|
|
|
Supreme Being
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: 17/01/2012 20:00:07
Posts: 213,
Visits: 505
|
|
Hi All,
First up, Didds, techniques - I am trying to find this out at the moment. In the meantime have a look at the ARL web site - they have a skills section with some video clips on. Also they sell a DVD thing called Catch Pass Kick or something with the same stuff and more on. Also see http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/rugby_league/skills/default.stm - where there are some useful demos, again video clips. These things repay repeated viewing. I don't think it is a secret, they just spend a lot of time on it. One difference is that they tend to hit a bit higher. I was chatting with the editor of Rugby League Coaching Manuals about it. He remarked on this change, noting that if you went low, as we were taught in the past, today's players would run at you all day. Brisbane use the gap above the belt and below where the ball is carried as the target area for the one on one tackle. Part of the rationale is that it moves less. Go low and you are vulnerable to a hip swerve and fend.
To give you an example of how league regards defence, how young they start and how integral it is to their thinking, here is an answer given to a guy asking about coaching U11s on a league coaching forum"
"Under 11`s is one of the most enjoyable ages to teach,or it
is /was for me.
I became great mates with Bob Wood from this forum,and he made
me very aware of the importance of teaching defensive pattern at this
age group,or any other for that matter.
You can add set plays designed to the strengths of your
team, on top of your basic team shape, such as the triangle type shapes...
Up to the ages of u/16`s i havn`t taught more than 3 good set
attacking plays,as it confuses them.
I have always found that a team with a "defensive
attitude" and a good basic shape taught to it, and allowed to play whats
in front of it will win more than it loses,-(a lot more)."
Jonesy, there is a saying in Aussie RL, "Defence wins matches". They have not lost an Ashes series to GB since '74 (or around there.) They may be onto something. Winning is sexy.
Dan, looking at your points:
1. Let's split out gym and track work from this. Conditioning can be achieved ball in hand as well (see Denis Betts below).
2. When learning a new skill, technique is the initial focus and the emphasis will be on that. Drills will be narrowly focused. As the technique is mastered it can be incorporated into broader activities. If technique slips or needs a brush up, one can focus in again. Otherwise attack and defence can be combined in all areas. If you are working on a line out move, work out how to defend it. That's defence. Once the players are know what they are doing, run them against each other, ditto scrums, rucks, mauls. They all have an attacking and a defending side. Back moves are an easy example - if you are teaching your backs a move, say a scissors, then teach them how to defend it. Once they have got the hang of things enough to run it opposed one can kill two birds with one stone.
3. That percentage will depend on what stage you are at with the skills you are working on.
4. Denis Betts puts it better than I can - "You have to realise that the game of rugby is built on basics. If you drift away from the core principles of catching, passing, running lines and tackle technique then you're in trouble. Once you stop practising these things - even for the most talented players - like most things in life, the skills falls away very quickly. We [Gloucester] try to keep the ball in hand as much as possible in training and just drill the founding principles home. It's all really simple stuff but fundamental to what you want at the end of it. Without these blocks in place, you have no chance of developing a free-flowing game. It's no good wanting to play a particular game plan if the players don't have the skills to execute it. So you have to start from scratch and look at the individual."
I think Denis correctly identifies the basic individual core skills, although I might add kicking. Defence is a team skill, tackling is an individual skill. Footwork comes into all of it and cannot always be separated from the situation/skill it is needed to support. Tackling needs just as much attention as one gives the other core skills, but it is just a part of defense. As can be seen from 2 above, it is possible to coach "both sides of the ball" together. Even a game of touch used to work on something or other is 50% defence.
5. All players need to be able to tackle. The winger may not make as many as the openside but the winger is often the last man out there - if he misses they score. Same with the full back. It's not a numbers thing. All need great technique, for the winger to pull off that try saving open field tackle, or the tight head to get into a good hitting position to make a dominant tackle, to stop the opposition momentum in the close quarters exchanges that are his domain.
That's just what I reckon.
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Member
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: 25/08/2010 12:18:32
Posts: 48,
Visits: 90
|
|
| Two-on-one tackles are, of course, a way of creating turnovers. This is becoming more popular because tacklers (rather than those joining the ruck) have the best chance of taking the ball if they can either stay on their feet in the tackle (which is possible 2-on-1), or get to their feet immediately. O'Driscoll does this very well, as does McCaw, to name a couple of the best known. We, as players, were told either at the start of last season or the season before, that there was a new directive, stating that tackling players must let the tackled player play the ball, even if they (the tackling player) were on their feet. However this does not seem to have taken effect at any level of rugby. Two-on-one tackles are more a feature of the up-and-out (drift) defence, because this defence allows the spaces between players to be smaller. To make a football comparison, this defence is zonal, with man-to-man marking within the zones, whilst up-and-in is more man-to-man. Unlike football, the fact the ball cannot be passed forward in rugby allows this marking to be very tight, and therefore intimidating, for the ball carrier. However, as Shaun Edwards points out, the potential problems occur when the opposition use their moves to prevent any simple man marking, and here it is vital that each defender makes the right decision - i.e. a decision which leaves each player covered. This is very much a training ground thing - you must discuss which player to take in a given situation. This is also the reason that the Lions, for example, adopted a up-and-out defence against New Zealand - they felt they did not have the time to adopt a complicated system (also Phil Larder was the coach!) However as that tour shows, the system allows the attacking side to dictate the play - little chance of interception, moderate pressure on the ball, tacklers easily visible. A well organised side will also make sure that the support is there to prevent 2-on-1 tackles leading to turnovers. If you're going to play up-and-out it's also important that players have the confidence to leave the space out wide. A couple of times in the series Julian White was exposed having to cover a larger area than he was capable of. As a first approximation, playing up-and-out you should not concede through the middle: there should be no missed tackles. However the problem with this is that players: 1) get sucked in by dummy runners leaving space out wide; and more importantly players, 2) get front on to the touchline in the effort to get out wide and cover the ground. With your hips in this position its very difficult to tackle on your inside shoulder. With up-and-in it's more difficult to get two-on-one tackles, except when close to the ruck situation. The absolutely vital part of this system is, as already mentioned, that you have strong one-on-one tacklers, but as noted, this is also a lot about decision making. However a point that has been somewhat overlooked, to my knowledge, is that the tacklers must slow the ball down. With up-and-out you focus mainly on your defensive alignment, but with up-and-in you have to focus on both your own team but also the other team, to a much greater extent. It also takes time, as well as getting into position, simply to get back to the offside line. You have to have a good ref with up-and-in. Some referees, especially at lower levels simply cannot imagine that there could be that much pressure on the inside-centre. Another issue is when the ball's out: some referees will play acting scrum-half's hands, others just like a nice game! The main way of attacking up-and-in defences is using kicks. The fact that the winger is up so quickly can leave a large space behind. The usual way of defending this is by having your scrum half track the ball and your full back perhaps a little closer than usual. Newport-Gwent Dragons (when Mike Ruddock was Director of Rugby) used to have their full back cover the openside winger and their blindside winger cover the usual full back space as soon as it was clear the play was happening. Obviously this was quite tiring for the wingers. The other thing to mention is that your wingers musn't get to tight to play: as this is an in defence they've got to stand wide enough to discourage the cross-kick.
|
|
|
|
|
Supreme Being
Group: Moderators
Last Login: 02/02/2012 14:47:41
Posts: 341,
Visits: 1,835
|
|
| A tip from watching a trial match last night. A bit obvious really. Most of the players were in outsized shirts. Half breaks were made, but I counted at least a dozen times when the player was grabbed by the back of the shirt and pulled back. A real advert for keeping the shirt tucked in and wearing skin tight gear to play rugby in. Also it was good to see a referee who understood the tackler's rights. Several times a player was tackled, both players went to ground and the tackler found himself a metre or so on the "wrong" side. However the tackler was able to get up and "jackle" the ball with impunity without having to come through "the gate". Perhaps we should be reminding some referees before games.
|
|
|
|
|
Supreme Being
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: 17/01/2012 20:00:07
Posts: 213,
Visits: 505
|
|
Interesting what you say re the half breaks and getting scragged Dan. Reminds me of another nice little detail picked up from gridiron. Ever wondered why the BC high steps after coming through the hole? Follow this link = How to Break Free from Defenders and Run the Football
Another example of the detail they go into with that game. There is some very interesting stuff on that site. All of the clips are well worth watching.
|
|
|
|
|
Supreme Being
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: 17/01/2012 20:00:07
Posts: 213,
Visits: 505
|
|
Up and out in RL -
I was speaking the other day to a former player with Salford Reds (Superleague side). When he was there, they used the up and out defence. Packing their defence tight together and showing the attack the outside. They key was not to let the attack back on the inside. He made the interesting point that in RL the touch line really is an extra defender - attackers really avoid it as if they get driven out they lose posession for certain. There is less fear of the touch line in RU for reasons we all understand. It is worth bearing this in mind when considering these matters. I understand that quite a few RL teams use Up and Out, esp. if they are a fast light team.
With any system, part of what one is doing is deciding where you want the tackle to happen. The rationale for using up and out (with defenders close together as described) in RU seems to be to isolate the ball carrier, get numbers there faster and have a better chance of a turn over. This will work if your forwards and esp back row are faster than theirs. If they are getting more numbers to the tackle then you and you are not getting the turnovers - well all the tactic is achieving is flogging your not so speedy forwards from one side of the pitch to the other!
He began to expain how players use different tackles in different positions and areas of the field and game situations but time was against us. I hope to be able to speak to him further on the subject.
He also mentioned how they would normally have the first 3 or 4 plays of a set planned in advance. I am not sure to what extent the same occurs in RU. Does anyone plan sets of plays like that?
|
|
|
|
|
Supreme Being
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: Yesterday @ 17:19:03
Posts: 634,
Visits: 854
|
|
| >He also mentioned how they would normally have the first 3 or 4 plays of a set planned in advance. I am not sure to >what extent the same occurs in RU. Does anyone plan sets of plays like that? Allegedly this is what Henry attempted to do with the 2001 Lions, and received criticism of the idea from some of the players. I'd be wary of such a proscriptive approach as I fear players at our level (7) won;t have the ability to carry it out effectively enough (cf the Lions who made similar remarks about what was happeming when a player wasn;t where he needed to be for whatever reason). I'd still be wary of it anyway UNLESS I had supreme faith that the players ALSO had the ability to recognise immediately any alternative superior opportunities that became available. It COULD be a way to get a really struggling side working - but wouldn;t IMO be any sort of long term DEVELOPMENT strategy. YMMV! didds
|
|
|
|
|
Supreme Being
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: 17/01/2012 20:00:07
Posts: 213,
Visits: 505
|
|
The structured play thing was a thought that came from reading a report on the Anzac RL test back in April. Gary Roberts wrote" "Stuart put together a well structured game plan of attacking plays that had the young Kiwis flummoxed.
These simple plays was not repetitious and were well disguised as to which one was coming next.
They moved to either 70% for 'a play and stay' on plays two, three and possibly four before sweeping back to the opposite 70%, either using, [a] Lockyer's long and accurate left side pass to create space for his left side runners or, [b] linking back to Hodges for his right side step or Tate for his speed in attack.
The other part of the plan involved dummy half scoots coming out of their end. Instead of using Smith and Berrigan constantly, they also used Tate, Hodges and Hunt with outstanding success. This ploy gained them many yards and, just as importantly, it achieved quick PTBs.
It was a game plan well thought out and well executed by the Australians.
Attacking from the back field, if executed correctly, will give far better results over 80 minutes than the single forward hit up. More teams today are revisiting this style of play.
The rules are simple if a team has effective left and right players:
A. Stay on the side where you receive the ball on play one.
B. Play and stay there for plays one, two, three, and possibly four.
C. Each play, when possible, targets the tackling players, lazy markers, space behind single markers, lazy or tired players.
D. Look for attacking spread from the 70%, giving width to your 'go to' players on plays possibly three, four or five.
This play can be used on both sides of the field utilizing your effective left and right players. Do not waste a play by running laterally/cross field in your own half.
These plays are not to be used on every set in coming out of your own end. Mix it up with dummy half scoots, plus ones, pre line passing and, like Australian coach, Ricky Stuart, have a plan, and practice scenario plays and sets in coming out of your own end."
For a representative side it is hard for a coach to do anything too complex even with top level players - the players do not have the familiarity with each other that they have at club level. I guess that is what Ricky Stuart was trying to do with this plan. A relatively simple game plan, probing at certain areas and looking to create space. It just made me think about such things in an RU context. Does one target certain areas of the field - get play to 60/40 points or 70/30, attack the blind side, back to 70/30 and go wide...? Interesting also how the Australians looked to engineer situations to suit the attributes of their best attacking runners.
I suppose the attraction of such things is that the players all know where the ball is going to end up - just with that knowledge they are a step ahead of the defence, and in an RU context would be more therefore likely to get more players to the tackle area faster.
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Newbie
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: 13/01/2010 16:58:10
Posts: 7,
Visits: 44
|
|
| We really got caught by two moves today (14 years old age group). Have been using man on man defence (without a rabbit)..we only play 12 a side. Want to start out to in system of defence, and also create two on one tackle situations. Two moves that caught us today, and I seek input in dealing with them with Out to In defence....or an Up and Out defence too.. 1.Wrap...A10 with A12. The A10 is very hard to reach, isnt crossing conventionally. With either system, is he now for D12? With D10 targetting A12 ? Am wanting to get defenders up fast and intimidating and defenders thinking of their man first, does D10 need to communicate re wrap to divert D12 from his traget? 1. A15 entering line inside A13, taking inside pass. With Out to In, D12 is now targetting A13 as is D13, How/when does he adjust his thinking to take A15.Is it based on his heads up, a call , say from D15 or should D15 be coming into line to take him, bearing in mind that he is back for kick and destined to take last man if opposition get it down the line.. Got to deal with this in next training session...in two days. Any help appreciated
|
|
|
|
|
Supreme Being
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: Yesterday @ 17:19:03
Posts: 634,
Visits: 854
|
|
assuming a 5 man pack and a 7 man (full) backline...
scenario 1:
this is a classic exploitation of the man on man (eg blitz) type defence... to create the extra man to finesse a defender somewhere by leaving him defending two players. IMO you will struggle to create a 2 on 1 tackle situation for a wrap around here unless the attack have a small hiccough and buy you time. That said...
Depending on how you structure your defensive systems, defenders could be following the ball once their immediate opponent has passed OUTSIDE himself. ie A10 passes to A12, so D10 follows towards A12 with a view to creating 2 on 1 with D12 on A12.
So, yes - IF D10 and D12 can "handle it" then indeed you can create a small "drift" scenario in effect... D10 must be aware that POSSIBLY when A10 passes then IF A10 starts to wrap then he calls a 1-out, such that D10 take A12, and D12 takes A10. That covers the man on man defense. 2 on 1 is still possible after the wrap but TBH I suspect A10 is now so deep that D10 will struggle to make the potential tackle area in time (and D12 possibly too!).
However, there are inherent dangers with any "follow the ball" strategy, because it doesn't close the gate on the inside. In the structure I outline above (D10 follows the ball and defends A12 whilst D12 takes D10) who is defending (say) A15 coming back the other way? . In a straight blitz and hold the channel D10 is still covering that place of course. D15 should be following the line of the ball on the OUTSIDE. D9 could be following the line of the ball on the INSIDE ... so this defender could be D9. But if he then holds that channel he is no longer covering the inside of the ball (in effect playing open side flank!). An option may be to use the blind side wing (D11) to follow the ball anyway, with a view to taking D10's channel whatever happens - this is probably fine all the time the breakdown is at a pitch extremity... a central ruck/maul/scrum would leave the blind side very exposed with this however of course - in a split field scenario this is probably not feasible and maybe a blitz/man on man defense isn't the best choice here (not that helps you particularly!). You may have to sacrifice D9's roving role until one of the forwards can cover for him and he can move from guarding the 10 channel against cut backs.
scenario 2:
I'd say that D12 in the scenario you describe will have a weak shoulder ie his focus is on A13, and he is lining up his approach with his outside shoulder. Unless the pass to A15 is made too early giving D12 time to readjust then leaving D12 with this responsibility will leave him exposed with a weak tackle potentially for any reasonably well timed run and pass.
I'd be looking for D9 to be following the ball on the inside and D9 would be the tackler on A15. D15 as you say will likely be hanging back to cover the kick, and provides another line of defense here - leaving D15 with this responsibility pf the tackle exposes the space behind. The blind side wing (BSW) could also be tracking inside the ball depending on initial field position (see split field above), or taking D10s channel such that D10 is tracking. In short though D9 following INSIDE the ball (an open side flank's normal running line say).
scenario 3:
Of course the latter now begs the question of ... what if the attackers dummy the wrap and use the inside ball from A13 to A15? ie A10-A12-(dummy wrap by A10)-A13-A15? You should be just about OK here, unless its split field and they have stacked one side with the danger of exposing the blind side later if you pull the BSW over. The danger is if you have to use D9 to cover 10 channel which then denies you D9 to defend against the inside ball, so D15 may have to now track just inside the ball but you are of course sacrificing space somewhere... either for the breakthrough or the kick deep. However... this is U14, 12 a side rugby. If the oppo can work that out, and make it work, then fair goes to them - and it can be a positive for you as you then address it in your next training session as some chalk and talk. This scenario is only likely IMO to work on occasion unless their forwards have total domination over yours (ie total quality ball, going forward etc etc etc)... in which case they are probably exposing you in other areas too. Given equality of pack, some decent pressure exerted anyway then the double whammy is unlikely to come off that often. If the oppo show no concept of being able to use a blind side wing effectively in attack you could take the risk and pull your BSW over to protect the 10 channel and cross your fingers.
Summary:
scenario 1: "full width field" : D10 follows ball after pass, D11 covers 10 channel. D10 takes A12, D12 takes A10. D9 tracks inside line of ball, D15 tracks outside (albeit at depth).
"split field" : D9 takes 10 channel as D10 follows ball. D15 tracks _just_ outside line of ball.
D9 moves once a forward can cover, then tracks inside line of ball. Possibly with genuinely split
field attack, you (over time) introduce drift/in to out
scenario 2: D9 tracks inside line of ball and takes A15.
scenario 3 (my scenario): non-split field. Progress as in scenario 2. D9 takes A15
split field: D15 tracks ball on the inside. And congrats to the oppo if they make it
work. use BSW in 10 channel and revert to scenario 2 if oppo are not
using BSW in attack (and cross your fingers ;-)
didds
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Newbie
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: 13/01/2010 16:58:10
Posts: 7,
Visits: 44
|
|
| thanks for all the great input so what seems key here also is that 10 channel, if we are following ball this needs filling also. seems then if we want D9 tracking inside and able to hit A15 breaking through....we need to use BSW to hold channel, OR we allocate a forward from scrum/sameside second row, to get out and hold channel, or from Lineout the backman...this leaves D-BSW helping D9 take A15 bursting through and also watching his A-BSW coming through.. it seems complicated for this level but of course we are now beginning to face ever more sophisticated attacks... its been amazing this season seeing the lads develop and start to play quite a mature game, and also witness dramatic changes in the opposition development...learning is rapid and it is necessary to introduce more complex scenarios for them to use/cope with on a regular basis, ..there is no rest for a coach!
|
|
|
|