A contest for possession, go forward ball, move the ball to create space, exploit space, and finish by scoring tries. This would be my rugby coaching philosophy and what I am trying to achieve coaching at Club U21 level.
I would be doing the same if I was coaching a pro team.
To achieve this, the rules need to assist not hinder the opportunity for rhythm and flow, which I’m quite sure all readers of this column will appreciate.
The tackle/breakdown area is the all-important part of enabling continuity.
This year there is even more tinkering of the rules at the breakdown, which frustrates me. In my view, rugby over the last twelve months has been most entertaining to watch and this was evident throughout the 2011 Rugby World Cup where most teams’ objective appeared to be to play the game to score tries.
This I applaud.
The breakdown/tackle area of the game is something I understand because I coach it on a weekly basis and I also have the opportunity through the International Rugby Academy to view some of the best exponents of coaching the breakdown.
The two who immediately spring to mind are Scott Robertson from Canterbury and Ian MacDonald from the Lions franchise in South Africa.
Both these specialist coaches, who have completely different styles, seriously understand the rules as they are written and as the referees blow it.
If you don’t understand the rules, and don’t understand the interpretation, then you’re wasting your time in either coaching or endeavouring to compete in this area of the game.
The all-important point is to understand what the referee is looking for. Nobody can see everything, but there must be a sequence of what the eye is searching for.
In my view, that sequence should be as follows:
1. Watch the tackler roll away to allow the tackled ball carrier to place the ball.
2. Next, watch the contest for that ball. Does the tackled ball carrier allow a contest or does he hold on?
3. Next, determine if the player/s on his feet is allowed to win the ball. Is he legal (i.e., was he deemed to be the tackler or tackle assist and was a ruck formed when the player attempted to recover the ball). If so, did he enter through the gate?
This is what a referee should be doing.
But many will miss point 2, which is most vital to retaining this area as a contest. Many referees are pre-occupied with point 3, missing the essence of the game: the contest.
I must say there are many spectators who yell from the side-lines with no knowledge of what they are yelling about.
Last year, I was in the USA on IRANZ business sitting quietly in an Irish bar in San Diego at 6am watching a live Tri Series match between the Boks and the All Blacks.
There were a number of South Africans at the bar who clearly misunderstood the tackle law, so eventually my frustration got the better of me and I demonstrated the tackle law on the floor of the bar.
The match became much more enjoyable to all concerned and I couldn’t help but think how simple and transparent this area could be with a little simple clarification.
If the referee is focused on point 3, penalties will be the result because there will always be a reason for blowing the whistle and this will destroy the game and force coaches to adjust their game plan to avoid this area to the determent of rhythm and flow.
If a referee focuses on point 2 for the first two or three breakdowns, a great contest will develop and the players who have the best technical skills in this area will be the victors.
This, of course, has become a modern day technique where the player requires a low centre of gravity achieved by having his feet wide apart and his back low and arched over the ball and genuinely attempts to rip the ball free from the soon-to-be congested area.
The problem I see is referees are too busy looking at the players arriving at the breakdown (and where they come from) than actually watching the player who is trying to win the ball and whether he is being hindered by the tackled ball-carrier.
That player on the ground with the ball is not allowed to hold onto the ball.
If this was refereed more vigilantly it would result in a lot more turnovers and significantly more continuity – and with continuity comes tries.
It all starts at the top, they say.
Therefore, I challenge Greg Peters, CEO of SANZAR, to be a businessman and proactive, rather than an administrator and reactive.
It requires strong leadership to drive the game in the direction that it needs to be played.
If Greg Peters wishes to confirm my view on the above, then he indeed should summon those people who are instrumental in this area – such as a coach who coaches the breakdown from South Africa, Australia and New Zealand and the best three exponents at the breakdown, like Pocock, McCaw and Brussow, along with Lyndon Bray, head of referees.
I am quite sure that between them, within one module, like we do at IRANZ every day, consensus would be achieved and the game would be much better for it.
Just to reinforce my point, in the first weekend of Super Rugby 2012, there were 59 penalties, 13 tries and 3 drop goals.
Surely we can do better by improving the ratio between tries and penalties.
Roar columnist and former All Black great, Murray Mexted, is the Managing Director of The International Rugby Academy (IRANZ), the leading global Rugby Academy. IRANZ offer an independent high performance pathway for coaches, players and teams worldwide. More details here.
Question
Guest
I call on Murray to explain the tinkering of rules he mentions, a statement which forms the basis of his entire piece. Last time I checked SANZAR ain't changed anything, but have focused on specific areas (the Big 5) to promote a brand of rugby which statistically is what we want to see (quicker ruck ball, more efficient scrum engagements, punishing negative defensive tactics at the breakdown). So once again, please can Murray explain.
allblackfan
Guest
damn wish I was there!!
Mex
Guest
Players arriving at the breakdown who lose their feet/go to ground will be focused on by referees.
Mex
Guest
Players arriving at the breakdown who lose their feet/go to ground will be focused on by referees.
Chris
Guest
I know Mex has played rugby at a decent level and I haven't, but I think his focus is little off. As things stand I think the (pro) refs are pretty good at managing the half meter around the ball. The problem is the area just outside that area, typically on the attacking teams side of the tackle. There are too many bodies on the ground impeding the support players from removing the first man over the ball. One of the great improvements in the interpretations this year concerns support players going off their feet. It seems that the powers that be have accepted that support players will lose their feet from time to time - the thing that has been introduced this year is that support players that go off their feet ("legally"), have to get up, giving the defending team an opportunity to counter-ruck. The effect of all of this is that the ball will be contestable far more of the time and that is good thing.
Moaman
Guest
So well-constructed and sensible; makes me wonder if it was ghost-written!
Dublin Dave
Guest
Was there anybody there with a movie camera? It would make a great Youtube moment!
WQ
Guest
Onor, My experience with non-professional Rugby would suggest to me that very few players have ever studied the rule book! However having said that, they are all experts, just ask them.
WQ
Guest
Mex, yes I agree probably a fairly poor choice of words, as jeznez quite rightly points out, I should have sad "a little tired" Getting "knocked up" is definitely something you try to avoid during after match functions and Rugby trips!
jeznez
Roar Guru
Gatesy, as a THP I would have to say that scrums are a reward not a penalty. You give me the choice of letting the ball go quickly into space where I'll have not chance of catching a quicker player or killing the ball and giving up a scrum feed and I will take the scrum every single time and have a crack at taking it against the head. Any dominant front rower will take it every time, and a forward gaining parity at the scrum will offend if it brings his team from disadvantage back to set piece.
soapit
Guest
well there you go. i always suspected i had something wrong there (seeing as the refs always policed it that way). makes rucking even more important then to get their hands off it as there no legal reason for them to do it.
johnny-boy
Guest
I agree about the cause PK but not so sure about the solution. It's the complexity of the laws that is the probelm imo. There are so many of them that players and coaches know that no ref is going to be able to ref any game fairly and squarely all the time so I believe they go hammer and tongs hoping to confuse the refs in to letting it slide cos they are not sure which rule applies and at what time, it's happening all so fast. The Crusaders are shameless masters at accidentally stumbling over the ruck on to their knees to accidentally seal the ball off . It's so obvious it's almost embrassing watching a ref looking like a stunned mullet at it every time wondering what to do and yes the Reds have picked up on this and push their luck with the very fast 'flat' passes. If it was simpler to it would be easier to ref and less easy to push the boundaries all the time. But don't worry I dont expect a ref to agree that making the ref less important would be a good idea
jeznez
Roar Guru
Pete, even at my very low level we coach and train to get away with everything we can. I've got no problem with ref's getting tougher on us for it, I completely see that as the referee's job.
jeznez
Roar Guru
Mez, it means the same in Oz, apparently WQ just gets a little tired...
Onor
Guest
Hay... after the years and years of issues of refs.. I'm wondering.. Do the players themselves understand the rules??
Mex
Guest
Well spoken except "getting knocked up" in my language means getting pregnant. Are we talking during or after the game?
simon
Guest
I would like to see a trial of making all ruck infringements short arm penalties (apart from foul or dangerous play).
Mex
Guest
The law states that if a player on his feet has his hands on the ball (legally) before the ruck is formed then he is allowed to continue trying to turn over the ball. If someone is stopping this from happening then that person should be penalised. Mex
Gatesy
Guest
Here's a crazy thought....The majority of players who spend their time in rucks are most likely forwards (I don't have any stats about it, but I'm sure I'm right). Forget penalising rucks and make all ruck infringements short arm penalties (other for for obvious foul or dangerous play) If your captain takes a quick tap, and there are a bunch of forwards laying on the deck, that might create some interesing attacking situations. Alternatively, set a scrum to the defending team whenever a tackled player holds onto the ball (better still, bring back rucking and clean outs).If the ref doesn't see an infringement, but the ball isn't coming out, let the scrum go to the team going forward. Hopefully, the forwards will get sick of packing endless scrums and frankly, I would rather see a scrum restart than a penalty kick. No doubt these are seen as simplistic and clever coaches would find ways to abuse them, but anything is better than the system we have now. Basically, we have applied band-aid surgery to the problem and the more we tinker with the problem, the worse the spectacle. If Rugby ever hopes to be taken seriously by the great unwashed public, then we have to speed up the breakdown and make it an absolute priority to get continuity into the contest.
Sam Taulelei
Guest
Actually Brett the focus changed for the 2010 season and last year the referees backtracked and favoured the defending side more, probably to win favour with the selection panel for world cup appointments. If referees return to what they focused and ruled on in 2010 things will be fine.