Photo / Dean Purcell

In trying to make sense of all this bickering among the Sanzar partners, the frayed and damaged Achilles tendon of Ali Williams helps clear things up.

The All Black lock is hobbling on one leg. From day one, he's never been quite right and his day one was not everyone else's. He missed the Blues' early season trip to South Africa because of a back complaint.

When he did make it into action in round four against the Sharks, he only lasted until the first half of the round seven clash with the Waratahs when his niggling Achilles flared.

Back he came in round 11 to face the Reds, managed to get through that before it went again the following week against the Hurricanes.

Now he's unavailable for up to six weeks and the danger of asking the top players to front in early February is perfectly illustrated.

He is the country's best lock, a critical player and a member of the five-strong All Black leadership group and he's barely able to walk.

It can't be stated as fact but a reasonable conclusion can be drawn that, if Williams had a longer off-season, if he hadn't been asked to cram his conditioning and preparation into a four-week window, he would have made a more telling contribution.

His injuries have not been inflicted by the game. His stuffed Achilles is not the consequence of commitment to the collision. He didn't slam into an immovable object like Rodney So'oialo and buckle.

He was cantering back to field a kick and it went ping, which is similar to the way it went against the Waratahs. What the conditioning experts believe is that a short off-season, or a non-off-season, heightens the likelihood of injury.

The evidence supports their theory. Of the 35 All Blacks who toured Hong Kong and the UK last November, 15 have had their campaigns disrupted by injury, some of them serious.

Jamie Mackintosh and Jimmy Cowan didn't make it through the first half of the Highlanders opening game. Before he broke a toe, Anthony Boric dislocated a elbow.

Cory Jane suffered a nasty leg injury two weeks into the competition, while his Hurricanes team-mate Hosea Gear damaged his knee in South Africa. Sitiveni Sivivatu's shoulder gave way in Brisbane and of course, Richie McCaw's knee took a pounding against the Highlanders.

No doubt, some of these injuries could have happened if the All Blacks had three months to prepare.

However, many might have been avoided with more rest and preparation time while the likes of Richard Kahui, Conrad Smith, Andy Ellis and Neemia Tialata might not have continually struggled with minor niggles.

To carry on with the current scheduling would be mad, especially as the All Blacks are not going to return from Europe this year until mid-December.

New Zealand Rugby Union chief executive Steve Tew says you can't present a balanced picture of why he and his Australian counterpart, John O'Neill, refuse to budge on their stance that an expanded Super 14 can't kick off before March.

"There are multiple factors," says Tew. "It's about the fans, the broadcasters and the players. All of these things contribute to the judgement call we are making."

Those factors do indeed contribute but surely Tew can't have forgotten that Super 14 without stars is nothing super at all? We know that from 2007.

We have seen the figures that show a definite lack of interest in Super 14 in February and March.

Tew has said that's because New Zealand is in beach mode. Is it, though, more to do with the fact the early games either don't feature the leading players or if they do, they don't make much of a contribution?

Could it also be true the market doesn't want squads to be managed as heavily as they are; that they are fed up with never knowing if the top players are going to be selected from one week to the next?

The early start is at the root of every ill currently blighting the game, which is why neither the NZRU nor the ARU are going to budge.

South Africa's position is harder to understand. Their problem with the proposed Super 15 is they don't want to play during the June test window.

"They are quite strong on not wanting any of their franchises playing games during that period. That's a fair concern but we know this is not the perfect solution."

It doesn't quite stack as a valid position. It seems a relatively small issue to be a deal breaker which is why there is a suspicion the South Africans are thinking more about what their broadcaster, Supersport, wants, rather than what would be good for the players and fans.

Supersport has an insatiable desire for rugby and a major financial stake.

So far, the South Africans have won support for the way they have protected the Currie Cup. It's maybe time the NZRU and ARU were given some for the way the are supporting the players - which in turn will make rugby better for the fans.