Lineouts - Getting the jumpers up fast

I received this in my inbox this morning ...

My players are asking for more help with the lineout, and they have correctly identified the fact that our biggest weakness is getting the jumper into the air quickly. Are there any good drills for this? Today I just had two pods going up and competing for the ball, neither was designated ''offense'' and they just had to go on the thrower. I'm just curious to know if anyone has any other ideas for working on this skill.

There are alot things at play here ... are you lifting legs or shorts? Are the jumpers moving or static? Going straight up or into the tunnel? Either way, getting into the air fast is a matter of the lifters reacting to the jumper, and minimizing all the extranous stuff at the actual jump (cadences, steps, delays in binding, etc).
As to timing, if we time things off the thrower, both teams get to initiate their actions at the same time, and neither team will get an appreciable advantage.

I like to use very dynamic lineouts and put everything in the hands of the jumpers. The lifters then have only one task .. lift, or don't lift. As to the mechanics - each jumper is a little different and I like to let them be. I don't personally believe in any kind of cadence at all for jumpers and lifters - again, its all about the jumper moving quickly and the lifters reacting. This is JUST my opinion, I've seen some static lineouts where the jumpers get up fast, its just not my personal preference.

So - if you want to develop speed, make your games/drills about speed. Instead of the "winner" being the one who has the ball, the "winner" can be the fastest unit. Here is a sample format.


Set up a line of 6 cones 5 meters apart. Set up as many of these in parallel as you have lifter/thrower groups. It's a race.

Throwers all start on the first cone, jumping pods on the second. On "GO" the group has to execute a lineout. When the ball is successfully caught in the air, the jumper passes it back the the thrower, and the whole unit moves to the next cone. When they hit the last cone, they now come forward, repeating the process. If the lineout is not successful, the group has to stay on the cone until they get it right. At the end of it every group will have executed at least 10 lineouts, under stress, and the winner will be the fastest group.

There are a million variations on this format, and many other lineout games that can be used to develop this speed and the decision making skills that go along with it.

As to off the pitch, your lifters and jumpers should be doing olypmic style lifts - push presses, cleans, jump squats, etc. This will get them faster and more explosive for the lineout tasks.

Great topic Deanna - lets see what everyone else has to say!

What I don't like about 'round the corner drills and what to do about it ...

This past weekend was another big Coach Development Program weekend. Nearly 80 coaches converged on Washington DC, and I got to see all sorts of coaches work their craft.

One of the staples in every coaches tool kit is the "around the corner" drills. You know, there is a big grid, the players stand in two lines on on edge of the grid, defense hands the ball to offense, and the players run round their respective corners.

This format is used for 2 v 1, 3 v 2, etc etc etc.

As i watched, and even took my turn coaching some round the corner stuff, I started to wonder if maybe there are some fundamental flaws with the format. Bear in mind that this is only MY humble opinion ...

First, lets take a picture of the standard "around the corner" setup.



1. A (attacker) and D (defenders) are typically lined up waiting for their turn at the activity. This particular vantage point is not conducive to observing the activity in progress. A better observation point might be the "try zones". From here players can see the impact that varying angles of run have with greater clarity.

2. Right to left - left to right. It is way to easy to let all the work happen from only one side. In other words, if the coach doesn't make a conscious effort to flip flop the players, you'll always have everyone passing off of the same hand and tackling off the same shoulder.

3. Defense hands the ball to the Attackers. I just don't like this, MENTALLY. Seriously, I know its just a convenient and easy way to start the exercise, but when does defense every hand the ball to offense? I like offense to get the balls, and be completely responsible for that. Just my preference.

4. Pinning the defender(s) vs Moving the defender (s).

Normally, when this is coached, we tell the initial ball carrier (A1) to run at the defenders inside shoulder, and pin him. That's all well and good, but short of an effective dummy pass, the ball carrier is no longer a serious threat to beat the defender running because they have not created any space. In fact, when we coach the exercise this way, if the initial ball carrier is late to pass, its almost effortless for the defender to push them out of bounds. Really, would we ever coach a ball carrier to run THAT CLOSE to the sidelines if they didn't really need to?

5. For the support player, this is painfully predictable. In this scenario, the second attacker (A2) nearly ALWAYS winds up receiving a lateral pass wide. There's no real decision here, no creativity. The support player is involved only in execution - they don't have to make any decisions, just catch the ball. It becomes, after a while, pretty robotic.

Here's one easy way to open up the basic 2 v 1 a little bit:



1. Instead of lining players up and having them go "round the corner", have them enter the grid through the tryzones. It's a better place for observing the activity, and it gives them a view of the space that is alot closer to what they'll see during a rugby match.

2. Entering from the tryzone allows the ball carrier a whole range of options. They can work on their 1 v 1 running skills and actually work to MOVE a defender, rather than just PIN a defender. They might even beat a defender.

3. With the Attacker's options opened up, the support player has to make decisions. Vertical support? Lateral support left? Lateral support right? Close? Far?

4. With two players now making decisions and using all the available space, the defender is challenged. Should they pressure, or be patient? Left shoulder or right shoulder? Maybe they should get in the passing lane?

Another variation on the standard 2 v 1 involves the coach, or possibly an injured player, putting the ball into the grid. This way you introduce a handling element (it could be a tossed high ball, or a ball let loose on the ground), and varies the space and time that both the offense and defense have to make their decisions. If you have new players who need more time to process, you can give them the ball way back in the tryzone. Want to challenge a more experienced player? Have them field a loose ball much closer to the defender.


Now, my FAVORITE way to train 2 v 1 is with something I refer to as a continuous game. I LOVE continuous games. It's my #1 practice tool.

First, you divide the players into two even groups - in the illustration below, there's a RED team and a BLUE team. Each team is assigned an end to defend. A coach or other facilitor acts as a referee. Instead if discrete repetitions, the teams take turns running 2 v 1s, with the referee managing and keeping score. It's important not to overcoach, and to just let them play. The defense doesn't wait for the offense to go, and the offense doesn't wait for anyone to hand them the ball. When the opportunity to attack is there, advantage is gained by doing so quickly.

What I love about this format is that it becomes COMPETITIVE. Players learn all sorts of things. They learn that, if the defense is snoozing, they can race to the corner for a try. They learn that if they get overzealous and take off without support, they can turn over the ball. The take chances when they have space, and yes, sometimes they panic. Most important of all, they learn to communicate with eachother, and they have a lot of fun.

How it might start (if RED starts on defense and BLUE on offense)



As soon as a try is scored, or some infraction occurs, BLUE goes on Defense, and RED on offense . The players who just finished politely exit the grid and return to their teams for whatever role they will take next.

And so on, and so on, and so on. If you want to work on contact skills, reduce the size of the grid and the number of participants. Want to work on moving the ball wide? Make a big wide grid. I like playing continuous 3 v 5 and continuous 5 v 8. You can alter the rules, the grid, and the number of players to focus on whatever you like. It's a great way to get a lot of people working at a high intensity, and lots of fun.

That's what its all about, right?

The Footwork Camp

So, this weekend was the Footwork Camp in Philadelphia. Julie McCoy, Sean Ross and Ellie Karvoski came out from Little Rock Arkansas. Drew from NY was a late addition to the camp staff.

My role in the whole this is a technical/business/media one - I build the website, set up credit card payment, and basically handled the overall logistics. Also I take picture. Angie Marfisi, recent Philly WRFC captain and now an employee at LaSalle University set us up with a SWEET arrangement at LaSalle. One of my former players, who's now with Philly, filmed the weight and agility portions (thanks Tunny!) so hopefully I can get a couple of clips up. We did the weight training portion in the fancy fitness center, used the football stadium (with well-drained turf surface) for the outdoor portion, and used the pole vaulting pads for the tackling segment.



My biggest concern was weather, and boy were we lucky. It could have been a zillion below zero, instead it was 50ish all weekend. The forecast called for rain, but miraculously, we were mostly dry, just a little drizzle.

There were 27 total participants for the weekend, and it was a full weekend. We had players from Boston, Albany, DC, Lancaster, NY, and of course Philadelphia. We even had a player from Northern Iowa! The players were of a variety of skill levels - 6 college players and a mix of DI and DII Club players. There were also a couple of coaches in attendance which I think is an awesome thing.

This is the second Footwork Camp I've been to, and I've know Jules now for many years. We played with each other on the West back when there were only 4 territories, then she coached the West when I was a player, and we also coached against each other from time to time when she was with the Ozark Ladies and I was with Colorado Springs She-Wolves. Over the years she's really refined her coaching "product" and it's thrilling to see that she has attained so much.

For me, the biggest takeaway is the application of exercise science and bio-mechanics to every single thing you do on the field. It is impossible to leave this camp without know that, for example, if you want to be more evasive, you need to work on your single legged exercises. If you want to be a better tackler, jump squats will help you. Keep getting outflanked in defense? Bring out the bands.



Etc, etc, etc. You as an individual player leave with the specific tools to improve your game. Not just a garden variety workout, but real tools. Once we got out on the pitch, it became clear how the specific lifts and agility exercise apply.



Second - is the empowerment of the ball carrier. Now, there are probably plenty of coaches who wouldn't agree with some of Jule's philosophy, and that's fine. The game is big enough for all of us, and for dozens of styles of play. What the players learn at the footwork camp is how to using running lines, superior biomechanics, and patience to create enormous gaps for themselves. They learn to conserve their support, and to minimize high and even medium risk passing.

Most of the times when I'm around coaches who choose to minimize the passing aspect of the game, its in favor of the contact game. This invariably creates rock-em-sock-em rugby (and sometimes you need rock-em-sock-em rugby). During the Footwork Camp, players learn to maximize their individual evasive running in such a way that the NEED to pass is minimized. And, as a result of improved running lines, when the pass DOES happen, its way more efficient and effective.

Anyway, I could write a whole lot more about the camp, the concepts, etc, but really the volume of information just way to huge so I'll leave it at that. It was definitly a learning weekend.

Using the maul in open play

All Blacks Coach Graham Henry talks about using the maul in open play and off lineouts to create attacking opportunities ... its a real interesting video with some graphic overlays and such. There's a distinction of a "thin" attacking maul, where the maul really resembles an arrow, and is used to penetrate, and the "rolling" maul, used to create overloads and suck in defenders.

Good stuff.

One-Legged Lineout Lifting

There is a really really interesting paper out that talks about the pros and cons of the "single legged lineout lift". Which I guess TECHNICALLY means "single legged jumper support".

Basically, this research says, though hard to do, a jumper who is lifted/supported by his INSIDE leg, rather than by both legs or by the shorts, has more control in the air and is substantially more mobile. The jumper can use his non-jumping/supported leg as a fulcrum, and move all about in the air, significantly reducing the pressure on the individual lifters.

Additionally, the time that it takes the jumper to reach peak height is reduced. I don't see this become all the rage quite yet, but it's definitely very intriguing..

Here's some interesting photos:





If you check out the paper online, there are images and video of it being done in a match. What's nice is they have some images of it executed poorly (and explain why), and executed well.

My big fear is that I would try this, and because it hasn't been seen, it might be "assumed to be illegal".

Any thoughts on this curious lineout variation? Anyone doing this with their clubs?

The Importance of the Scrum

So last Friday a handful of collegiate coaches got together, and over a brew, discussed several things rugby.

One topic that game up was the importance of coaching position specific skills. The majority of us present considered ourselves "Tight Five Specialists" (so many coaches come from the tight five!!!), which sparked a discussion of how important, REALLY, it is to provide position specific coaching at the collegiate level.

We did not agree. This was nice, as it sparked much interesting discussion.

One coach was of the mind that the amount of time spent coaching the skill of scrummaging should directly equate to the amount of time spend scrummaging in a game. And, since scrums come largely from handling errors (forward passes, knock-ons), a team that handles well will have less scrums. So, the idea was proposed, spend more time on handling and less on scrums.

Basically, the idea was, our time with the team is limited, and should be focused on the activities the players spend most of their time doing on the pitch.

In my gut, I see the point, but don't agree. First phase possession is where it all starts - if your backs can launch off an attacking platform (a scrum moving forward), they will be more successful. If your back row can launch off a neatly executed controlled wheel, they will be more successful.

If, rugby-gods-forgive, your scrum starts turning over your own possession, its really seems to demoralize the whole team.

So I thought to myself, how much time really IS spent scrummaging, and how many opportunities to attack come from a scrum? Looking in my match stats from past games, it seems that there was a low of 15 and a high of 31 scrums in an 80 minute match. Since scrummaging is so closely related to handling, I thought to investigate the pros ..

Guess what I found? According to planet-rugby.com, in this last round of November tests, there was a low of 15 scrums and a high of 28 scrums. That's not any different than collegiate women! I suppose that the handling skills are better, and probablly so is the defensive pressure, which forces errors.

So me personally, I can't underestimate the power or significance of the scrum - no way. I've seen games played where the offense were DREADFUL ball handlers, and it didn't matter, because every single time there was a knock on, whether it was their put-in or not, they got the ball back. It didn't make for pretty rugby, and it sure sucked for the more dynamic, more mobile team, but the scrummaging team walked away with a win. Does that mean I want MY team to be dreadful ball handlers? No. Of course not. I, like everyone, want to minimize the times we turn over the ball.

But we scrum when the OPPOSITION turns over the ball too, and I want to put as much pressure as possible when THEY turn over the ball and WE get a scrum. I definitely don't want to give up that ball, and if possible, I want the win the engagement and get them moving away from our back line before we even start our attack. That means scrum, and scrum BIG.

Seriously, doesn't it put fear into everyone when the team you are playing has solid scrummagers, and suddenly there is a 5 meter scrum in your red zone, on the left side of the field? How many games have been won or lost that way?

Will the new engagement laws change the power of the scrum? I guess we'll have to wait and see. Here's an article about it on Scrum.com - Next year's Super 14 will be the litmus test.

Concern over saftey-first scrum laws.

The Two Man Drop = Power Up?

I game upon this article from the RFU by googling "long body ruck".

The Two-Man Drop - Producing lightning-fast recycled ball .

Since the topic sparked so much discussion, I thought it would be worth posting here. At the core of the paper are these ideas:

Use this techniques when more dynamic options have been exhausted.
Put TWO bodies in between the poacher and the ball carrier.
Never let one player go to ground together, always two!

Our MNT Head Coach, Peter Thornberg, is quoted along with Eddie O'Sullivan, the Irish MNT coach.

Coaching the Tackle - Through and Gather

I had an opportunity to work with USA Women's 7's Head Coach Julie McCoy some this summer. She spends some time on Sunday working on the details of the tackle.

Jules has been using "fat mats" to help players develop explosive power. It keeps the body from taking a beating, elevates the fun level, and really lets the players push hard. The entire tackling session was about two hours, and leads into an extensive session on footwork - how to be in the position to MAKE the tackle, how to finish the tackle in a position to poach, and how to poach as you are coming off the ground.

This particular clip is about 4 minutes, and addresses the act of "gathering" a player, rather than simply wrapping. To do this correctly requires significant explosive upper and lower body power.



In this particular session, the key take aways I had were :

• Tackle through, not to the player. Never reach with the arms, rather, drive through with the shoulder.
• Gather the player to you with the arms.
• Finish the tackle in a wide-based, split-leg position to enable the follow up poach.
• Power is generated by extending the hips
  
• Use explosive lifts - jump squats, snatches, etc, rather than traditional squats to develop physical skills.

And I really want some fat mats.

Support Skills: Rucking part 2 - Coaching the Seal

One technique that has become popular in recent years is the "seal".

The essential difference between this and more traditional techniques is the role of the very first support player. Providing the she arrives to the ball carrier BEFORE the ball carrier has been brought to ground, that initial support player plays an active role in ball retention and ball presentation, rather than just stepping over the player and driving.

The technique can creates controversy because of it's similarity to bridging (which is illegal). When executed poorly, the technique can also bring penalties for "diving over" or "making the ball unplayable". On the flip side, this technique provides a very fast clean ball to the scrumhalf, provides greater ball retention than other methods, and allows for more go forward options and dynamic play.

The following footage is of Kathy Flores, WNT Head Coach, and Candi Orsini teaching this techniques as part of a joint camp between the Eagles, MARFU, and NRU in the spring of 2006.

Thanks to the WNT for their permission to present this footage here.



Though out this session, a few things got my attention.

An attempt to step (evade) the defender was presented as standard.
Keeping the feet moving and going forward was a next best option.
The decision to go down was presented as the BALL carriers decision (ie, not support telling the ball carrier to go to ground, but vice versa).

Support Skills: Rucking Part 1

I received this a while back from a friend who is currently in a player coach role:

I've been working with forwards on rucking. They are still having trouble getting their spacing and speed correct and recognizing where to go. Is there any particular drill(s) that you can think of off the top of your head
that you could send me to address this issue. I did do some of the drills we have discussed in the past. I know we discussed that rucking is more than one issue and rucking is not always the problem.

This seems like a great topic to dialogue about. Since it's the off season, let's go for it!

Personally, I see rucking as technique which is part of a the larger set of SUPPORT skills. We can't truly address the issue of rucking without the larger topic of support, and of course we need to distinguish between offense and defense.

Offensive Support consists of actions taken by a player or players to

• maintain continuity of attack


• preserve options


• maintain go forward


• maintain possession


• minimize the impact of errors

So - when support fails, several things typically result starting with the most severe:

• Penalty turnovers


• Turnovers


• Slow Ball


• Sloppy Ball


• Loss of continuity

So, as coaches, when we approach rucking, its important to put whatever games or drills we use in context and to ask a lot of questions:

What are we trying to accomplish by rucking? Do we just need good possession, or do we need quick ball? Do we want to attack off the base or are we moving the ball away?

Did the ball carrier get behind the defense? Is the tackler still on his feet? How many players are in support of him? Where are we on the field? How much time to do we have?

What is the defense doing? Attempting to poach? Stepping over the ball? Piling bodies in? Kicking at the ball? Are they contesting the ruck at all, or are they loading everyone up on the fringe?


Sounds like overkill? More penalties happen at the ruck than anywhere else. More turnovers occur there. The team that has the ability to attack effectively through multiple phases of play will always be more successful that the team with a well-rehearsed first phase only plan. In order to get those multi-phase tools to our teams, we must develop outstanding support skills. Those support skills should be learned and practiced by all players, regardless of the position they play.

As to the ruck itself, of late it seems there are a few primary techniques out there. Over the course of the next few days I'll try to get some video examples of each:

• The link/leach/seal



• The long body ruck



• The traditional "driving over" ruck



• Hybrid approaches

So - the floor is open for discussion. How do you coach the set of support skills we describe as "rucking?"