New Zealand have everything that England do not... but we would be mad to copy them

• England were knocked out of the Rugby World Cup at the first hurdle 
• Stuart Lancaster's side became first host nation ever to exit at Pool stage
• A five-strong panel will sit down to review England's woeful performance
• New Zealand are currently the standard-bearers in world rugby
• The All Blacks face South Africa in the World Cup semi-final on Saturday
• Rugby World Cup 2015: Click here for all the latest from the RWC

By Sir Clive Woodward for the Daily Mail

Published: 16:30 EST, 23 October 2015 | Updated: 19:13 EST, 23 October 2015

Admire, appreciate and applaud... but we will never topple New Zealand by simply copying them. The New Zealand rugby team is a special thing, arguably the best sporting team in history. I love rugby too much not to appreciate what they bring to our sport.

Steven Pokere's No 13 New Zealand jersey is the most cherished one I own of those I swapped as a player. It came after England beat New Zealand 15-9 at Twickenham in 1983.

My most cherished win as a coach was beating New Zealand in Wellington in 2003 when we were down to 13 men at one stage. Our pack that day was described as 'White Orcs on steroids'. Brilliant. That win was bigger than the World Cup for me — that is the esteem I hold for New Zealand Rugby.

Former England coach Sir Clive Woodward believes New Zealand's rugby team is arguably the best in history

Steven Pokere's New Zealand jersey is in Woodward's possession after a swap, and he still cherishes it

You only need to speak with legendary All Black Sean Fitzpatrick for five minutes to understand why they have been the dominant team through world rugby history. His pride and passion burns in his eyes and their performance against France last weekend was a stark reminder of how devastating they can be.

They were so accurate, fast and strong. Players with 100 caps, players with five, it made no difference and I will be surprised if they do not serve up another memorable performance against South Africa on Saturday.

Having said that, English rugby spends far too much time looking at New Zealand. As a player I remember coaches showing us their highlights reel all the time, which I just didn't understand.

More recently Stuart Lancaster made a big push on 'culture' in the England team — which was just not needed — and often talked about this in reference to what the All Blacks do.

I was recently sent a book called Legacy, What the All Blacks Can Teach Us About The Business Of Life by James Kerr and the first thing I noticed on the back cover was a recommendation from Stuart Lancaster: 'Very insightful… I recommend it to all involved in developing high-performing teams in sport or business'.

I can't imagine a current New Zealand coach endorsing a book about English rugby like this.

Woodward's best memory as England coach was beating New Zealand - not winning the World Cup final

England are now explaining what they are doing in terms of what New Zealand do. England defend their over-use of the box kick by pointing towards statistics that say New Zealand actually kick the most; their policy on overseas players can apparently be justified because New Zealand adopt the same approach. They do not by the way, nobody else does. Copying in any business means coming second, at best. You have lost before you start.

My England team respected New Zealand hugely but we also did everything we could to dismantle the All Blacks myth. We used Prozone statistics to show how normal they are. I also stopped everyone calling them the All Blacks — they are New Zealand. We stopped the theatrics in front of the Haka, letting them get on with it before slowly taking our tracksuits off to take the sting out of the build-up.

The most obvious difference between New Zealand and England is their fitness and skill levels. They lead in other areas also, but their excellence elsewhere is underpinned by these foundations.

Jonah Lomu (centre) and his team-mates perform a haka after beating Fiji in Kuala Lumpur in September 1998

Former All Black Sean Fitzpatrick talks about every New Zealander being a stakeholder in the jersey

Jim Greenwood's Total Rugby is the coaching philosophy I follow: from Henley Hawks to England it was about coaching and selecting 15 players with amazing skill levels. That was highlighted by Trevor Woodman, Steve Thompson and Phil Vickery in our front row. We were an all-court team.

In 2003, England were the fittest team in the world after following a programme designed by Dave Reddin. After I left he was sacked by the RFU. Lancaster had the opportunity to bring him back into the England set up, but the job went to someone who had never worked in rugby.

I felt England's conditioning was markedly inferior at this World Cup to some of the other Home Nations, let alone New Zealand.

It must never be about trying to slavishly copy New Zealand. Otherwise we might as well create our own Haka — it will be about as much use. What works for them, will not necessarily work for us, and by the time we do it as well as them, they will be on to the next thing.

When Australia beat England, they were playing like Australia should. The great Gus Pichot credits Argentina's resurgence to discounting how world rugby suggests they play, and instead playing the Argentina way, the Latin way. I would absolutely love to know what the current coaches believe playing 'like England' looks like. Organisationally and structurally we certainly can learn from New Zealand. We drastically underestimate how effective it is for the national team to have total compliance and support from the whole system as New Zealand do.

Fitzpatrick talks about every New Zealander being a stakeholder in the jersey. It is a powerful sentiment, one I believe in and love, but they convert this rhetoric into tangible action geared towards performance. Our sentiments remain as words written on a wall.

Woodward clutches the William Webb Ellis Trophy as he leaves the field after England's 2003 World Cup win

The big difference is that at every level — junior, club, provincial — everything is geared towards having a successful national team. We are more interested in maintaining good relations with the clubs, cutting deals at the national side's expense. All noses throughout New Zealand rugby are pointing in the same direction, so organisationally it means they are super competitive and focused.

Do not mistake me as being anti-club. They are so important to the success of the national side and the likes of Bath owner Bruce Craig, Saracens owner Nigel Wray and Exeter owner Tony Rowe are making huge contributions to English rugby.

But we are not truly together in this. New Zealand's focus on the national team is a huge contributor to the All Blacks' power and aura and is backed up by clear thinking and structures off the field.

Steve Hansen was not given the coaching job at New Zealand without prior experience; his CV is impressive

Ask yourself four simple questions: Would New Zealand select a rookie coach without any international experience? Look at Steve Hansen and Sir Graham Henry's CV before giving out the ultimate job.

Would New Zealand offer six-year contracts to a coaching team that after three years had won nothing?

Would New Zealand run an operation with zero international coaching experience throughout their entire organisation?

Who would New Zealand have selected to conduct a review of their international team?

Much has been written on RFU chief executive Ian Ritchie's selection for the panel to conduct the review. As a stakeholder in the shirt, I was staggered.

RFU Chief Executive Ian Ritchie has got far too close to the England rugby team for a man with no knowledge 

Ritchie has overseen England's worst World Cup ever and over the last four years has got far too close to the team for a man with zero rugby experience or knowledge, culminating in awarding six-year contracts to Lancaster and his coaching team.

He should not be allowed anywhere near the review, let alone leading it and choosing the panel. There is a total conflict of interest. Three of the five people on the panel have no experience in international rugby. There is no input or representation from the 12 Premiership clubs.

Meanwhile, Sir Ian McGeechan and Ian Metcalfe are also conflicted having helped select Lancaster four years ago. They are joining the panel with their minds already made up. It was the same four years ago when Nick Mallett and I were asked to apply for the job. I can handle others being picked over me but it has been made clear to me now that the decision had already been made before we walked into the room.

Ben Kay is an entirely suitable member of the review but elsewhere I would have asked Worcester director of rugby Dean Ryan to represent the clubs and Reddin to analyse the conditioning programme.

Stuart Lancaster's position as head coach of the England team will be heavily scrutinised by a five-man panel

Like Kay, Lawrence Dallaglio and Will Greenwood would be great candidates, especially if you are planning on interviewing players. Players certainly should not be talking to board members, they need to speak to fellow players or experienced coaches. As far as international coaching experience goes, yes, I would have loved to have been part of it but it was never going to happen. So they should have looked to the likes of Eddie Jones or Jake White, not the conflicted McGeechan.

Ritchie's team looks like a comfortable collection of friends coming together for a quiet chat. They are not true stakeholders; tough, angry, independent and dead set on making sure this never happens again. The RFU badly need to listen to the expert voices they have been blocking out.

Selection was a big problem for England on the field at this World Cup and that malaise is evident off it, too. In fact, the parallel is scary. The make-up of this panel highlights a conflict of interest by those selecting it. It is defensive, unimaginative and slow, with a clear remit of trying to limit the damage and paper over cracks they and their friends created. After 12 years of frustrating failure, England need to get on the front foot and be bold once again.

A dejected England team leave the field after losing to Australia 33-13 at the Rugby World Cup on October 3

Many have pointed to my own disappointment in the 1999 World Cup as evidence for why Lancaster and the coaching team should stay because we recovered to win four years later. It is wide of the mark for a number of reasons, one being I was two seasons into the role, not four.

The reality is everyone loses games. Henry and Hansen lost many with Wales and were ridiculed at the time. They also suffered a major disappointment with New Zealand at the 2007 World Cup and Henry also lost a series with the Lions in 2001.

If set up properly, this review had great potential. It should have asked whether Lancaster was the right choice four years ago and if he is the right person to take England forward. 

Is he the person who should be sitting in the coaches box at the Six Nations against a rejuvenated Scotland team in Edinburgh?

England let down their fans this summer, producing the worst World Cup performance by a host nation ever

If you had a credible director of rugby in place at the RFU, this would not even be necessary because he would be keeping tabs on the situation and updating every-one constantly, including the RFU council and the 12 Premiership clubs. In fact, we probably wouldn't be in this mess to begin with.

Now, if Lancaster and his coaching team stay, how much confidence can stakeholders, sponsors, players and Lancaster himself take knowing his future has been decided by such a compromised and limited panel?

Secondly, the bigger picture should be looked at. Why have England gone from leading the world and winning the World Cup to losing finalists, quarter-finalists and now third in their pool in successive World Cups?

Lawrence Dallaglio (pictured in 2003) would have been a great candidate to sit on the RFU panel

Do not let revenue figures cloud the fact there are some real problems and now a great opportunity missed. The clubs are heading in one direction, the players another and the RFU are compromising at England's expense. Let us not forget we have not been successful in the European Rugby Championship for some time now, either.

At these crossroads it is vital we move forward together. Clubs should be part of this, so too a representative for the players with the support of outstanding, independent sports leadership, someone like Lord Coe.

The most poignant lesson I learned from losing is you have no chance on the field if you are compromising off it, at best you will get lucky from time to time.

New Zealand's players understand their role as the inspiration for a nation and do not take it lightly

The no compromise approach does not make you popular — I have learned this and continue to do so — but it is so frustrating, because we have been compromising for 12 years. There have been a few moments of promise, but really they have been false starts and anomalies because we cannot back it up.

Along the road, good people who have made huge contributions to English rugby — Andy Robinson, Brian Ashton and Martin Johnson to name but three — have been hung out to dry. Sadder still, players have seen their entire England careers pass them by with nothing changing.

When it comes to international rugby, you are in the business of inspiring a nation.

New Zealand understand that does not come with compromise.

Comments (18)

Share what you think

• Newest
• Oldest
• Best rated
• Worst rated

 View all

The comments below have been moderated in advance.

 View all

The views expressed in the contents above are those of our users and do not necessarily reflect the views of MailOnline.

Add your comment

Enter your comment

By posting your comment you agree to our house rules.

Submit Comment Clear

Who is this week's top commenter? Find out now