Rugby: Hits and misses

The Chiefs tight five have overachieved, given their lack of experience. Photo / Getty Images

Friday night's clash in Hamilton was a classic, tense, brutal, relentless battle. The Chiefs held on for a 14-10 win to make their first Super rugby final. But, as Gregor Paul reports, the game also broke long-standing perceptions and confirmed others.

The Chiefs as underachievers

We all know the Chiefs have a sorry history. In the early years, they were mainly bad. In recent years, they have started badly, finished well and come up short.

Regardless of the journey, the destination has been consistent for the Chiefs - they have failed to gain a position that reflects the talent within their squad.

Before 2009, the Chiefs had managed just one semifinal appearance, in 2004.

Look at the players at their disposal over the years and look at their record and there is only one conclusion - they are the competition's great underachievers.

So does Friday's epic victory change that perception? Is it fair, now they are in a final, to still see them as underachievers?

The 2009 campaign certainly goes a long way towards removing the tag.

All three front-rowers used against the Hurricanes were in their debut campaigns.

Aled de Malmanche has been used mainly from the bench since his debut in 2007 and both Craig Clarke and Kevin O'Neill have been shipped in from other franchises where they never really nailed a starting place.

The Chiefs' scrum has creaked and at times buckled in the past three weeks but they have scrambled to good effect.

They have managed that problem by showing great physicality at the breakdown, by displaying enormously proficient pick and drive work which has been supported with quality ball retention.

The front five have overachieved, given their collective lack of experience. And, given, where the Chiefs were after three rounds, we can again make a case to say they have overachieved

They lost their opening three games and no other side in the history of Super rugby has done that and still made the playoffs.

Is making the final enough, though? Should we see that as proof this team is fulfilling its potential?

What the last few weeks have shown us is that the Chiefs can hang tough.

They can cope with the intensity and pressure of finals football and the last three weeks have effectively been knockout rounds for them.

They had to dig in and guts out a win against the Hurricanes in the round-robin. Another arm-wrestle in the rain against the Brumbies followed and then there was Friday's semifinal.

What impressed most was the composure, the commitment to the gameplan, the desire, the passion and the clinical execution under pressure. Mils Muliaina's try in the semifinal was brilliant.

They have strung together three courageous wins. That's not been achieved by good luck. There is an understanding of how to play, how to win and how to cope with pressure.

It's because these qualities have been so evident that the Chiefs should not be happy with anything other than the title and why we should believe they have the ability to reproduce their form next season.

The Hurricanes as chokers
It's a horrible term but we all know what it means in sporting parlance - the inability of a fancied and capable team to win pressure games. It's more than that, though.

Choking is when teams make poor decisions under pressure; when they deviate from something that has previously worked for them or fail to capitalise on opportunities through the collapse of basic skills.

Statistically, the Hurricanes are chokers. They have won just one knockout game of the seven they have played - a semifinal against the Waratahs in 2006.

They fit the bill on other fronts. Tactically, they were poor against the Chiefs. They kicked too much ball away. Shorn of Richard Kahui, the Chiefs were defensively vulnerable in their midfield.

The Hurricanes combination of Ma'a Nonu and Conrad Smith should have been given every opportunity to probe for holes. The Hurricanes are best when they play high-tempo rugby that keeps the ball moving from touchline to touchline.

The Hurricanes were also undone by poor execution of basic skills. As Victor Vito said: "We had a lot of opportunities but something was missing."

That was attention to detail. Ball protection was not good enough. Passes were not accurate enough and as well as there being too much kicking, it was not well enough thought out. Under pressure, the Hurricanes didn't deliver and the real worry is that many of their squad have plenty of finals experience.

The Chiefs had two players - Sivivatu and Muliaina - who had previously played a semifinal. The Hurricanes had 10, some of whom - Neemia Tialata, Andrew Hore, Jason Eaton, Rodney So'oialo, Piri Weepu, Smith and Nonu - have played several.

Colin Cooper and Ian Foster as future All Black coaches
It's becoming apparent that Foster's future might be brighter than Cooper's. The Chiefs coach has given his side belief and a game-plan that suits their strengths.

"We are a better side when we let the ball go a little bit," he said of their tactical approach to the semifinal.

The Chiefs wanted to play a bit more football than they had been allowed to in the first encounter and that is what they did. It was smart. Foster, too, has retained an honesty and maturity in his off-field work. The modern coach has to present a public face; deliver the right message in the right tone with the right language. Foster has done that.

Cooper, on the other hand, has never seemed at ease in his front-of-house work. Nor has he shown himself to be as tactically adept as Foster. The Hurricanes are still capable of random performances when they neither play the right style nor execute to the required level.

An argument could be made to say the Hurricanes should have started Friday night's game with Weepu at first-five and asked him to bring Smith and Nonu into the game with a view to exposing Dwayne Sweeney.

Instead, Cooper started with Willie Ripia, who struggled in the first game and struggled again to put the Chiefs under pressure through the quality of his kicking.

It was Ripia's loose kick that led to Muliaina's try, as well as a weak follow-up tackle attempt and he was taken off immediately after, with Weepu taking over.