A player who learns a skill under game conditions , has a much more robust technique under pressure than a player that learns a skill in an artificial coaching environment.
This is not to say that there is no room for technical coaching, but that it is secondary to the game.
What we are trying to do with our rookies, is to have them play a lot, and then use that platform as a basis for small technical improvements, as opposed to teaching them skills and then putting them into the game.
It is too early to tell, but several of our better rookies are already playing for A-side (which is rare at this time of the year).
Are there others that coach the game to new players this way?
I think that it might be the better way to coach older players who are new to the game. Now these games are not complete rugby games, they are controlled by the coach, and in my case they are designed to recognize and attack space!
Rugby is simple:
The aim of rugby is to have the ball in hand in front of the advantage line - moving forward.
Eventually you'll move forward into the in-goal - where you can stop and force it in exchange for some points.There are two ways to achieve this aim.
1) Kick the ball over the advantage line and hope the opposition can be pressured into giving it back to you before they cross their advantage line.
2) Carry it over the advantage line - thus removing the ball in hand involvement of the opposition.I'm a fan of two - The opposition should have to earn possession through their own merits - and except for extreme situations, or to exploit an undeniable opposition weakness - the ball should not be kick(given) to them.
Generally speaking there are two ways to achieve 2).
1) Get your big ugly forwards to carry 'it' across the advantage line. or
2) Get your backs to carry it across the advantage line.
The traditional New Zealand way to do 2) is attack the advantage line for eighty minutes, hard out, with your forwards.The traditional Australian way to do 2) is attack the advantage line for eighty minutes, hard out, with your backs.I suspect the answer lies in some sort of synthisis of the two 2's.
Tactics to me are how this strategy is implimented in a combat situation.Tactics are the stuff you do in contact with the enemy.
There are - in reflection upon the simplicity of rugby - three catagories of tactics.
1) The aim of rugby is to have the ball in hand... (A.K.A. getting your hands on the ball)
2) ...ball in hand in front of the advantage line...
Options of play with the expressed purpose of crossing the advantage line. If this was one of those yes/no flow diagrams the no (we do not have posession of the ball) would point back to defense which If you'd been paying attention you'd know I regard as nothing more than an opportunity to get your hands on the ball.
3) ...in front of the advantage line - moving forward.
1) Rucking and mauling.
2) Lines of running and support play.
3) anything that involves continuation of advantage (the last three words sum up the game for mine), or at very least continuation of possesion - in the hope that if you hold 'it' long enough one of your charges will make a tactical decision that will result in the crossing of the advantage line - (that is before someone gets isolated or kicks(gives) the ball away).
What we tend to do is have no positions except for a SH.
We then configure the field and number of players to either emphasise utilization of space or continuity (wide if using space, or thin if recycling).
The lack of positions allows all players to develop all skills (how many times have we screamed at the backs to go into rucks, or groaned as our prop drops the ball in support in the open field). We even take it a step further when we look at utilizing space , by configuring the defense initially to either be bunched (offense should look to spread the ball wide) or by having them spread out (offense should look to penetrate), once it gets going you can show the players how attacking a spread defense by penetration, bunches it, and vice versa.
As an example, you can do 15v15 on a normal width field for use of space. 10v10 in 10m channel for focus on recycling.
At the early stage it is easier to reduce the numbers and get everyone involved.
It is important to have a coaching objective and then design the game around it.
Plus you can be consistent on what you want them to learn.
In this method, as a coach, you will see many things that the players do not do well, but you must be focussed on one thing, just like you would be if you were practicing that skill in a traditional drill.
I have found that a technical foundation (i.e., specific drills to develop technique and skill) is critical to teaching rugby to new players.
However, like you, I have discovered that there is often a void between the drill and the game. Some players have difficulty juxtaposing the two - they don't see how the drill relates to the game situation. Moreover, they sometimes play , they play technically sound, but without flare and there is little explosive play.
They are going through the correct motions, but lack passion in their play.To that end, I have long held that active playing of the game in practice - full contact - under controlled conditions is the single best training for these players. And, it keeps their tackling skills sharp.
Also, the conditioning aspects is more specific to the game; I would prefer to end practice with 20 minutes of full-on play than to run some sprints, etc.A couple of caveats first.
I never go into full contact drills or game situations until there is a foundation of ball handling, tackling, and a (at least) rudimentary understanding of situational play.
Typically, I like to get the younger players watching videos of good rugby to give them some perspective of the game.
During the full contact practices, I run very tight control on the situations and stop play periodically to address mistakes or apparent misunderstandings.
I know that this breaks the flow, but I try to make these interventions learning modules, wherein we address the specific issue at hand by asking the players to respond and interpret the situation (initiating self-coaching).
Lastly, you are correct about the application of technique in pressure (i.e., game) situations and the development of robustplay. There is no question that this results in dramatic improvements in performance.In the end, I have found that we respond much better and our play on Saturdays is more inspired and effective.
The pace of the games is greater and the decision-making is decidedly improved. The players also enjoy playing the game.
And, when play is integrated into very specific drills - that are used as warm-up and training before the scrimmages - the players see and appreciate the relevance and applicability to the game
Skills and drills
Work on rugby skill drills but design/change them to incorporate the energy system you are trying to train...for example, ball handling drills could beextended so that there is sufficient continuous running (jogging) to train the aerobic system.
Players might be grouped by their level of fitness ,rather than skill level. If you wish to work on mauling techniques (see current discussion on this topic), you might let them wrestle a while longer to get aerobic training.
Sprinting exercises could be incorporated into handling drills by putting a time/distance challenge to simulate sprinting...a well-designed practice does not have to have exercisesjust for the sake of it...players may come to you and ask...Hey, what about our fitness stuff?...you should be able to answer...we did it... ;-)
The confined area helps you as the coach keep every body where you can see them ( yell at them without loosing your voice :-)), helps maintain intensity as the is less option for the contacts etc. to be spaced out and as there are competing groups beside then for competition.
If you have a half dozen grids (or as approp. for your numbers) you are able to rotate often enough to keep up the variety. If there is a particular drill you want to concentrate on you can position yourself at that grid and the players come to you rather than vice versa.
A good drill to try with your players involves keeping the drill as close to game situations as possible 'ie short runs, tackles etc. Incorporate changes of direction and running style ie sideways as in defensive alignment and throw a ball in there somewhere.
For example, set off in groups of two to jog the first 10m, change direction sprint for 10-20m, sideways for 5m, backwards for 5m then hit a tackle bag, quickly to feet to pick up a ball and set a ruck/maul (maybe another sprint). After a circuit, players man the tackle bags, etc, until relieve by the following group.
All the up down work is just as tiring as going flat out up down a footy field. In summary: try to keep the drills as game-oriented as possible (can't recall ever leap-frogging someone in a game).
Players don't actually like doing fitness drills, so the best way to motivate them is to conceal it.Indeed, some work done by a few of my colleagues has found that rugby players sprint faster with a ball than without one; essentially, they seem to try harder if it seems to be rugby related.
The lesson is to try and hide the conditioning work in the drills.goals
I think that your team goals will guide you through everything you do as a coach.
It will determine how you run skill drills, unit moves and team play.
I think that most coaches have these goals in their heads and subconciously work off them, but where a number of coaches fall down (me included!) is the communication of these goals to the team.
After some problems in the past with confusion on the team's direction, we have a team meeting at the beginning of the season to determine what these goals are, and then we monitor and communicate the reasons we are coaching something in terms of these goals.
An example of this was that, due to a change in our competitve structure this season, this fall season did not have the significance of past years. Recognizing that we have a number of players leaving the club the end of the year, we dedicated this season to recruitment and building of depth.
This meant that we spent a lot of time in practice mixing the better players with those new to the game.
This also meant that we selected our best side, maybe once all year!
In fact this policy caused some problems, as we had made it to the final of a tournament and did not select our best side, because our goal was to improve depth, and what better way to improve a b side player than have them play in a high pressure game (not all the players agreed with this policy!).
Once you select your goals you MUST be consistent if you want to achieve them.
The trick is to keep the long term view in your goals.
In the spring, our competitive season is very tough, and we will keep the club broken into ability groups at practice, and have more of a focus on the top players.
Just to pull this out a bit more. A big problem is the difference between goals and objectives
A goal has to comply with the 'rules' of performance measurement: it must be specific, measurable, agreed, realistic, and time-dependent.
An objective is a general aim that drops out from these. The important element of goal-setting is that it has to be independent of the opposition or environment: objectives don't have to be.
Objectives
Winning a match is an objective; coming x in the league is an objective. Goals are the tools we use to try and hit those objectives, but they are more rigorous and can be evaluated properly.
Strategy and tactics follow from this as the means to achieve the goals, and then you're into 'teamwork'.If the distinction between goals and objectives isn't clear, then the coach starts being perceived as unfair.
Common whinges such as Martin didn't pass the ballthe crowd were putting me off and the other team was much bettershouldn't be able to be used for goals. From goals comes accountability, and then (hopefully) improved performance