The JR Blog

Clean out drill for young rugby players

Sun, 30 Oct 2011 12:44:00 GMT

Clean out drill for kids

The clean out is one of the hardest thing to teach young rugby players. Like tackling it is a confidence thing, they just don’t want to stick there head in and drive.

So the question is how do you build their confidence at the break down?

The trick is reducing the distance and padding all the bits that can hurt (i.e. the knees and elbows). The drill shown in these clips is a simple staged ruck situation. The tackle bag represents the tackled player on the ground, it’s needed for them to get used to stepping over the players on the ground.

The drill works as follows;

- Lay a tackle bag on the ground and place some cones under the edges to stop it from rolling around as they step over it.
- Set up some cones about a meter away from the bag on either side.
- Give the players on one side a crash pad and tell them to stand close to the tackle bag.
- Tell the players without the crash pads, their job is to drive over the tackle bag and push the crash pads away.
- On the coaches signal they attempt to clean out with leg drive

As the players understand the concept of the leg drive in the clean out, take the crash pads away and add a ball on one side of the tackle bag. Tell the players the team that can drive past the ball wins, make sure they don’t use their hands (one of the first things they will do when they start to loose).

Coaching points:

- Keep the head up to see where the opponent is
- Get low and drive up
- Make contact with the shoulders
- Take small steps to drive

If you want a full season of games check out one of the manuals below.

Step and palm (fend) warm up - Kids Rugby

Tue, 04 Oct 2011 07:06:00 GMT

Step and palm (fend) warm up - Kids Rugby

To maximise our time at training we should add our skill development into the warm up. Here is a side step and palm off (fend off) drill that allows for larger numbers and will help warm the players up without injury.

Set Up

Establish the number of participants, we really want to have at most 3 players lining up to run at a time. Therefore if you have 20 players you would be looking at setting 5 stations up (remember you will have a crash pad holder, so the groups are 4 players).
- Place a cone for each station about 1 meter apart to reduce the chance of collision.
- Place a crash pad about 4m back from the players with the ball.

Directions

- Tell the players to line up between a cone in groups of 4
- Tell the first player to go and pick up the crash pad and stand at the position of the crash pad.
- Give a ball to each group and explain to the players that the ball carrier will run forward with the ball in 2 hands until he/she reaches the pad, at which time they will choose the side they want to step towards and move the ball under the arm of the hand furtherest away from the pad.
- The ball carrier should attempt to push the pad away with the free hand (closest to the pad) and accelerate using the push to gain more speed.
- after they have completed the step and palm they job back to their group and hand off the ball to the next player. Its best to use 2 balls in each group speed things up.
- Change pad men every couple of minutes.

Coaching Points

- Ball in 2 hands when running
- Transfer the ball away from the contact zone
- Push arm into pad and use the push to accelerate away from the pad

If you are interested in more games and drills have a look at the manuals I have written for young players.

The Beginners Rugby Manual
The Introduction to Contact Rugby
The Introduction to Breakdown and Set Piece Manual

Warm Up - Side stepping and Driving

Tue, 04 Oct 2011 07:05:00 GMT

Side step warm up - Rugby for kids

As a coach it is hard to warm the players up without wasting time! Usually we only have 1-11/2 hours per week to try and train the players. In this time we have to improve their skills and gel them as a team.

Therefore, it is import ant to use our time wisely and the warm up is the perfect time to add basic skill development. It’s well documented now that static warm ups (stretching without movement) aren’t effective as dynamic warm ups (warming up through movement). So lets combine the warm up with skill development, while reducing the contact and chances of injury.

This side stepping and leg drive drill hits that mark. It is designed for larger groups, with a fast turn around participation. It can be set up any where and requires limited equipment. The poles and crash pads can be replaced for cones and simply a defender or coach tagging the player.

Set Up

Establish the number of participants, we really want to have at most 3 players lining up to run at a time. Therefore if you have 20 players you would be looking at setting 5 stations up (remember you will have a crash pad holder, so the groups are 4 players).
- Place a cone for each station about 1 meter apart to reduce the chance of collision.
- Place a pole about 2ms in from the cone
- Place a crash pad another meter back from the pole

Directions

- Tell the players to line up between a cone in groups of 4
- Tell the first player to go and pick up the crash pad and stand at the position of the crash pad.
- Give a ball to each group and explain to the players that the ball carrier will run forward with the ball in 2 hands until he/she reaches the pole, at which time they will choose the side they want to step towards and move the ball under the arm of the hand furtherest away from the pole.
- The ball carrier then must hit the pad and drive the pad back 5 steps. This hit will later be replaced by evading the pad or trying to hit on the edge of the pad so reinforce evasion rather than running into players.
- Tell the pad holder to stand their ground and later you can tell them they can move forward after the ball carrier steps the pole.

Coaching Points

- Ball in 2 hands
- Transfer the ball away from the contact zone
- Drive with the legs through contact

If you are interested in more games and drills have a look at the manuals I have written for young players.

The Beginners Rugby Manual
The Introduction to Contact Rugby
The Introduction to Breakdown and Set Piece Manual

Process vs Results Based Selection

Sun, 08 Nov 2009 01:05:00 GMT

On the weekend Robbie Deans made a clear decision based on his selection policy which, put simply is to give everyone a chance to impress and then select on form. This selection policy is obviously a process based policy rather than a results policy.

What I am referring to here is the selection of Quade Cooper in the team to play England. In short term this is a huge risk, however, a step forward to the big picture of building a positive culture. All players now know they have a chance to make the team through performance and the best players will be on the field at all times.

Cooper has been knocking on the door for the past weeks and put his hand up in the midweek game against Glouster, where he had a hand in all the points scored. Yes due to injuries the timing might have been right to bring Cooper in, however, it would have been easier to stick to conservative centre pairing.

This decision is based on the long term objective of winning the World Cup. The result went Deans’s way in more ways than one. It puts all players on notice that their position isn’t a given and it gives hope for the fringe players hoping to break into the team.

Is Deans’s obvious focus on the World Cup correct? I suppose the answer comes back to the age old question of process vs results based coaching. Should he concentrate on the results while slowly bleeding players into the team or should he throw results to the wind with the focus of giving all a chance and hoping in the year of the World Cup the players select themselves.

In terms of culture an open selection policy will always create a competitive and vibrant atmosphere. Selection based on reward will also add a positive reinforcement and promote the player buy in factor. At the junior levels this attitude will increase the player desire and enthusiasm to give their best for the team and sooner rather than later the results will start to flow.

I suppose time will tell when the Wallabies face up to their ultimate test at the Rugby World Cup in NZ.Process Vs results based selection

On the weekend Robbie Deans made a clear decision based on his selection policy which, put simply is to give everyone a chance to impress and then select on form. This selection policy is obviously a process based policy rather than a results policy.

What I am referring to here is the selection of Quade Cooper in the team to play England. In short term this is a huge risk, however, a step forward to the big picture of building a positive culture. All players now know they have a chance to make the team through performance and the best players will be on the field at all times.

Cooper has been knocking on the door for the past weeks and put his hand up in the midweek game against Glouster, where he had a hand in all the points scored. Yes due to injuries the timing might have been right to bring Cooper in, however, it would have been easier to stick to conservative centre pairing.

This decision is based on the long term objective of winning the World Cup. The result went Deans’s way in more ways than one. It puts all players on notice that their position isn’t a given and it gives hope for the fringe players hoping to break into the team.

Is Deans’s obvious focus on the World Cup correct? I suppose the answer comes back to the age old question of process vs results based coaching. Should he concentrate on the results while slowly bleeding players into the team or should he throw results to the wind with the focus of giving all a chance and hoping in the year of the World Cup the players select themselves.

In terms of culture an open selection policy will always create a competitive and vibrant atmosphere. Selection based on reward will also add a positive reinforcement and promote the player buy in factor. At the junior levels this attitude will increase the player desire and enthusiasm to give their best for the team and sooner rather than later the results will start to flow.

I suppose time will tell when the Wallabies face up to their ultimate test at the Rugby World Cup in NZ.

Coaching to Strengths, South African Style

Tue, 15 Sep 2009 08:30:00 GMT

The South African coaching team (Peter De Villiers and co.) have produced a perfect example for all Junior coaches on how good coaching strategy can overcome a team’s weaknesses.

South Africa were crowned the Tri-Nations champions this week and fittingly so. They capped off a tough season with great use of their strengths to over come the best teams in the world. On paper the SA team is solid and powerful, however, lacked a true line breaking combination in the back line.

If you were to do a quick strength and weakness analysis on the Springbok team it would look as follows. Let's begin with the weaknesses.

Center combination lacked flare
The centre combination of Jaque Fourie and Jean de Villiers are solid hard running players who can hit the line at pace and defend like demons, however, can’t create a play from nothing.

Lacked a play maker at fly half (10, five eight)
Morné Steyn is very reliable set move executer and has an excellent right foot kicking game, however, he isn’t a Dan Carter or Matt Giteau who can create magic from nothing.

Faulted at the scrum
Although in most games their scrum would hold their own, over the course of the Tri-Nations it did come under fire and was a definite weak link in the armour. It wasn’t reliable enough to build a back line attack off.

Overall their main weakness was a back line that showed little chance of breaking the line in attack. Under the ELVs the back line would have been able to bash their way through the 3rd or 4th phase, however, under the new amended rules their inroads would have been far less advantageous.

On the other hand the Springbok strengths were in far more abundance.

Powerful, physical forward pack
The power the Boks had at the break down was key to their game dominance, they often turned ball over through their ability to stay on their feet and their powerful counter rucking.

4 world class line out jumpers
The line out was formidable winning all their own ball and a large portion of the oppositions ball. Why wouldn’t you be confident to kick when you know there was a good chance of winning the ball back?Lightning fast wingers

Lightning fast wingers
A Bryan Habana led cavalry of lightning fast wingers allowed the Boks to kick the ball behind the opponents and get to it before the counter attack could be structured. Even better the chase was so effective with the high ball that most kicks eventuated in knock ons or an infringement.

A boot that doesn’t miss
The boot of all their goal kickers just didn’t know how to miss even from 55m out. This meant the opponents couldn’t risk infringing even in their own half.

So if you have a powerful, committed forward pack, a back line full of defensive steel, and lightning fast wingers what game plan would you play? Naturally a kick chase game, hinged on powerful defence and physical dominance at the break down, capped with a goal kicking radar.

The only way a team could beat them was to put them on the back foot through quick recycling of the ball at the break down and fast movement of the ball to gaps. The Wallabies showed this in Brisbane and the All Blacks started to work it out in the last quarter at Hamilton.

To the Bok's credit they were clever enough to stop this fast phase play and suffocate the opponents until they made a mistake or the reinforcements arrived. The game plan was a strategic master piece based on a well thought out SWOT analysis.

The moral of the storey is, get to know your player's strengths and weaknesses and develop a game plan that will bring out your strengths. Too often a coach will develop a game plan based on how he wants the team to play even though they aren’t capable of that style.

How do you get the best out of a Junior front row?

Tue, 08 Sep 2009 08:06:00 GMT

There are 3 key areas to a great scrum and they are controlled predominantly by the front row.

1. The engagement
2. The body height
3. The drive

All of these 3 factors are determined by timing. Timing is the key to a successful scrum that wins own ball and creates tight heads (win against the head). It’s important the front row are taught timing from an early age.

A good engagement is the key to establishing a strong base for the scrum. Too often the front row seem to lean against each other, they have no desire to try and out play or control their opponent. Usually because they have heard about how dangerous the engagement can be and they are tentative.

The best way to get around this problem is to make it fun, get them to wrestle each other. Begin with them kneeling in a push up position and on the coaches call they have to engage with the opponent (still on their knees) and try to wrestle him to the ground. Soon you will see they learn the advantages of a good engagement and wrestling for positioning. This is also a safety measure it will increase their strength and body control.

How often do we see a bad engagement followed by poor body height in a junior scrum? Too often teams see the scrum as a rest from the game and end up just binding and leaning. It might be a roll off from bad habits learnt in Rugby League but it can be dangerous.

The best way to get a junior player to understand the concept of low body height is to exaggerate their notion of leaning for a rest. Get the players to simply lean against each other, let them choose how. More than likely they will stand virtually upright, while they are doing this tell them to take a step towards the opponent. This will usually cause them to loose balance and fall to the side or backwards. Now get them to repeat the exercise, however, this time with knees bent and back straight. Again get them to take a step forward and watch the difference in stability. Ask them which was less energy consuming and taxing, the answer will hopefully be the second version.

We know the benefits of low body height, however, often the kids aren’t taught or shown why it really helps them. Hopefully the next time they decide to take a break at the scrum they will realise with low body height they can actually contribute to the scrum and exert less energy.

So you have managed to change the players perception on the engagement and body height, there is one more component that is necessary to win the ball and this is where timing is essential.

In under 19s laws the scrum can only push 1 meter after the ball is fed in. This is a component junior players under use and estimate. A simple, well timed push when the ball is fed in can win own ball and opponent ball very easily and once the ball is at the feet of the second row everyone can relax. Generally the feed in the scrum is pretty poor causing the ball to bounce around and making it hard for the hooker to cleanly strike the ball, this means a good push on the feed is more important. It only needs to be a quick, well timed push as the ball comes in and you have won yours or your opponents ball.

A trick to teach the props about the necessity of calling the ball in is to get them to pack down against a scrum machine or another prop, with their eyes closed and tell them they have to strike for the ball when you tell them to open their eyes. Feed the ball into the scrum and call the ball in, watch them miss the strike. The reason being is naturally their eyes haven’t had time to adjust to coordinate the timing. Now explain to them if they do the same for their hooker he will have little chance winning the ball. This little explanation will work wonders for the communication.

There are plenty technical tricks the front row have to learn, however, I think these are key to Junior scrumaging. Good luck!!!

Kids into Rugby, It’s Easy!

Mon, 24 Aug 2009 08:41:00 GMT

If it’s so easy why aren’t we doing it? Doing what I can hear you say. Ah derrr, think like a kid! We are all kids at heart and we all want the same thing, no not that.

I mean what do kids want? Put simply they want fun and so do we as adults, so where is the difficulty? Maybe its professionalism, is that the disease killing our game turning kids and older players away from our game? Or officialdom over cluttering our game with technicalities. What ever the problem people are turning away on droves and staying away from the stadiums in pursuit of something more exciting.

I would have to say I am a die hard supporter, played for 20 years, coached for the last 15 years and will probably get cremated with a rugby ball in arm. But I am seriously considering installing a rack of torture to distract me from the pain suffered when watching rugby at the moment.

On the other hand AFL is soaking it up, kids are flocking to the game and stadiums are filling at nearly every home game. The atmosphere is electric and people are watching it on the box (I have to say though I still can’t see the point of the game).

What are they doing that is so attractive? I think its simple, exactly that, keep it simple. Our game has become so complicated that even the officials are getting confused during the game and of course the new comers have no chance understanding what the hell is going on.

I think Graham Henry is right, maybe its time to have a real think about the rules of the game. The greatest problem is that the powers to be seem to think there is no problem with the game and believe rugby will always a have a place. Didn’t General Motors think the same thing, there will always be a place for big cars and look what’s happened to them?

So lets look at the game from a kids point of view, we want to run with the ball (or watch someone run with the ball), we want to score lots of tries (or watch someone score lots of tries), we want to pass and kick (or watch someone pass and kick), generally we want lots of action.

Correct me if I am wrong but I haven’t seen a kid do something or watch something boring, so why should we?

7 Reasons Why 7s Rugby is the Future

Thu, 27 Aug 2009 00:20:00 GMT

Here are 7 reasons why I think 7 aside rugby is going to increase the player population and exposure of Rugby through out the world.

1. Easy to coach and referee

7 aside rugby is easy to coach and referee which makes it highly attractive to junior or entry level rugby coaches and schools. Parents and teachers don’t have to worry about the scrum safety issues which generally are perceived as dangerous and labelled a no go zone in primary school circles. The open and flowing style of the game lends itself to young players and in turn makes coaching the game a pleasure. Personally i believe that rugby in Primary School should be 7 aside rugby and if players want more they join their local club who can then coach the technicalities of 15 aside rugby.

2. Easy to watch

This is a given, as we have seen the growing public attraction to the 7s circuit around the world. Hong Kong 7s has set the bench mark, closely followed by the Dubai 7s tournaments. The fast and unpredictable nature of the game lends itself to good viewing, top that with the short duration of the game you have a winning formula.

3. Suits countries with limited resources

The game suits countries with limited resources. Personal costs are lower, equipment costs are reduced and most importantly you only need 14 good players to have a chance of jagging a match or two. The luck in the game can turn the match on the drop of a ball (excuse the pun), just look at Kenya this year.

4. Kids love it

It’s the perfect game for kids, they can run, kick, chase and tackle until they blue in the face. There is plenty of space which helps them feel a little less threatened and more likely to have a go. It’s also a game that can be played up at the local park with limited numbers.

5. Fits easily into time restraints

This is probably one of the key advantages of 7 aside rugby, it can be played quickly. Perfect for the school system in which you generally only have 45 minutes to play a sport. Outside of the school system competitions can be run in half or a full days and all teams can have their fare share of game time.

6. Easy to sell

The Olympic committee aren’t going to have their work cut out selling the tickets to this tournament. Here’s a scenario, you have the choice between the 1500m distance running, discus and 7 aside rugby what are you going to choose? Not only that in the time it takes them to run the marathon you could have watched approximately 10 games of 7 aside rugby.

7. Its in the Olympics!!

Here we go every country in the world will have the chance to enter a team in the Olympics to play rugby, what an impact this will have on rugby. The sport will be introduced to countries that have never played it before, let alone heard of it. Each National Rugby Organisation or Association will be able to apply for grants from their government and more than likely receive them to increase the nations rugby skill level in order to win a medal. Naturally this directly or indirectly will increase the exposure of rugby around the world.

I don’t know about you but I am in 7th heaven!!!

Is 13 the Lucky number?

Mon, 24 Aug 2009 08:38:00 GMT

Maybe 13 is the lucky number to get rugby out of this dire state of affairs. Put your hand up if you are enjoying the drudgery we face every test match in the current Tri-nations arena. If your hand is raised I am sure you are feeling a little lonely at the moment.

If the IRB and the Northern Hemisphere powers that be aren’t keen to change the rules of the game to increase the viewing pleasure then maybe the only alternative is to drop the flankers. It pains me to say it as I am an ex-flanker and loved the position, however, in light of the increase in skill level and defensive adaptability the game is to big to fit 15 players on the field and score tries.

The aim should always be to place the advantage of the game in the hands of the attacking team, giving them the best opportunity to score tries, providing they can hold onto the ball and limit mistakes. At the moment the advantage is firmly gripped by the defensive team.

Defence has come so far in rugby that most teams only need to place 2 or 3 players in the ruck to win or slow the ball down, while the attacking team usually has to double that number just to maintain possession. Do the maths and you can see why everyone is resorting to the arial game, it’s the only way through.

Ironically the IRB and the Northern Hemisphere hand brakes complained about the increased amount of kicking in the ELV’s. Naturally they resorted to a conservative amendment to the rules and unfortunately I can’t see much of an improvement. The Super 14 was run under the ELVs and even though the speed of the game was increased the spectacle didn’t really live up to expectations.

What other law changes can actually benefit the attacking team, possibly making the ruck defensive line 5m back (league style governed by the touch judge), drop the rule allowing the tackler to play the ball after getting to his feet or as Graham Henry mentioned giving a mark for every kick caught on the full.

Personally I think these changes will mean a greater intrusion into the game we all know and love. Reducing the numbers will mean the rules can remain the same and the only change will be a little more space on the field and let’s face it who wouldn’t love to see a back line with a little more space?

Looking at the rule changes being thrown around I think this is by far the best alternative and lets face it the defensive patterns will quickly adapt or maybe not, isn’t that what we want?

Age Grading vs Weight Grading

Fri, 07 Aug 2009 00:25:00 GMT

The age old discussion (excuse the pun), should players be graded by age or weight?

I suppose the greatest statement for the case of age grading is that players will have to face a player of size sooner or later, therefore the sooner the players get used to playing bigger players the better. Secondly when is the correct age to bring back the age grading? If science is used then players will be around 16 when the pubity tapers off.

Truthfully there is no perfect grading system, there will always be a problem for someone. However, we have to step back and take into consideration the future of rugby. With this in perspective rugby junior numbers are declining and one of the key reasons is that parents (in particular mum’s) and players are turning towards sports of less contact. The question should then be simply, which grading system would attract junior players (between 6-12 years) and their parents to the game.

Obviously when looking at the grading system through the eyes of a 6-12 year old size would be a big determining factor. If you or I were to choose playing against a player around my size or against a player my age, it’s pretty obvious which way we will tend towards. In the early years players need to gain confidence, especially in contact which then spills over into all the other aspect of the game.

Generally speaking the early ages of rugby is a confidence and game sense stage, in which players will gain an understanding of all the facets of rugby and hopefully increase their confidence. Tackling is gradually phased in along with the structural elements of the game, i.e. the scrum and line out. As the players move towards the 12 years age they are generally refining their skill level and technical aspects of the game. The point I am trying to make is that playing against players of the same size and not age is not going to be detrimental to the players. In fact around the age 12 players will be making a decision about whether they stay with the sport or move on and if they are feeling confident they will continue playing.

Is 16 too old to change over to the age grading system? If we are taking into consideration a very general understanding of pubity then 16 is about the age most of the body changes start to plateau out. At this age most of the players should have gained enough confidence playing against players of their own size and hopefully become comfortable with their own body size/shape. Contact shouldn’t be a problem for them and the correct tackling technique should be embedded in their game, reducing the chance of injury. This all lends itself to a quick adaption of the new variety of sizes in the game.

The only possible spanner in the works could come from players who have a considerably slow growth and don’t appear to be moving through the grades. The only way to reduce the chance of a small 10 year old playing against a large 8 year old would be to contain the weight grading to a difference of 2 years, for example distribute the players according to weight with in an age of 2 years, for example 6/7 years, 8/9 years, 10/11 years, 12/13 etc.

What about the school rugby sector? Generally speaking the open teams contain players of varied ages selected according to their talent, so age is of little consideration. Most of the open team will be 16 and older reducing the impact of the weight grading on selection. In the lower ages weight can be easily used to grade the players and would probably increase or even out the inter-school competition.

Rugby should be attempting to shrug the image of a dangerous sport and reduce the possibility of injuries. With parents, in particular mums, pushing their kids towards sport of little contact every act of creating confidence in the sport is necessary. Parents and players will definitely perceive the sport as less dangerous if they are going to play against players of their own size or weight.

At current most sports are determined by age rather than weight, which leaves a great opening for rugby to take the leading move and possible increase the players population. Hopefully parents will see the step forward taken by rugby as a positive and register their kids in the local competition. Once the players and parents become accustomed to the game there is a better chance they will remain with the game.

At present I can’t see a better way of gaining the confidence of young players and parents, can you?

Boys Need Physical Contact

Fri, 07 Aug 2009 03:42:00 GMT

As crazy as it may seem, boys need physical contact as a form of affection. How often do you see boys rumbling in the back yard, wrestling in the school playground? More to the point how often do you see girls doing the same?

Obviously boys and girls are different and they both need affection, however, in different forms. Girls are more drawn to cuddling and hugging, while boys will more than likely turn the cuddle into a squeeze followed by a wrestle. Sound familiar?

Boys will generally rumble with their friends and peers at any given opportunity. I see it with my 9 year old son all he wants to do is rumble, tackle or push me, and that is in an affectionate way. My daughter loves to be held in my arms and my son likes to wrestle his way out of my arms.

Call me biased, but doesn’t that make rugby a great outlet for boys? The back yard is actually more dangerous than the rugby field. How often do you see or hear of young boys injuring themselves in the back yard? More often than on the rugby field. Why?

Because rugby is a controlled environment, in which coaches and referees are on hand to reduce the chance of injuries. The players are taught how to play the game, how to fall and how to tackle correctly. The variability and unseen dynamics of the back yard are far less controlled and considering boys will naturally graduate to physical contact isn’t better if they get their fix on the rugby field?

The channels of contact in rugby are gradually introduced along with the other co-ordination skills needed for the sport. The players are coached through the safety aspects and the correct techniques reducing the chances of injury. Injuries are inevitable in every sport and with good management they can be reduced.

So as crazy as it may seem the rugby field is actually a safer place for physical contact than the back yard. Correct me if I am wrong!!

Rugby World Cup Re-Invented?

Fri, 07 Aug 2009 03:41:00 GMT

Is the World cup Structure fair and inspirational for developing nations?
The New Zealand Herald writer John Roughan wrote an interesting article about the integration of the developing nations into the New Zealand heartland of rugby or maybe he was implying the world heartland of rugby.

He added "They have no hope of making it past the pools but that is enough. For a month they can play in the big time and maybe even give one of the top teams a fright." Which raises the real question of if we are going to grow the game shouldn't we be trying to add a purpose in the Rugby World Cup for these developing nations other than cannon fodder or a moment on the world stage?

How about we let them play for something totally different, the 'Rugby World Plate'? What if these nations, that don't qualify for the top ten, can play against each other on almost a level playing field for their own version of the Rugby World Cup. These developing nations would be given a realistic chance at some silverware.

Lets develop this scenario further. Split the world cup into two sections using the ranking system in place, the top 10 and the emerging 10 (for the want of a better name). The top 10 play for the Rugby World Cup and the next 10 play for the Rugby World Plate.

The pool stage would involve the two groups playing each of the other teams in their group once. What a spectacle! The top 10 rugby nations in the world would all play each other once in the first 2 weeks, complemented by equally close and exciting matches between the next 10 nations. Fans and supporters would be presented with a spectacle at each game rather than hoping their team would score a try against a rugby super power.

The point system would run similar to the current bonus point system, promoting tries and high point scoring to gain bonus points. After the completion of the pool stage the table rankings would decide the format of the knock out stage or finals. The following two weeks would provide the rugby world with gripping games in which all levels of the rugby world would be playing for an outcome.

The greatest issue would come down to the ticketing and ensuring the capacity crowds follow the next 10 matches. However, if the ticket system was based on team locations packages in which spectators buy a package including 2 match of the emerging 10, then all games would be full. This would mean for example a spectator following the Springboks buys a package, they would see 2 match of their choice from the Springbok pool games and 2 matches of other teams located in the same region as the Springboks. Naturally this would mean the teams would be allocated a region and play most of their games in that region.

Once the pool stage is over tickets to the quarters, semi finals and the finals could be staged on the same nights or consecutive days to encourage higher spectator interest.

It’s just a thought that probably needs gaps to be filled, however, I for one would far prefer to watch Georgia take on Namibia, than one of the world leaders taking on one of the emerging nations.

The World Series concept sounds great, why not go one step better, Rugby Champions league?

Fri, 07 Aug 2009 03:40:00 GMT

The International Rugby Board are considering the introduction of the biennial tournament. The tournament would involve ten teams, New Zealand, Australia, South Africa, England, Wales, France, Ireland, Scotland, Italy and Argentina. The aim of the tournament is to place more of a bearing on the end of season tours to the Northern and Southern hemispheres, which of late have been bleeding grounds or half hearted squads.

Truth be said, the major problem with the squads for the end of season tours are usually related to contractual ties to clubs. And understandably so, if you or I were a club forking out thousands of dollars/pounds/euros for star players we would also be asking for the return of the stars at the end of the international season. Sure playing for your country is and always should be the pinnacle of a players Rugby carrier, however, for the clubs sake having the players sent off on a meaningless tour is pure money loss.

So what about give the clubs/franchises a turn? The Rugby Champions league, it's got a ring to it doesn't it? The top four teams of the Heineken Cup and the top four teams of the Super 14 come together at the end of the series to play off for the Rugby Champions League title.

Naturally the tournament would have to alternate each year between the Northern Hemisphere and the Southern Hemisphere with a fall out year during the World Cup year. Four to eight weeks of the best players, playing for their clubs/franchises in a do or die battle for their respective competition. Could it get better?

Due to time and cost restraints the format would more than likely have to be a knock out competition with the draw randomly drawn out of the barrel. Each team would advance only on a win until the last two are left to fight it out.

Anyway, it's just a thought, before we reduce the intensity of test matches even further by organising more internationals why don't we give the clubs the stage?