Great news! Because we’ve recently reached our preliminary sales target for

Just click the GRASSROOTS RUGBY banner bottom right!

We’re on hold!

Due to the pressure of poker gameil poker onlinelive poker tourscarica gratis pokeraces texas holdem multiplayerpoker texas holdem onlinegioca poker on lineparty poker,party poker bonus,party poker comsexy poker gratispoker da scaricare gratisgioco a pokergioco strep pokerpoker downloadseven card studgiochi streep pokerwww pokergiochi giochi onlinedownload video poker gratisvideo poker da scaricare gratisstrategia texas holdemstrip poker gamesgiochi carte poker gratisgioco poker da scaricare gratispoker texano onlinegiochi jack blackblog casino onlineplay free baccaratcasino online autorizzationline gamblinggiochi casino pcroulette systemgioco della roulettecraps gratis888 casinosoftware video pokercasino o netplay baccarat onlineplay baccaratvideo poker gameaprire un casino onlinebaccarat gratisroulette strategyvideo poker strategyregolamento roulettegiochi black jack in lineagiochi black jackdownload gioco rouletteplay blackjack onlinecasino online italiarisposte casino on net other projects I have decided to put this blog on hold for an indefinite period. I hope to return to full-time or at least part-time blogging in the future. In the interim may I thank my many readers for their interest.

PS
Rugby Coaching Notes at (http://www.eurekastreet.com/rcn/ahcoach.htm) motorola ringtones music real ringtones ringtones info nokia remember ringtones free lg ringtones cingular wireless ringtones free ringtones and wallpaper for cell phone cell metro pcs phone ringtones free real ringtones sprint free sprint pcs ringtones blackberry free mp3 ringtones free virgin mobile ringtones phone ringtones verizon cell free phone ringtones verizon wireless much music ringtones download ringtones motorola cell cingular free phone ringtones motorola tracfone ringtones free ringtones for prepaid phone free bollywood ringtones free polyphonic ringtones download continues in full operation and I’ve just (January 30th 2008) added a Backs Drill.

While whiling away these drear days of not quite Christmas by sifting through my Mediazone video downloads to try to answer some of my outstanding technical questions about the 2007 World Cup (What happened to Ireland? Did England actually change their game after the South Africa debacle?) I suddenly found myself with another series of questions to answer.

These largely fall under the heading of:
“Why is general TV coverage of rugby so bad?”

To my mind, the only thing that can explain this lamentable state of affairs is that the TV companies believe their audience to be a bunch of rugby-illiterate morons who are looking only for thrills and spills and are probably half drunk to boot! This criticsm, by the way, goes for all of the rugby channels Mediazone, Sky, Canal+, BBC, RTE etc. etc. (I am well aware that the transmitting companies usually share the video feeds and add their own commentary and analysis, by the way, but why do they compound the shortcomings of their commentators by accepting the available slovenly and uneducated video direction? Maybe, heaven forbid, there’s really only one company world-wide responsible for it all and I’m now in danger of slandering a single poor soul who never wanted to do it anyway. If so, my advice is, “Do yourself a favour, my friend, and go back to day-time game shows where you belong.”)

So enough of the rant: with nearly a couple of months to go before the Puma-less Six Nations what do I, as a reasonably intelligent and often sober, ex-rugby player want to see on TV?

1. The actual grounding of the ball to score a try is only interesting if there’s a question about it’s legality. What I want to see is how the try came about. Where and how did the movement start? What were the key moves and mistakes that made it possible? The average try takes only 45 seconds to score says Sir Clive Woodward so why can’t I have the 45 seconds of play leading up to it (maybe from a better angle) instead of three fifteen second sequences of an unopposed player crossing the line, dotting down and receiving the soccer-style intimate caresses of his team-mates? (There’s plenty of time for such replays while the kicker goes through his interminable ritual, anyway. Again, unless there’s a question about the kick 3 seconds is more than enough.)

2. I want to see the scrum in action and this means seeing the props’ feet if possible. When will video directors understand that the ref is almost always in the way on the put-in side? (The overhead camera at Stade de France gives a great view but why is it so rarely used?) And while on the subject of the scrum, once the ball is heeled and in the scrum-half’s hands I want to see his options - i.e. the camera needs to pull back immediately to show the attacking back line AND the defence. You can substitute ‘lineout’ for ’scrum’ and ‘lifting pod’ for ‘prop’s feet’ in the above if you wish.

3. Speaking of evaluating options available, yes it’s exciting to be close-up to the ruck or maul but it’s the possibilities for attack and defence that these actions open and how the options are exploited that are really interesting.

4. Why is the camera always on the kicker and NEVER on the kick receiver? Is it possible that our mythical director really doesn’t understand how kick-offs work?

5. I want to see a lot less personality boosting. I don’t care (Bill McLaren excepted, of course,) if the children in his class at Aughtermochty Mixed Infants are cheeering for this player or that one or about the doings of his celebrity spouse either. Let’s leave the cult of celebrity to soccer for a few more years.

Well, those are the wants. What I’d LIKE to see and hear is just a little more informed analysis. I’ve noted that it’s not the commentator’s or the colour guy’s fault if the director has no idea which bit of action to replay for illustration but with modern technology isn’t there a way of at least providing some re-play options? How about allowing the commentary team to direct the video also so that we’d find out if one video/commentary team is better than the others.

I do want to know who is carrying the ball but I can make up my own mind whether he’s doing it well or not. However, if the commentator/colour guy has an observation about WHY he thinks something is happening I’m prepared to be interested.

I’d like it, too, if the statistics could all be gathered into sequences and shown at reasonable times - the half-time and final whistles, for example - and not scattered like confetti into the proceedings.

Will I get my New Year’s wishes? What do you think?

In this series of critical review of rugby websites there will be no winners or losers. My links are to be found at Media Links Worldwide .

What to expect: Well, it depends which flavour you choose!

The Kiwi site is seemingly streets ahead in coverage with plenty of news headlines on its front page - both sites are effectively re-formatted newspapers, written largely by newspaper reporters and composed by newspaper-influenced composers - and the Aussie site is certainly more parochial but since both rely heavily on the local newswires there probably isn’t a lot to choose between them newswise. Both sites have a heavy Antipodean bias, of course, which isn’t all bad if that’s your compass.

There are some subtle differences, however. Since the Aussie site has had some sort of historical association with the Sydney Morning Herald it prints columnists, the “Experts”, from that paper - at one time relying heavily on the predictable fulminations of Greg Growden and the folksy wisdom of Spiros Zavos. In contrast the Kiwi site has a more straightforward format not, so far at least, betraying any marked editorial allegience. Both sites feature opinion from a range of rugby personalities - Grant Fox, Tony Smith, Ewen McKenzie and John Connolly among them - and as a result while the mainstream is well represented there isn’t quite the broad range of opinion that www.stuff.co.nz serves up.

As for video the Kiwi site has a certain amount of interview-type coverage - useful if you don’t know what Robbie Deans looks and sounds like - but not exactly at the cutting edge. Notably it does feature a Women’s page, a healthy departure for rugby news coverage.
Strong points: Very much the authentic voices of the Antipodean mainstream.
Weak Points: Apparently satisfied with mainstream issues - a little more controversy or at least dissenting opinion wouldn’t hurt.

Excerpt from an article by DUNCAN JOHNSTONE - co-editor of Rugby Heaven.co.nz - in Stuff.co.nz Sunday, 25 November 2007.

Unbelievable? Inconceivable? Just plain stupid? A great idea that failed? How many games do players need to play to reach their peak?

“Some startling statistics reveal how Graham Henry’s controversial reconditioning and rotation policies left his All Blacks squad severely under-done for the rigours of a world cup.

“The starting XV who lost their quarterfinal to France averaged just over 12 games each for the entire year.

“It’s an indictment on the system when game time for a workaholic player like Jerry Collins is 1011 minutes the equivalent of less than 13 games of rugby.

“But there are some even more damning figures. First-choice halfback Byron Kelleher played the equivalent of just 8.5 games this year before heading off to his lucrative French club deal.

“Senior hooker Anton Oliver played the equivalent of just 10.6 matches.

“Injuries and troubled Super 14 selections contributed to seriously restrict Joe Rokocoko, whose time on the paddock panned out to be 10.2 matches while his Blues team-mate Ali Williams was left with 591 minutes of rugby 7.3 matches.

“Ironically the busiest player this season was Doug Howlett who packed in 1720 minutes the equivalent of 21.5 matches.

“Skipper Richie McCaw had a busy season despite being reconditioned. He started in 17 matches, played in 19 and got in 1288 minutes of action.

The more one thinks about the offload ( there was a time when I called it “passing out of the tackle” or “POOTT” before the term “offload” simplified all our lives) the more complicated it becomes.

Statistics show clearly, as if we needed to be convinced, that a team’s determination to keep the forward motion of the ball alive has a favourable impact on the final score. It doesn’t necessarily win matches but it surely makes them easier to win. However, raising the number of offloads by a team or by a player involves not just embedding the sure and certain knowledge that offloads do actually work but often a complete re-appraisal of what really takes place at the tackle/breakdown. Reducing the number of offloads that your opponents can complete takes a similar reappraisal of defence tactics.

Having said all that I have to apologise for what comes next. Actions that take place on the rugby field are extremely complicated. To a casual spectator they seem to be largely instinctive but nothing could be further from the truth. A good player assesses situations and deals with them according to a pre-learned hierarchy of actions. Spelling out these actions in detail always seems horribly trite not to say interminable especially when we know that the player can mentally review a very complicated list of possibilities and visualise the possible outcomes in seconds. What is important is that the player first of all has a well-constructed sequences of actions available and equally importantly that he or she maintains the ability to run through them logically.

For the ball-carrier offloading requires a sequence of decisions and actions which begins, hopefully, a few seconds before the realization that a tackle is “inevitable”. (This is not to suggest for a second that even inevitable tackles will actually succeed! Players completely miss 10% or so of their tackles through poor technique or failure of will and even if there is an actual laying on of hands there always exists the possibility of breaking out if the tackle is poorly constructed. ) The offload process thus begins when it appears that all efforts at escape and evasion have been exhausted. You’ve done your best to either avoid, fend-off or bulldoze the defender but now he or she is moving in for the tackle.

Before it happens, however, there needs to be a final check of the availability of your support.

I’ve ranted long and hard elsewhere (In “Rugby Coaching Notes”, for example) about the need for supporters to accept that tackles will happen to ball-carriers, to position themselves appropriately AND to make sure that the ball-carrier knows where they are.

Then comes the decision sequence: “How can I accept the tackle and maintain a position to make the offload?” It is important here for the ball-carrier to realise that he has some control over the sort of tackle he’s going to receive and this question can be broken down into: “How can I make him tackle me but leave my hands/arms free to make the pass?” and “How can I force my hands/arms free if he wraps me up?” (This is obviously the point where confidence in your upper-body strength built up during those long hours in the gym comes into play!) It goes without saying, I hope, that the first priority in any and all of these actions is to maintain possession of the ball!

The options here are to force a low tackle which will permit you to either pass as you fall or immediately after reaching the ground having turned your body or to make a “half-break” by ducking under the tackler’s arms so that you can pass behind him. (My strong suspicion is that the current increase in the number of high tackles is a direct result of the growing popularity of the second of these options.) Forcing the low tackle depends on the space available and the direction of approach of the tackler - if there’s space you can “run away,” at the last moment if there isn’t you can at least change direction to wrong-foot the tackler. Making the half-break might involve changing direction (side-step or swerve) to pass the defender on his “wrong” side i.e. the side he doesn’t expect.

If a wrap-up looks likely the tactic is to try to maintain a good base with your feet well placed to support a twisting movement to spring your arms free. This is obviously more easily said than done but without good foot position it is certainly nigh impossible. If the defender lifts you off the ground - not uncommon there days - your best bet may be to clench everything and try to get to ground with your arms free.

The last and perhaps the most crucial decision, strangely enough, is whether to pass or not!

Making a bad pass is almost as bad as dropping the ball so if you’re not confident you can complete a sympathetic pass it may be better to simply lay the ball back. This decision will be based on the amount of freedom available to your arms/hands, the position of your best supporter and the actions of the tackler and his supporters. It’s better to have the courage not to pass than to force an error on your team-mate. The supporter will be watching you intently and, if he sees hesitation on your part, is most likely to driver over and thus protect possession. This is second-best but it’s certainly better than watching a defender boot the loose ball down the field and scamper after it.

To sum up offloading is about preparation as much as execution. Having mental images of the opportunities and pitfalls of your possible actions will, as always, play a big part in their success. Good luck!

I thought I was fairly familiar with the world’s rugby websites but recently I discovered one I’d never seen before. SARugby.com is a South African site and while it seems (on short acquaintance, I must admit) not very remarkable in other respects it has a Stats Center with an excellent table of every RWC statistic you could ask for backed up by very extensive and exhaustive articles, team lists, player profiles. Paradise for the statistics nuts among us and clearly a labour of love by SARugby.com. I’m sure you’ll join me in thanking them for their work.

In this series of critical review of rugby websites there will be no winners or losers. My links are to be found at Links

Planet Rugby

• |News 9| Analysis 2| Coaching 5| Gossip 2 | Topical 9|
• |Timely 7| Regional 9| Video 1| Audio 0| Images 4|

What to expect: A lot! Planet Rugby’s home page looks like the first page of AutoTrader! Literally 10s of headlines, two or three (small) topical photos, a video box (more about that later,) and various Fixtures, Results, Tables, TV schedules, links and boxes. And a few ads, of course.
Comprehensive? Absolutely. Strong editorial discrimination? Hardly. While the major “newspaper” sites confine themselves to between 5 and 10 top stories, i.e. headlines and first paragraphs with a “read more” link, plus links to various topical sections, look hard enough at Planet Rugby’s home page and you’ll find links to ALL the latest rugby stories from around the world. As a result this is hardly a site for the casual browser and certainly not a site for one-eyed supporters. All the better for that you may say!
The aim of the content also seems to be coverage rather than controversy. No correspondents are named so there’s no-one to get annoyed with. “Gimme the facts, Ma’am, only the facts.” There is however an “Off the Field” section with excellent but all too few coaching tips from the resident “Guru” and the odd article about refereeing etc. as well as betting and fantasy rugby (whatever that is?) links.
The video box works - at least on my browser and video set-up - which is more than I can say for other sites - but the content is terminally bland. Ed Turner hasn’t yet figured out that the Republic of Ireland doesn’t have a rugby team or how to pronounce Waikato but he can read the scores. Otherwise we currently get Nelson Mandela, the return of the Pumas and Jake White with the cup. Oh! and that vastly informative series of Visa “Debates”.
Strong points: Coverage and attention to detail.
Weak points: Few, considering what it is.

Excerpt from the Commentary section.

“…the one question that was critical therefore was whether an expansive approach would stand up under the pressure of a winner take all knockout competition.

It did not – and this has never been more dramatically illustrated than in the France v New Zealand quarter final game. In order to understand the immensity of this game, it is necessary to go back to November 2006 .

In that month, New Zealand defeated France – in France - by 47 points to 3. This suggested that New Zealand seemed to have found the right formula for beating one of their major world cup rivals. They scored 7 tries, creating just 43 rucks and kicked the ball 29 times. They made few passes – just 91 – but were clinical in their execution .

This formula disappeared however in their RWC quarter final match against France. Instead of creating 43 rucks, New Zealand created 165 or almost 4 times as many. This was around 100 more than a normal New Zealand game; was around 50% higher than the next highest in the tournament and is almost certainly the highest figure ever seen in an international match. It was at a scale that New Zealand had never remotely experienced before with an often seen expansive approach being replaced by forward attrition. The successful formula of recent years had been abandoned for some reason and New Zealand found themselves out of the competition.”

This interpretation certainly seems compelling (and the numbers it quotes are nearly incredible!) While the implications and mechanics of “creating a ruck” raise questions there seems to be little doubt that NZ got their game plan totally wrong!

What do you think?