Better Rugby Coaching / Better Rugby Coaching / The Huddle / new interpretations at the tackle / Latest Posts

RE: new interpretations at the tackle

didds — Tue, 23 Feb 2010 17:45:48 GMT

[quote][b]Ruckoff (23/02/2010)[/b][hr]
if rugby turns into a sport like basketball where missing becomes more significant than scoring it willbe a sad day for rugby.[/quote]

hear hear.

didds

RE: new interpretations at the tackle

Ruckoff — Tue, 23 Feb 2010 13:19:09 GMT

This game (Lions v Chiefs) was not a good example of the interpretations of the tackle or Super 14 rugby.

There has to be balance, like any sport if you attack at every option you leave yourself open.
The difference was the lack of kicking and run at all costs, similar to a barbarians game.

In its own way the game was just as bad as some of the the SHYTE served up in some of the 6N/ GP/ HK last yr's TriNations . Rugby isn't just about running....or kicking....or scrummaging....or rucking...or mauling...or line outs....or defence...it's about ALL of them, and there were way too many fundamentals missing from that 15 a side game of 7s.

I enjoying watching the physical battle on the gain line (which was non existent here), interesting stat was the Chiefs only had 24 rucks. Talk about gain line success rates, or non existent first up tackling.

if rugby turns into a sport like basketball where missing becomes more significant than scoring it will be a sad day for rugby.The excitement and celebration comes from rare times a try is scored rather than watching a game of try tennis. The reason why the roof came off in Cardiff when Wales played Scotland was because there should never be that number of points scored in the last 5 mins, if it had been like that for all of the game it would have diluted the pleasure.

If you want running rugby, watch/play league. I prefer an all round game with many facets of play.

Just because there are a lot of tries in a game doesn't mean it was a good game!

RE: new interpretations at the tackle

Red & Black fan — Mon, 22 Feb 2010 23:41:22 GMT

Fair comment, but as a paying punter I'd rather see that than the SH:doze:YTE served up in some of the 6N/ GP/ HK last yr's TriNations & even parts of the Lions tests...& as a coach, i want my charges to express themselves... in my understanding/ interpretation, the spirit of Rugby (as i imagine WWE sitting in rugby heaven, looking down benevolently/ malevontly on us as we endevour to play/ teach/ coach the game... :D :hehe: :) ) is about RUNNING with the ball in hand & scoring tries, while trying to prevent the opposition from doing the same, by fair means (mindless aerial ping pong, crash bash bore, defending a lead & arm wrestling is just FOUL in my coaching handbook!) If this produces a try fest, because two teams are being POSITIVE & playing with creativity, flair & intent, so much the better... difference of opinion but its all good- we can still have a few jars & glory in our wonderful game!

RE: new interpretations at the tackle

didds — Mon, 22 Feb 2010 23:28:43 GMT

[quote][b]Red & Black fan (22/02/2010)[/b][hr]anyone see the 19 try match ... although some might have issues with the defensive aspects on show in the scorelines[/quote]

I certainly do. Festival rugby... maybe... but a professional competitive match - 19 tries in 80 minutes with a pretty even split of tries scored ie not a runaway one sided affair? Something has to be seriously wrong there - these guys can tackle, we know - so 10 tries to 9 is frankly ridiculous. that's not "running rugby" - that's just basketball. You have the ball, you score, now we have the ball, we score.

didds

RE: new interpretations at the tackle

didds — Mon, 22 Feb 2010 23:28:11 GMT

RE: new interpretations at the tackle

Red & Black fan — Mon, 22 Feb 2010 22:34:49 GMT

Well, if this years S14 games are anything to go by in terms of try scoring & having a go (some basketball scores- anyone see the 19 try match between the Lions & the Chiefs! WHAT a game!...) then the new (or more importantly CORRECT) interpretation of the laws should see more positive play & less aerial ping pong... although some might have issues with the defensive aspects on show in the scorelines (for example how do you score 9 tries in a game & STILL LOSE?!) I think it's more the type of game i'd like my young players to be emulating, rather than some (please note, i said SOME!) of the fare being dished up in the heineken cup Guiness prem. & 6 Nations....

RE: new interpretations at the tackle

Ruckoff — Fri, 05 Feb 2010 13:29:14 GMT

After searching the IRB website for any changes or news on this and finding nothing, I have found the following article from Andre Watson, the South African Rugby Union’s manager of referees.

The strict application of Law in four key areas has seen a decline in the number of reset scrums and kicks in general play as well as an increase in tries, says Andre Watson.

A review of the first round of the FNB Varsity Cup matches and of pre-season Vodacom Super 14 warm-up matches has provided encouraging signs for a new refereeing focus.

“There is no way we have enough evidence to reach any definitive conclusions, but the early signs are interesting,” said Watson.

“Referees are focusing on strictly applying the Laws in four areas to free up the ball and if what we have seen so far is continued through the season, we will have achieved our desired aims.

“I want to make it clear that no Laws have changed; they have just been more correctly applied, played and coached.”

Watson said that the impact had been significant when comparing the first round of the Varsity Cup in 2010 with the first round of 2009:

· Reset scrums declined from seven per game to 2.8 per game – a reduction of 60%

· Kicks in general play declined from 48.5 kicks per game to 32.3 per game – a reduction of 33%

· While total tries for the round rose from 12 to 30 – a 250% increase.

“It is way too early to use this evidence to say that the changes have had the desired results but at least they appear to be pointing in the right direction,” he said.

Watson reiterated that the four key areas where the Laws were being more strictly applied were:

a. Tackle – tackler to release IMMEDIATELY and roll away or get back on his feet.

b. Scrums – correct engagement, correct binding and straight body positions.

c. Off side in general play – players to stand still until put onside as per law.

d. Observe for obstruction at kick offs and line outs prior to a maul forming.

No changes, just laws being strictly applied.

Do you think this will lead to less kicking in the game, more attacking/running play or just more penalties/free kicks and inconsistent refereeing (not a dig at refs!)?

RE: new interpretations at the tackle

Ruckoff — Fri, 05 Feb 2010 13:07:37 GMT

Article from nzherald regarding the new interpretations at the tackle.

Richie McCaw's work at the breakdown is used as a global model for aspiring flankers.

Now the master is going back to the classroom. Like all Super 14 players, McCaw will have to negotiate his way through the interpretation referees will use at the tackle in this year's competition.

Basically, tacklers will have to give their prey time to release the ball before they attempt to pilfer possession. All the sly leaning on victims, pushing up on the ball without releasing it and similar shortcuts will not be tolerated by match officials.

The Stormers have been trialling a new scheme of clapping their hands over their prey to show officials they have given the tackled player a chance to play the ball.

McCaw is in Nelson for today's trial game against the Blues but will not suit up for his 92nd game for the Crusaders until about round three of the series. However, he has been trialling his ideas at training and did not see a massive level of exasperation with the changes.

"It might be there is a whistle-fest in the first 10 minutes but that is okay if the referees have drawn a line in the sand. As long as they do that it would be silly not to adjust.

"You have still got to have a contest, it has got to be right or wrong, black or white."

McCaw, who is acknowledged as one of the master pilferers in world rugby, said the change would not be exasperating as long as referees ruled as they had promised.

"As long as we know where we stand. They have said they are going to be pretty hard on it and as long as they do that for the whole season, every week, then you have to adapt to it."

Players would have to be far more selective and accurate about trying to steal a turnover and they might only get a couple of chances in any game. Players had used this grey area in the game to their advantage, testing the referees' judgment when they were almost on their feet or getting back to that position.

Some officials were more lenient but this year the referees had vowed to be far more strict in the tackle area so unless the tackler had a genuine chance for a steal, the side with the ball should be able to create more continuity.

"It's all good in theory, it will be just interesting to see how it goes," said McCaw.

"Teams that are really accurate and figure that out to get their breakdown right, will be the ones that do pretty well."

I thought this was just being trialled by SANZAR but apparentley this will be applied to the 6 nations as well.

From the BBC Sport website

Both the England and Wales teams will play under the new guidelines being handed down to referees from the International Rugby Board for the first time at Twickenham on Saturday.

Good training/playing concept being applied by the Stormers, whereby they will be clapping the hands over the tackled players before attempting to steal.

RE: new interpretations at the tackle

referee — Fri, 05 Feb 2010 11:43:47 GMT

You're quite corect about the law concerning the tackler, however, it seems at the top end this has been allowed to drift in the defender's favour, against the law book.

Below the elite level of the game you will find that the tackle law is enforced more as the law book suggests. Again, it seems to be all about reffing the top end as a seperate game to the ''community'' game. This then confuses everybody when we as referee's ref more to the laws than seen on the TV.

RE: new interpretations at the tackle

Ruckoff — Tue, 02 Feb 2010 11:52:29 GMT

Didds - You're correct the tackler has never been allowed to claim the ball whilst on the ground.

I think the philosophical change that SANZAR are looking to introduce is to stop the one complete action of the defender making a tackle and then remaining in contact with the tackled player and/or the ball whilst getting to his feet. This one action can be performed very quickly and gives the defending team a great advantage to get turnover ball and stops the tacked player from presenting the ball because it is being contested from the moment he gets tackled.

The tackler will now have to get back to his feet AFTER releasing the tackled player and NOT being in contact with the ball (not using the player or ball as a lever or platform to get up). Once he has got back to his feet he can only then contest for the ball.

In theory this should allow the tackled player his right to immediately present the ball and support players slightly more time to clear out the jackal.

Another area of contention/interpretation for referees!

RE: new interpretations at the tackle

DanC — Tue, 02 Feb 2010 11:09:23 GMT

See my latest blog entry on what Richie McCaw thinks:

http://rugby-coaching-blog.com/2010/02/02/richie-mccaw-turns-over-a-new-leaf/

new interpretations at the tackle

didds — Thu, 28 Jan 2010 12:05:50 GMT

You may have seen Dan's latest email which contains a piece regarding possible new interpretations at the tackle... within the piece is the following

"SANZAR referee's manager Lyndon Bray spoke to the Dominion Post about making rugby a more open game, and ensuring that more time is spent with ball in play.

"We've agreed philosophically to change what the tackler can and can't do," Bray said.

"He is doing too much. We've allowed, in the evolution of the game, to let him remain in contact with the ball and ball carrier after he leaves his feet and he stays on the ball and jumps up and rips it away.""

Well... that's news to me! Since when has the tackler been able to - whilst still "on the ground" - claim the ball THEN get to his feet and remove it?

Did I miss something somewhen?

didds