Tuesday, November 25, 2008
Collegiate All Americans
The selection process has been announced for the 2009 Collegiate All American team and it appears to remain consistent with the 2008 process (Press Release). USA Rugby should be commended for the increasingly transparent process of selecting All Americans. You may not always agree with the selections but you do know how they were selected and who the selectors were. As a player you know that if you make your TU team, have a good run at the NASC then you have a shot. That's all a player can ask for... There's nothing worse than paying all that money to go to the NASC and then get the feeling that the team was selected before you even got there. Not too long ago, many felt like that was the case.
Friday, November 21, 2008
Promotion / relegation and does size really matter?
The 2009 South collegiate men’s matrix has been released (Version 1.0) and some commentary accompanied the schedule concerning promotion / relegation. It appears that there will be an initiative to force promote and relegate collegiate teams based on prior year performance.
So, let’s take a look at an updated listing of collegiate teams in the south ranked by undergraduate enrollment… 2008 Ranking - I've highlighted in red the teams that have changed divisions since 2006.
When you examine this list and then also examine the total numbers in each division, some things jump out fairly quickly.
First, we need more Division 1 teams. Looks like LSU may be heading to the South so we need another team to join them for an 8team top league game league schedule.
Second, there needs to be a separate competition for small college teams. The disparity of enrollment within Division III is ridiculous. Rugby is at its most popular on campus when the students and administrators can identify with their success. Sure, if Sewanee beats Georgia it is huge back on campus, but if Sewanee gets put out of the playoffs by Memphis or Mississippi State, most are going to wonder what the heck those schools are doing playing Sewanee in a playoff match.
Third, providing quality coaching and non-student leadership on campus has got to improve. You see it every time someone steps up and takes on a program with the right tools in the toolbox. My good friend Jeremy Linne is proving it this year at UNC – Greensboro. Those boys had not won a game in three seasons and were known only for their anti-social behavior. Well, this fall he’s got them to a 3-3 record and his boys are actually helping to coach the local high school teams. He’s gone in and used a proven formula and they have bought into it and are on their way. Closer to home, Scotty McCreight is doing the same thing at Tennessee Tech.
So, lets find another team ready to take on the challenge of Division I rugby; lets create a separate small college competition and then give those that qualify the choice of either playing in it or playing in the conventional divisions; and lets create a coaching mentoring program to get every college club a coach that has the tools to build a respectable program. Sounds easy enough, right?
So, let’s take a look at an updated listing of collegiate teams in the south ranked by undergraduate enrollment… 2008 Ranking - I've highlighted in red the teams that have changed divisions since 2006.
When you examine this list and then also examine the total numbers in each division, some things jump out fairly quickly.
First, we need more Division 1 teams. Looks like LSU may be heading to the South so we need another team to join them for an 8
Second, there needs to be a separate competition for small college teams. The disparity of enrollment within Division III is ridiculous. Rugby is at its most popular on campus when the students and administrators can identify with their success. Sure, if Sewanee beats Georgia it is huge back on campus, but if Sewanee gets put out of the playoffs by Memphis or Mississippi State, most are going to wonder what the heck those schools are doing playing Sewanee in a playoff match.
Third, providing quality coaching and non-student leadership on campus has got to improve. You see it every time someone steps up and takes on a program with the right tools in the toolbox. My good friend Jeremy Linne is proving it this year at UNC – Greensboro. Those boys had not won a game in three seasons and were known only for their anti-social behavior. Well, this fall he’s got them to a 3-3 record and his boys are actually helping to coach the local high school teams. He’s gone in and used a proven formula and they have bought into it and are on their way. Closer to home, Scotty McCreight is doing the same thing at Tennessee Tech.
So, lets find another team ready to take on the challenge of Division I rugby; lets create a separate small college competition and then give those that qualify the choice of either playing in it or playing in the conventional divisions; and lets create a coaching mentoring program to get every college club a coach that has the tools to build a respectable program. Sounds easy enough, right?
Monday, November 10, 2008
Ruck Management
Now that the fall season is in the books there is time to reflect on the effort and quality of rugby that was on display. Probably the single most difficult thing to predict from Saturday to Saturday this fall is how the referee will manage the tackle / ruck during the match… So, lets identify the ideology of the referee as it relates to ruck management.
Pretty much all teams now teach their players to arrive low at the ruck and initially use the player on the ground as some sort of support to “stay on their feet”. You will hear some coaches still complain about this being bridging but I think its pretty clear that its being allowed, particularly since we got that handy little handout at the national tournament (see prior post for details). You can pretty much define a rucking style and a referee’s management by what happens next… What do the next players in support do when they arrive and what happens to the players already there?
For the purpose of this exercise we must also be careful to define “stay on their feet”. It can mean anything from the player’s body not physically beginning on the ground to having the weight of your body on your feet (standing).
Conservative
A conservative referee approach will keep everyone on their feet at all times. So, once that player has secured the ruck, he expect the next supporting players to arrive and also stay on their feet – meaning the balance of their weight is on their feet, not balanced on a player already on the ground (like the tackled teammate). No one should be on the ground except maybe the tackled player.
Moderate
The moderate referee understands that the arriving players may actually force or drive the existing (bridging) teammate past the ball and is OK with that as long as he doesn’t willfully collapse to the ground. You typically see players end up in the push up position either lying over the tackled player or just past them.
Liberal
The liberal referee has little regard to players that ruck past the ball on clearly won rucks. So, once the bridged player is driven past the tackled teammate by support player #1, he simply goes to the ground. Then support player #2 drives #1 past the ball as well and he goes to the ground and/or collapses on top of the original bridged player. In this case, you may see players stacked on top of each other or end to end with their shoulders clearly on the ground. Now that the defending team isn't allowed to tidy up their side of the ruck with their boots, you see this method more and more.
The focus of the moderate and the liberal referee is obviously on won possession so get it moving regardless of players willfully leaving their feet. The players action make it much more difficult to counter ruck and also creates a deeper off sides line so that the attacking team gets a much better launch in the next phase. Since this method is obviously the most advantagous for attacking teams, it is obviously the preferred method of coaching the ruck. The only problem is that if you teach a rucking technique with the balance of the player’s weight off their feet and then you run across a conservative referee, you will have a penalty riddled game.
I had a very interesting conversation with a LSU parent this past weekend and they pretty much explained this very thing to me. I was complimenting the (liberal) rucking style used by LSU and he recounted their experience last year in the West semifinals against Colorado. Seems that they faced a very good Colorado team and brought their liberal rucking style. Unfortunately for them, the game was apparently managed by a conservative referee. This parent definitely wasn't happy with the penalty count and was left with a very clear opinion that it effected the outcome of the game.
Pretty much all teams now teach their players to arrive low at the ruck and initially use the player on the ground as some sort of support to “stay on their feet”. You will hear some coaches still complain about this being bridging but I think its pretty clear that its being allowed, particularly since we got that handy little handout at the national tournament (see prior post for details). You can pretty much define a rucking style and a referee’s management by what happens next… What do the next players in support do when they arrive and what happens to the players already there?
For the purpose of this exercise we must also be careful to define “stay on their feet”. It can mean anything from the player’s body not physically beginning on the ground to having the weight of your body on your feet (standing).
Conservative
A conservative referee approach will keep everyone on their feet at all times. So, once that player has secured the ruck, he expect the next supporting players to arrive and also stay on their feet – meaning the balance of their weight is on their feet, not balanced on a player already on the ground (like the tackled teammate). No one should be on the ground except maybe the tackled player.
Moderate
The moderate referee understands that the arriving players may actually force or drive the existing (bridging) teammate past the ball and is OK with that as long as he doesn’t willfully collapse to the ground. You typically see players end up in the push up position either lying over the tackled player or just past them.
Liberal
The liberal referee has little regard to players that ruck past the ball on clearly won rucks. So, once the bridged player is driven past the tackled teammate by support player #1, he simply goes to the ground. Then support player #2 drives #1 past the ball as well and he goes to the ground and/or collapses on top of the original bridged player. In this case, you may see players stacked on top of each other or end to end with their shoulders clearly on the ground. Now that the defending team isn't allowed to tidy up their side of the ruck with their boots, you see this method more and more.
The focus of the moderate and the liberal referee is obviously on won possession so get it moving regardless of players willfully leaving their feet. The players action make it much more difficult to counter ruck and also creates a deeper off sides line so that the attacking team gets a much better launch in the next phase. Since this method is obviously the most advantagous for attacking teams, it is obviously the preferred method of coaching the ruck. The only problem is that if you teach a rucking technique with the balance of the player’s weight off their feet and then you run across a conservative referee, you will have a penalty riddled game.
I had a very interesting conversation with a LSU parent this past weekend and they pretty much explained this very thing to me. I was complimenting the (liberal) rucking style used by LSU and he recounted their experience last year in the West semifinals against Colorado. Seems that they faced a very good Colorado team and brought their liberal rucking style. Unfortunately for them, the game was apparently managed by a conservative referee. This parent definitely wasn't happy with the penalty count and was left with a very clear opinion that it effected the outcome of the game.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
