ALL GAMES ARE equal but some are more equal than others. What separates them is the consequences of winning or losing — or, to put it another way, the ‘occasion’. While it might not seem like a powerful force, it can cause a few tornadoes to spin inside the minds of players.
As the occasion becomes greater, so too does the associated pressure and this changes things dramatically. Whether it’s the stress of kicking the winning goal, making a perfectly timed pass, or just looking good on TV, pressure can be omnipresent and omnipotent, so it’s best to have it on your side if at all possible.
In knockout matches such as the looming Rugby World Cup quarter-finals, mental skills to pacify this pressure will be more important than ever. Without such mental traits, maintaining poise and making quality decisions becomes less and less likely. Favourites can quickly become failures, just like New Zealand did in 2007 when firstly they lost themselves, and then the match.
Winning knockout matches is more about doing to opponents what they would least like to receive, rather than doing what your team would most like to do. Surprisingly, these two ideals aren’t always aligned.
Also, given the exaggerated fear of losing in these games, the mental anguish of conceding scores is magnified somewhat. So while three points might not seem like much to the scoring side, its impact on the opponents is a better reflection of its true value.
Advertisement
Just look at how many drop goals are attempted in cup matches compared to league games. Equally these same drop goals are adjudged to be signs of composure in knockout matches, but of impatience in league games, yet nothing has really changed except the mindset.
Cup matches are all about momentum and it requires putting points on the scoreboard. Rugby is a zero-sum game, and failing to convert gilt-edged opportunities into points is like allowing your opponents to score. While it’s not always evident from the scoreboard, every attack always results in a victory, whether it’s for the attackers or the defenders.
Wales’ loss to Australia last weekend was a perfect example of this. For a period during the second half, Wales temporarily had a two man advantage and yet still couldn’t score. The scoreboard hadn’t changed, but everything else had. Welsh dejection and Australian invigoration seemed to be poles apart and from that point onwards, the result was never in doubt.
Four years ago when Ireland lost to Wales in the RWC 2011 quarter final, the Irish team came unstuck mostly as a result of the pressurised situation that caused plenty of wayward decision making. After Wales had run into an early 7-0 lead, Ireland were stunned and compounded this by unnecessarily rolling the dice and consecutively kicking to the corner instead of attempting three points.
Although it was windy, making the kicks trickier than normal, this suited the Welsh for several reasons:
Doubling down on losses so early in the game indicated to Wales that they could probably infringe more than usual without conceding points
Driven lineouts are actually quite rarely successful, and especially so when both teams are still fresh
Rebuffing Ireland would greatly erode Irish confidence, sowing regret and raising doubts
That last point isn’t nonsense either. Daniel Kahneman – the Nobel Laureate and Behavioural Psychologist – suggests that ‘loss aversion’ is a cognitive bias wired into nearly all of us. It implies that the despair from losing something is greater than the joy from winning something equal, and it’s this discontent that causes an overreaction to gamble and chase sunk costs, whatever the odds.
As such, regular folk can quickly go from being risk averse to risk seeking, just because they hate losing, even temporarily. In cup rugby, avoiding these emotional pitfalls is as important as catching and passing.
Considering the alternative to what actually happened on that day, had Ireland relentlessly chipped away at the Welsh lead, perhaps they could have diluted their initial superiority where it mattered — on the scoreboard. A 10-3 deficit at half time in the RWC 2011 quarterfinal could plausibly have been 7-6 or indeed 7-9, greatly altering how the game unfolded in terms of tactics and pressures.
Despite being under huge stress physically and territorially, Wales were never under pressure on the scoreboard. While the final score of 22-10 didn’t reflect Ireland’s efforts, it did reflect their awareness and intellect on the day.
Facing into this weekend against Argentina, it’s likely that Ireland are more psychologically robust this time around, but the Pumas are a quality side who know how to play it tough and smart.
Irish supporters won’t have forgotten how well Juan Martin Hernandez can build a score for his team. Back in 2007, he notched up three drop goals, two of which game in the first half as Argentina steam rolled Ireland 30-15.
This weekend is set to be a game of many intriguing battles, but as ever, the winner will likely be the team that stays focused on winning the war.
'Failing to convert gilt-edged opportunities is like allowing your opponents to score'
ALL GAMES ARE equal but some are more equal than others. What separates them is the consequences of winning or losing — or, to put it another way, the ‘occasion’. While it might not seem like a powerful force, it can cause a few tornadoes to spin inside the minds of players.
As the occasion becomes greater, so too does the associated pressure and this changes things dramatically. Whether it’s the stress of kicking the winning goal, making a perfectly timed pass, or just looking good on TV, pressure can be omnipresent and omnipotent, so it’s best to have it on your side if at all possible.
In knockout matches such as the looming Rugby World Cup quarter-finals, mental skills to pacify this pressure will be more important than ever. Without such mental traits, maintaining poise and making quality decisions becomes less and less likely. Favourites can quickly become failures, just like New Zealand did in 2007 when firstly they lost themselves, and then the match.
Winning knockout matches is more about doing to opponents what they would least like to receive, rather than doing what your team would most like to do. Surprisingly, these two ideals aren’t always aligned.
Also, given the exaggerated fear of losing in these games, the mental anguish of conceding scores is magnified somewhat. So while three points might not seem like much to the scoring side, its impact on the opponents is a better reflection of its true value.
Just look at how many drop goals are attempted in cup matches compared to league games. Equally these same drop goals are adjudged to be signs of composure in knockout matches, but of impatience in league games, yet nothing has really changed except the mindset.
Cup matches are all about momentum and it requires putting points on the scoreboard. Rugby is a zero-sum game, and failing to convert gilt-edged opportunities into points is like allowing your opponents to score. While it’s not always evident from the scoreboard, every attack always results in a victory, whether it’s for the attackers or the defenders.
Wales’ loss to Australia last weekend was a perfect example of this. For a period during the second half, Wales temporarily had a two man advantage and yet still couldn’t score. The scoreboard hadn’t changed, but everything else had. Welsh dejection and Australian invigoration seemed to be poles apart and from that point onwards, the result was never in doubt.
Four years ago when Ireland lost to Wales in the RWC 2011 quarter final, the Irish team came unstuck mostly as a result of the pressurised situation that caused plenty of wayward decision making. After Wales had run into an early 7-0 lead, Ireland were stunned and compounded this by unnecessarily rolling the dice and consecutively kicking to the corner instead of attempting three points.
Although it was windy, making the kicks trickier than normal, this suited the Welsh for several reasons:
That last point isn’t nonsense either. Daniel Kahneman – the Nobel Laureate and Behavioural Psychologist – suggests that ‘loss aversion’ is a cognitive bias wired into nearly all of us. It implies that the despair from losing something is greater than the joy from winning something equal, and it’s this discontent that causes an overreaction to gamble and chase sunk costs, whatever the odds.
As such, regular folk can quickly go from being risk averse to risk seeking, just because they hate losing, even temporarily. In cup rugby, avoiding these emotional pitfalls is as important as catching and passing.
Considering the alternative to what actually happened on that day, had Ireland relentlessly chipped away at the Welsh lead, perhaps they could have diluted their initial superiority where it mattered — on the scoreboard. A 10-3 deficit at half time in the RWC 2011 quarterfinal could plausibly have been 7-6 or indeed 7-9, greatly altering how the game unfolded in terms of tactics and pressures.
Despite being under huge stress physically and territorially, Wales were never under pressure on the scoreboard. While the final score of 22-10 didn’t reflect Ireland’s efforts, it did reflect their awareness and intellect on the day.
Facing into this weekend against Argentina, it’s likely that Ireland are more psychologically robust this time around, but the Pumas are a quality side who know how to play it tough and smart.
Irish supporters won’t have forgotten how well Juan Martin Hernandez can build a score for his team. Back in 2007, he notched up three drop goals, two of which game in the first half as Argentina steam rolled Ireland 30-15.
This weekend is set to be a game of many intriguing battles, but as ever, the winner will likely be the team that stays focused on winning the war.
How long will Paul O’Connell be sidelined for? We asked a leading physiotherapist
Irish descendent Ayerza and the Pumas are coming for Ireland’s scrum
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
Argentina Ireland Rugby World Cup rwc 15 RWC 2015 Under Pressure World Cup