Go

Wednesday, 13th May 2009Back-line Fundamentals

Pat HowardBasics of open play for all levels

Backs to the Fray

The Essentials of Back-Line Play

Pat Howard



"The world is divided into people who do things - and people who get the credit."
Dwight Whitney Morrow.

There are few variables in the fundamentals of back-line play.  Most rugby people will have slightly differing views on small particulars, but the two issues which confront all back lines and age groups come down to shallow v. deep, and wide v. close.

Before we deal with those scenarios, lets discuss what is not up for debate: that hitting the ball while moving is a must, and one of the most often neglected aspects of the back-line game - passing while still moving.  These 'first principles' are as true for my brothers and their mates playing schoolboy rugby as they are if you're playing internationals.

If a player stands and delivers the pass it's obvious he's no great threat to the opposition. As a consequence, the player receiving that pass attracts extra defenders, less space, but sometimes more time (although I don't see its benefit).  In that situation the big 'wind up' pass more often than not ends up isolating runners.  As always, there are exceptions.  At times you may need to manipulate the defence - say, if you want your opposition to drift - but as a general rule it's better to deliver while attacking the defensive line.

Not many players fully understand that the pace at which you hit onto the ball and then pass the ball (while still moving) is not as important as the essential need to just keep moving.  A great exponent of this - remembering that I never got to play with Mark Ella was David Knox.  He had the ability to canter to the line and stop opposition sides from drifting, but still create space and time for those outside him because David rarely hit the pass at full pace, he had the time to evaluate whether he'd drawn anyone onto him, decide whether to pass, take the hole, or take the half-hole and offload.  Even though he sometimes seemed to be almost loitering, it was rare for his involvement not to threaten the defence.  None of this is to say that running at full pace is incorrect.  I'm just stressing the point that passing drills can be done at half-pace to emphasise accurate passing, and that threatening defences means not stepping to pass.

This leads us naturally to the second principle beyond debate: the quality of handling and passing.  For all the planning and the infinity of different moves that go into back-line play, the basic ability to hit the mark under pressure is an absolute necessity.  The backs must be able to do this while close to the advantage line, or even sometimes on the line itself.  Coupled with that skill is the ability to catch, to catch under pressure, and to catch and pass in one movement.



Those are the fundamentals.  Now let's consider the two variables I outlined at the outset.  Firstly, depth.  Standing deep is only a starting point.  Whether you start deep or shallow will largely be dictated by how skilful your backs are at playing 'in the faces' of the opposition.  The guiding principle is that the back line should only be as deep as is needed to allow quality passing and handling while still moving forward as you pass.  Shallow back-line theories are fundamentally sound, as long as the ball id delivered while the defence is being placed under real pressure.  But this approach means it's more difficult (although not impossible) to get the ball wide.  Remember that a deep start with a deep finish will result in players not attracting the inside back defenders.  This leaves a very good, thick defensive unit for the attacking outside backs.

Width is an even more interesting principle to consider.  If you stand close to your back-line comrades you will ensure - or at least encourage - quality handling.  For the more talented back lines, standing wide increases the width in back-line defenders, at least in theory.  In practice this doesn't always happen.  If you can stand wide, move forward as you pass and still deliver accurately, this is obviously the ideal pattern.  But don't forget that your support lines and breakdown support lines will become more difficult to sustain.  It's essential to remember that it's the ability of your players that will determine the width of your back-line - that is, stand only as wide as you can without compromising the basic skills of the team.

Some food for thought.  On a 65-metre-wide field, if the distance between the scrum-half and fly-half is 10 m and you have a scrum 5 m from the touchline, there is a full 50 m left outside the fly-half.  If the inside and outside centres are then separated by 4 m each, that will leave your back trio - the two wingers and the full back (and presumably your three most elusive runners) - with more than 40 m of width to play in.  By contrast, standing 10 m apart (English/All Black style) will leave only 30 m of space out wide, with a consequent increased risk of poor passing.

The French back-line against South Africa and Australia last year featured excellent execution with a very wide back-line.  Their back-line theory is a splendid demonstration of the value of hitting the ball at the space, skilful passing and excellent angle changes.  Even though they stand very wide, they have the skills to support that style.  The English also stand pretty wide with the fly-half and inside centre not always pressing to the advantage line, which causes opposition defences to drift.  For that reason their breaks are primarily made by short passing moves designed to catch out the drift defence, not by moving the ball around their opposition.

Width is ultimately dictated by skills and whether you are trying to go around sides or between them.  Depth is only important from the point where you actually deliver your pass, not the depth from which you began.  Once again, your team's skills will dictate how close to the opposition a player can catch a pass.

At a more advanced level of the game, there has been a strong tendency (led by Australia) to play multiphase, organised rugby.  This has proved extremely successful and teams who have the training time to achieve this level of organisation will find the approach very valuable.  I do believe, however, that the practice has been to the detriment of classic 'first-phase' attack.  (First-phase rugby is the situation where 16 out of 30 players on a field are confined to a small space - excluding short line-outs.  The attacking team knows exactly who they are running at and with what numbers.)  Frankly, there's no real reason for its demise.  To deal first with the numbers in a scrum situation, normally you will have either seven players versus four, or seven versus five.  The difference is that the half-back will be to the left side of the scrum from the attacker's point of view.  In later phases you can expect it will take four people to win the ball versus two to slow it down, creating a pattern of 11 attackers, 13 defenders.  This simple arithmetic highlights the fact that first phase is still a potent platform from which to attack.  Consider, for example, Matthew Burke's try in last year's Test Match against England at Twickenham.
    
In conclusion, the paramount basics of back-line play are:


Coaches should carefully assess their personnel and then decide what depth and width are applicable for the team in order to get the best results, in terms of both scores and enjoyment.



Pat Howard played 20 Tests for Australia before departing for Leicester, where he played in three successive premiership-winning sides.  In his final season he also acted as back-line coach, was a member of Leicester's European Cup-winning team and was unanimously voted European Player of the Year 2000-01.  He then returned to Australia to rejoin the ACT Brumbies.  He is a third-generation Wallaby, following in the footsteps of his dad, Jake, and his late grandfather, the legendary three-quarter Cyril Towers.