New Zealand Rugby

As an up-and-comer in New Zealand rugby, Julian Savea had been billed as the second-coming of Jonah Lomu. Like Lomu, Savea is a big, fast, strong running winger, who caught the public's imagination at a young age.

In reality it is hard to compare players from different eras. The game has just changed so much. But that does not stop us from trying. 

Current All Black coach, Steve Hansen, is the latest to make such a comparison, suggesting that Savea is a better player than the man many compared him to, as was reported by The New Zealand Herald. That is a big statement, but he does offer an explanation:

"I think he's probably better," Hansen remarked. "He can do more things than Jonah. Jonah was a great player but I think Julian has got more to his game than Jonah."

He is probably right in that Savea certainly does have more to his game. Initially a liability under the high ball, he has improved immeasurably and is now safe taking kicks sent his way. His kicking game is developing too.

You would not call him a "kicker" as such, but he has a boot good enough to exploit space in behind when it is there, as well as toe through grubbers and chips. Additionally he has good hands and anticipatory skills that make him dangerous chasing attacking kicks.

But does this make him better than Lomu?

There is no doubting the threat Savea poses with ball in hand. Big, fast and strong, he is a player that attracts attention from opposition defences who struggle to contain him.

He is more than a one-trick pony though, having the ability to capitalise in space, as well as coming into the line to be a threat in the midfield. His ability to ensure he is always in the game was something Lomu never quite had either.

Yet as far as posing a threat to defences, Lomu is still king. At the top of his game, he was as dominant as anyone has been, ever.

He could fend you off, he could go around you, he could go straight over the top of you. The man was a beast.

For all of his flaws and the criticism he received during his career, there has never been another player you could just give the ball to and say "go score a try." When this did not work, it was usually because the defence was so heavily committed to him.

People often cite the fact that he never scored a try against South Africa as a limitation of his.

Perhaps they are right. But if anything, it was the South Africans that showed just why Lomu was so important to the teams he was on.

At times it seemed to almost become an obsession for them. They would often stack their defence towards the All Black left wing, sometimes having three or four players in covering range of the big man. This opened up space elsewhere and it was almost ridiculous the amount of room they allowed the likes of Jeff Wilson and Christian Cullen at times.

This was the true value of Lomu: a player who could dictate a game simply by being on the field. He did not have to touch the ball, or even be near the action, to help create a try.

To have a player with that ability on your team is handy to say the least.

It was his feats at the 1995 Rugby World Cup that created the Lomu legend. As a 19-year-old, he debuted for the All Blacks in 1994. From this he became the youngest ever All Black, a record he still holds.

However, he did not fire in this series. So it was as an unknown that he embarked upon the World Cup the next year.

What followed was the most astronomical rise to superstardom rugby, perhaps even sport, as ever seen.

He swatted his opponents off like flies en-route to scoring seven tries and setting up a handful of others. His semifinal performance against England remains his most famous, as he bagged four tries and utterly destroyed what had been considered a tough opponent.

Four years later he was equally impressive, bagging eight tries, this time as the most heavily marked man in world rugby. He was one of few All Blacks to finish the upset semifinal loss to France with his reputation intact, having run all over them to score two tries and put the All Blacks in a commanding position.

Despite his dominance, he could have been so much more. He played his entire career with a crippling kidney disease, which eventually forced him into retirement prior to the 2003 World Cup.

It was a condition that prevented him playing at the peak of his powers on a consistent basis. In fact, other than the two World Cup's, the true Jonah was rarely seen. He was still a beast, but nothing like the player he could be.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e3yxSdRk41o

He was criticised heavily for this inconsistency. Although it was not until later that we all realised just how sick Lomu was. To be fair, you have to place greater weighting on his World Cup form, as this was when he was aiming to peak for.

As his All Blacks Hall of Fame induction video says, 20 of his 37 test tries came in either 1995 or at the 1999 World Cup, contrasting his two best seasons with the rest. His 15 World Cup tries remains a record, placing him well in front of some illustrious names who played more World Cup games.

It is easy to reminisce about Lomu's career through rose-tinted glasses, though. If Lomu is only going to be judged at his best, perhaps Savea should receive the same treatment.

But has Savea peaked yet? He is only 24 and still has a lot of rugby left in him. That said, Lomu played his best rugby at the age of 20 and had his last dominant season as a 24-year-old.

Savea has yet to strike fear into opponents the way Lomu did. He is very good yes, a powerful runner and a reliable finisher, scoring 27 tries in 27 tests. But he has not yet destroyed a team the way Lomu would, to the point where the game plan became "Operation: Shut-down Jonah." 

You can use the argument, as Hansen did, that Savea has more strings to his bow: better going backwards, more skilful, more involved in the game. But in terms of sheer athleticism, Lomu is still the best and it is not even close.

Who you think is better really comes down to what you are looking for in a player. Or even just how much better you think one was than the other in a certain area.

It is hard comparing players between different eras. It was a far more open game in Lomu's day. The defences were less-organised and wingers saw fewer high balls come their way. But you can only judge him on how good he was in his own era. He could have adapted to a different type of game if he needed to.

The best way to think of it is: Who would you rather have on your team? If this is the case, give me Lomu any day of the week. Savea may get there, but for now, Lomu's raw talent is something that Savea, or anybody else, just cannot match.

It is beginning to look increasingly unlikely Dan Carter will ever make it back to the top of his game. After spending more time sidelined with injury than actually playing in recent years, the All Blacks fly-half has picked up another knock in what was his ITM Cup comeback game in the weekend, as per TVNZ. 

While it has been suggested that he may indeed play this weekend, it is yet another reminder that Carter is not getting any younger. His body is not standing up to the knocks as it used to and whether he will ever get himself back into condition to add to his 100 tests is starting to look questionable.

But what a 100 tests it has been.

Regarded by many to be the greatest fly-half the world has ever seen, Carter has hardly put a foot wrong in an international career spanning over a decade. Few others can claim to have the all-round game he possesses. Perhaps his only flaw has been the lack of a drop kick, but even this he has added to his arsenal over the past five years.

Initially a play-maker at inside centre, who would take the ball to the line, running dangerously and putting others away, he became a director of play. He still retained the ability to take the line on, possessing a strong fend and explosiveness off the mark, but complemented this with vision and a kicking game that enabled him to steer his team around the park. 

His goal kicking has improved too. He is perhaps not among that elite group in this category, but he is still pretty good nonetheless. Of his 1442 test points, 1279 have come from either penalty kicks or conversions.

He is a physical player too, a strong defender who tackles low. It is rare to see him fall off a tackle and it is not uncommon for him to go looking for them to make. There are games where he will be among the leaders in tackles made for his team, acting in a similar way to a loose forward in the defensive line.

Perhaps this physicality is catching up to him. His injuries have not deterred him though, as he still throws himself into contact as confidently as ever.

It is rare to find a fly-half with all of these abilities at such a high level. Many of the greats tend have a weakness in at least one area. Not Carter though, it is that which has made him such a good player for such a long time.

The second test of the 2005 British and Irish Lions Tour to New Zealand is generally considered his greatest performance and, indeed, one of the greatest individual performances ever. It was the night he eclipsed his opposite, Jonny Wilkinson, as the world's best fly-half.

As the All Blacks racked up 48 points to blow a hapless Lions team off the park, Carter notched up 33 of these. Among this, he scored two tries, four conversions and five penalties. He could do no wrong that night, cutting the Lions defence to pieces with his strong running game and showed a near radar-accurate boot. 

Perhaps the most memorable try of his career came in this game. Receiving the ball in space up the right wing, he sauntered towards the line before gracefully dropping the ball onto his foot, putting through a masterful grubber to beat the cover defence and keep the ball in play at the same time. He would win the chase, touching down with inches to spare.

It was this type of mastery that characterised Carter's career. While a great controller of a game, it is his ability to create something from nothing, or to take the smallest of chances, that he will be most remembered for. 

He was carted off the field with a broken leg later that year, in a 30-13 win over the Wallabies in Australia. What he had already achieved was undeniable though and, unsurprisingly, he was named IRB Player of the Year.

From then on he was an automatic selection for the All Blacks. Even the prodigiously talented Nick Evans could not make a legitimate case to usurp Carter for his role and left for Europe after the 2007 World Cup in a disenchanted manner.

For Carter it was a dream run which ended in disaster, pulling up with an injury in the ill-fated World Cup campaign in France. Despite his consistent form, he has not had much luck at World Cups. Four years later he fell mid-tournament also, with a crippling groin injury. His display in the pool match against France was as good as any solo-performance in the tournament and his absence was noticeable in their rematch in the final.

His lack of World Cup stardom has been more than made up for in between time though. After Evans' departure in 2007, Carter became somewhat irreplaceable as the All Blacks No. 10.

There was no clear back-up and despite a relentless search for one, it was a quest that was never fulfilled. When Stephen Donald took over in Carter's absence in 2009, the All Blacks struggled and had their least successful period of the 21st century. 

It was not just Donald though. Colin Slade, Aaron Cruden, Mike Delany and Luke McAlister were all tried at various stages as well. None were necessarily poor. But none were anywhere near the level of Carter either.

When he returned to the team in late-2009, things began to look up again. Admittedly there was a handful of other regulars making their returns as well, but there was no one more important to have back on the field than Carter.

His class showed, as he pulled the strings to execute the running-game the All Blacks had struggled with earlier in the year. In white jersey's they dismantled a French side whom they had lost to earlier in the year, with Carter in sublime form.

It was form that would continue into 2010, where the All Blacks reclaimed their spot as the top team in the world. With Carter back in the picture, they implemented an attacking game plan to perfection.

He never quite reached those heights again though. Despite his undoubted class, a series of injuries have seen him unable to stay on the field for a consistent length of time since then.

In 2012 he was once again named IRB Player of the Year. At times his form that year was top-notch, but it was not as consistent as it had been earlier in his career and Kieran Read, Conrad Smith or Richie McCaw would have been more deserving of the award.

His form towards the end of the 2013 Super Rugby season was again of the highest class. But again he showed his increasing frailness and was sighted just six times in an All Black jersey, two of which he left the field early in.

The story has been much the same in 2014. After a six-month sabbatical, he returned to play a cameo role in the latter part of the Crusaders' season, but once again was sidelined with an injury.

While this most recent injury may not sound as serious as some of his past ones, it is a sign of the times. Carter is injury prone. In his first game of rugby for months he picked up yet another injury.

At his best, he remains the No. 1 fly-half in world rugby. But he is so rarely able to be at his best these days.

If he cannot stay on the field for a decent length of time, he cannot play himself into the form that makes him so dangerous. Additionally, if he is not playing, the All Blacks can hardly justify picking him; he has not been able to show that he is still better than the other options available.

Whether he wears the black jersey again or not, his place among the All Black greats is secure. Of the past decade, only Richie McCaw can claim to have had a more illustrious career and many claim him to be the best ever.

Late last year, the Otago Daily Times rated Carter as the fourth greatest All Black ever. Only McCaw, Colin Meads and Jonah Lomu rated higher, while he finished just in front of George Nepia and Michael Jones. That is illustrious company to be in.

In another list this year, Wynne Gray of The New Zealand Herald rated Carter as the fifth best of the post-World War II All Blacks. Again it was Lomu, McCaw and Meads, along with Sean Fitzpatrick, who rated ahead of him, while Michael Jones and Ian Kirkpatrick came in just behind him. Again, illustrious company to be in.

On both lists Lomu was the only back to rate higher than Carter and no fly-half rated higher than him. Grant Fox finished as the second-placed fly-half on the ODT's list, finishing 23rd overall, while no other was included in Wynne Gray's top 15.

He would likely feature similarly on a worldwide list. There are many fly-halves who have caught the public's imagination throughout the years: Barry John, Michael Lynagh, Jonny Wilkinson, Mark Ella, Phil Bennett, Stephen Larkham, Naas Botha and Hugo Porta, just to name a few.

But none of these men possessed quite the same all-round game at the high level Carter did. 

Unfortunately, he probably will not be around as a player to show us this game much longer. So appreciate him, while you still can.

It is a shame when careers have to end. But what a career it has been. 

How lucky are we that we have been able to watch it unfold?

New Zealand centre Conrad Smith has been a member of two World Cup squads: the 2011 champions and the ill-fated 2007 quarter-finalists. Despite the results of each, he recently claimed that the 2007 team was the better squad of the two.

In reality, such comparisons are near impossible. They do, however, make for an interesting debate. 

Perhaps Smith is not too far off the truth; the 2007 All Blacks may very well have been a more talented bunch than the team that won the World Cup four years later. It was a World Cup that was lost after trying to be too clever off the field and some bad luck against France in Cardiff.

No two words are more synonymous with that 2007 campaign than reconditioning and rotation. The selectors developed a master plan in the lead up to the Cup, which saw their players play limited roles in the Super 14 that year. Instead, they preferred to allow them to obtain peak physical condition in training.

Likewise, they decided rather than playing a top line-up every week, they would rotate their players and develop if it were needed.

In theory, they were good ideas; in practice, not so much.

The reconditioning programme left the players physically fit, but not match fit. They went into the World Cup underdone and played like it. This was not helped by the rotation policy, which had prevented solid combinations being built prior to the event. Even during the tournament, they were intent on rotating their players, making for some questionable selections at crucial times.

They were a team that looked disjointed, and they did not fire in the way they had the two years previously.

It was this, as much as anything, that caused them to come unstuck. Four years later, they stayed away from the two "r" words and got the job done.

The 2007 All Blacks were raging hot favourites heading into the World Cup. Even during it, it was hard to see them being beaten.

Their tight five was as good as the All Blacks have had during the professional era. Tony Woodcock, Anton Oliver and Carl Hayman made up an intimidating front row—powerful scrummagers who were hard-working around the park and strong in the tight.

In the locks, they had two athletic men who excelled at lineout time in Ali Williams and Chris Jack.

They were a formidable group. Behind them, Richie McCaw, at the peak of his physical powers, led a loose-forward trio that also featured the industrious Rodney So'oialo and the hard-hitting Jerry Collins.

If one was to find a critique among this bunch, it might be their lack of ball-carrying ability. As good as So'oialo and Collins were, they were not in the same class as Kieran Read and Jerome Kaino at the next Cup. Kaino was arguably the best player at the 2011 World Cup, and his ability to take the ball forward would have been huge four years earlier, while Read's ball skills would have been equally important.

Other than this, it would be hard not to favour the 2007 forward pack against the 2011 vintage, particularly in the tight and at the set piece. The 2011 pack was perhaps more mobile, but the strength of the 2007 front row is hard to look past.

The backs provide greater contrast. In 2007, they were based around exciting, skilful players. The dynamic nine-10 pairing of Byron Kelleher and Dan Carter had Nick Evans available as cover for Carter. Outside them, Luke McAlister and Aaron Mauger were equally good second five-eighths, both skilful players capable of taking the gaps.

Out wide, think of Joe Rokocoko, Sitiveni Sivivatu and Doug Howlett, with the reliable Leon MacDonald at the back. Smith filled the No. 13 jersey until he succumbed to injury, at which point the selectors took the unprecedented move of shifting Mils Muliaina into the midfield as cover.

It was unquestionably a talented group. Carter at the top of his game, a dangerous all-round scrum-half inside him and two second five-eighths who, on their day, were as good as any in the world at the time. That an in-form Rico Gear did not even make the squad shows the quality of the wings, while Muliaina and MacDonald were two of the best full-backs of their generation.

The 2011 side, however, was more solid. Cory Jane and Richard Kahui were both outstanding, skilful, safe players, but neither would have fit into the dynamic 2007 approach. It is likely Hosea Gear and Sitiveni Sivivatu would have been preferred if that approach had been taken a second time.

Likewise, it was recognised that they needed to keep a strong combination in the midfield and not experiment with players in these two key positions. Ma'a Nonu and Conrad Smith brought experience that was lacking from the 2007 back line and formed a rock-solid pairing.

The famous first five-eighth injury plague of 2011 saw four different men used, while Piri Weepu was not quite the dynamic player Kelleher was, despite being outstanding in his own way after Carter's injury.

So which was better? Talent-wise, it is tough to see past the 2007 team. Carter at the top of his game, despite carrying an injury that forced him from the field in the quarter-final. By 2011, he was still playing good rugby, but he was not quite the same penetrative attacking threat as earlier in his career.

The depth out wide probably gives the 2007 team a slight edge too. Although this is perhaps not surprising, given the 2007 campaign was built around developing depth.

There is so much more to winning rugby games and World Cups, though. It is as much about your mental approach, your tactics and your experience. In these categories, the 2011 side trumps its predecessor.

By 2011, there was a recognition that it was okay to win ugly. That, at the end of the day, it mattered not how they won, just that they won. The 2007 campaign was huge in New Zealand coming to this realisation. Not just the coaching staff, but players such as Woodcock, McCaw, Mealamu and Smith, all of whom had been there and done it by the time they found themselves under pressure in the 2011 final.

Perhaps this is being too harsh. It is easy to say in hindsight that the 2007 team should have taken a drop kick when trailing by two points. They instead went for the strategy of forcing the French to infringe and winning a penalty.

The tactic semi-worked. There is no doubt the close-in defenders were a mile offside, at times tackling the All Black forwards as they were picking up the ball. This happened multiple times. However, referee Wayne Barnes appeared to swallow his whistle and did not blow the penalty, meaning the All Blacks came unstuck.

This is not to blame the referee, only to say that it would be harsh to blame the players for their tactics. They were not to know that the penalty was not coming, particularly when France were so blatantly infringing. Even with the infamous forward pass and yellow card, they probably would have scraped through had a penalty been given.

But it was not. By 2011, New Zealand had learnt that sometimes you have to take the referee out of the equation. They had adopted the drop kick as part of their game, and despite using it sparingly, would use it when necessary. If that team was faced with the situation the 2007 team was, it would have been no surprise to see them take a different approach.

It was winning that had become important, not necessarily winning while playing attractive rugby. The team of 2005-2007 had been so dominant they had rarely been pushed in tight games. They were a team that liked to throw the ball around and won the majority of their games convincingly. It was often suggested that they did not know how to close out tight games, and perhaps this was right.

The 2011 team was more polished, more prepared and, most importantly, more composed. 

Once again facing France, this time in the final, the 2011 team showed great patience in the second half, and they did not enjoy their usual dominance. After having just five points to show for having France under the pump for most of the first half, the second half seemed to be played between the two 10-metre lines, with neither team looking like scoring.

Four years previously, this may have meant panic stations for the All Blacks. They may have gone looking for the ball out of desperation, which would have led to them being penalised. But this time they did not. They fanned out, stayed onside and, despite their wealth of possession, France could not find a hole in what was a very well-organised defence.

It makes you appreciate how many factors go into winning a World Cup. The 2007 team may very well have been a more talented group than the 2011 one. You could at the very least argue that it is hard to say one was clearly more talented than the other. 

But it was the experience, patience, preparation and ability to learn from their mistakes that was so crucial for the team of 2011 and the ultimate difference between the two. This acts as just another reminder ahead of the 2015 World Cup that talent alone does not always get the job done.

New Zealand fly-half Aaron Cruden has confessed his embarrassment after the episode that resulted in him being kicked out of the All Blacks squad for their upcoming clashes with Argentina and South Africa.

Cruden missed the team flight to South America after indulging in a drinking session and has admitted he is unashamedly embarrassed in a statement released by the New Zealand Rugby Union (h/t Eurosport.com):

I am deeply embarrassed by this lack of judgement and have never been more disappointed in myself.

I carry the burden of shame and disappointment and I am deeply apologetic to my team, to my family, and also the New Zealand public.

I have no excuses. I accept full responsibility for my actions and the penalty of missing the next two games, and I will work with New Zealand Rugby to undertake any other disciplinary action to work through this situation.

The New Zealand team were initially due to fly out to Argentina on Saturday, but after some issues with their plane, they were stuck in Auckland until Sunday. All Blacks coach Steve Hansen admitted Cruden had subsequently gone out drinking on the Saturday night, branding his actions “extremely out of character,” per BBC Sport.

Cruden’s faux pas comes at an unfortunate time for New Zealand, who are currently six points clear in the race for the Rugby Championship. The All Blacks could sew up the title with victory against the Pumas, who are bottom of the standings.

For Cruden—who has been replaced in the squad by Crusaders No. 10 Tom Taylor—it’s an extremely unfortunate occurrence and, for the time being, he looks unlikely to add to the 35 caps he’s accrued in the iconic black jersey so far.

The All Blacks have a plethora of top-class options for the No. 10 jersey, not least Beauden Barrett, who was already pressing Cruden hard for a starting role before the latter's misdemeanour.

But players, like any of us, can make errors of judgement, and while Cruden is in a position of supreme privilege and great responsibility, this shouldn’t be the curtain call on his international career. Radio host Paul Flynn thinks the 25-year-old should be cut a little bit of slack:

To all those on their high horse - @aaron_cruden is a young guy and has made a mistake like most of us have at some stage.

— Paul Flynn (@FlynnyLive) September 22, 2014

It’d certainly be a shame if Cruden was perpetually ostracised from the All Blacks setup, for he is an exceptional player. So much so that he’s been touted by many to replace Dan Carter when the legendary New Zealand fly-half hangs up his boots.

Naturally, Cruden is a player who has a lot to learn on the pitch and as this whole incident emphasises, off it too. But for New Zealand, hopefully this will be an anomalous bump in the road in what could potentially be a distinguished and trophy-laden international career.

Halfway through the 2014 Rugby Championship and heading into Round 4, New Zealand have already begun to stamp their usual authority all over the competition. They will have the chance to further expand their lead against South Africa on Sunday morning.

Both teams have made changes for Sunday's clash—forced or otherwise. Lionsrugby.com passes on head coach Steve Hansen's comments that the All Blacks will replace the injured Liam Messam with Steve Luatua on the flank, and will also bring in Jeremy Thrush for Simon Whitelock, who is still out with a rib problem.

A further change comes at fly-half, where Aaron Cruden has been handed the No. 10 shirt ahead of Hurricanes player Beauden Barrett.

Heyneke Meyer's South African side have made just one change from the team that narrowly missed out 24-23 in the last round to Australia, but it is an important one. Meyer has prompted 20-year-old Handre Pollard to spearhead the Springboks' attack ahead of Morne Steyn.

Regarding the young man, Meyer told reporters: "Handre has the right skill set for how we want to approach this game." This means we should expect to see more ball-in-hand-orientated tactics, with the South Africans keeping possession rather than focusing on kicking the ball forward.

Despite having experienced heads around him—notably South Africa captain Jean de Villiers, as he celebrates his century of caps—Pollard's inexperience will show against the New Zealand's strong defensive line, and the All Blacks will pressure the South Africans into mistakes, making it impossible for them to play to their original tactics.

There has been a lot of talk over the summer about the All Blacks' demise—discussions about whether their dominance at the top has been waning—but their current form proves it to be nonsense. When they limped to a 12-12 draw with Australia in the opening round of the Rugby Championship in Sydney last month, they answered those critics by thumping them 51-20 the following week.

This prompted high praise from The Telegraph's Steve James: "The world champions and No. 1-ranked side are not just in fine fettle. They are in devastating fettle," he proclaimed. Indeed, the All Blacks have been in great form of late and will look to carry that into Sunday's fixture.

Hansen, speaking to the press, was cautious about being over-enthusiastic, though, despite his excitement: "It's not about talking it up to the newspapers...but an opportunity for a top-two clash is exciting," per allblacks.com.

In recent years, the All Blacks have dominated their South African rivals. In the last 10 games between the two sides, New Zealand have proved more successful, winning eight games. The last game the Springboks won was an 18-5 victory in Port Elizabeth back in August 2009. Even then, however, New Zealand had fielded a weakened side in preparation for the approaching World Cup.

After a narrow loss to Australia last round, South Africa will be looking to come back with gusto against their biggest rivals. Despite this, they haven't beaten New Zealand for three years, and due to a lack of experience in their front line, and the fact that the All Blacks are in imperious form, it is a struggle to see them doing so on Sunday.

New Zealand have a great opportunity to cement their position at the top of the table and almost tie up this year's Rugby Championship. Expect them to do just that.

All statistics courtesy of Statsguru, ESPNscrum.com unless otherwise noted.

New Zealand did just enough to outlast Argentina in a defensive and mistake-ridden 2014 Rugby Championship clash.

The All Blacks eventually won 28-9, although the game proved a lot closer than the 19-point difference would suggest.

The All Blacks found it tough to break down a resolute Argentina defensive line, as well as dealing with treacherous conditions, marked by heavy rain in the first half.

That is the game at McLean Park, a great win for the @AllBlacks and a strong effort from @unionargentina #NZLvARG pic.twitter.com/Zs35oX5VDv

— All Blacks (@AllBlacks) September 6, 2014

The opening period was defined by how the Pumas frustrated New Zealand. They stymied the All Blacks by consistently denying them the space to get out and play from deep.

Argentina's approach also featured a number of drop-kicks to keep the All Blacks at the wrong end of the pitch. This stifling game plan forced many New Zealand errors.

The half-time statistics were particularly painful reading for the All Blacks, as Ruckin Good Stats revealed:

Halftime: New Zealand conceded 12 turnovers, 1 @ b/down, lineout 6 hand errs, 1 forced into touch, 3 in open play #NZLvARG

— Ruckin Good Stats (@ruckingoodstats) September 6, 2014

The half-dozen handling errors were a clear indicator of how well Argentina's approach worked early on. So was the fact that the All Blacks didn't take the lead until the 16th minute.

Their opening points came courtesy of a Beauden Barrett penalty kick. It was the start of a superb showing from Barrett. That kick was soon answered by a penalty conversion from Argentina's Nicolas Sanchez.

However, the All Blacks asserted control via a superb example of counter-attacking rugby. It came from a break sparked by a clever kick nudged through the stubborn Argentina defensive line by Barrett.

Eventually, the ball was worked to fleet-footed powerhouse Julian Savea. He scored his 25th try in as many matches. It was ample reward for Barrett's ingenuity.

That gave the All Blacks an 8-3 lead. But fly-half Sanchez soon struck back again with his second penalty kick to make the score 8-6.

That's how the first half seemed destined to end, which would have suited Argentina. But the All Blacks had one more piece of brilliance left before the break.

They stole the pill from an Argentina scrum. Aaron Smith fed the ball to Barrett. His acceleration and nifty first move to evade a tackle combined for a superb sight.

At top speed, Barrett slipped a smart reverse pass to Liam Messam. He plunged his way over for the try. Sadly, Barrett missed his kick, leaving New Zealand with a 13-6 lead at the interval.

In the second half, the rain eased off which allowed the All Blacks to work the ball more and build some sustained possession. They didn't take long to capitalise.

Once again, Barrett was at the heart of things. A line-out produced some nice combination passing from Smith and Barrett. The latter then released Savea with a brilliant piece of quick thinking and deception.

Barrett used his eyes to look off would-be tacklers and draw attention away from Savea. He looked one way and passed the other, via a subtle flick of the hands.

Barrett didn't pass directly to Savea. Instead, he passed into a space and simply counted on his team-mate being there. Savea obliged and took the ball on the run to stride in for his second try.

At this point, Barrett's kicking woes resurfaced. He missed his conversion to leave the score at 18-6. Barrett's inaccurate kicks were the only blotch on his otherwise thrilling performance.

Awful conditions a huge factor. But All Blacks GK% is currently running at 29%. 2 from 7.

— Paul Williams (@thepaulwilliams) September 6, 2014

After Sanchez added his third penalty goal for Argentina's final points, it was no surprise that New Zealand turned to someone else to execute the kicking chores.

Colin Slade converted his first kick to make the score 21-9. There was still time for one more display of speed and strength from the All Blacks.

It came courtesy of Aaron Smith. He was set free from a scrum the All Blacks dominated thanks to the power of their forward pack. Slade's conversion wrapped up the points and sealed the game.

Smith deserved his score. While Barrett's efforts were highlight-worthy, Smith was the steady and efficient presence at the heart of everything the All Blacks did.

The All Blacks were certainly made to work for this win. Argentina would have earned some plaudits for such a rugged and committed display.

However, New Zealand's ability to win with room to spare, even when making mistakes, confirms the All Blacks' status as international rugby union's dominant force.