Here are some interesting views I found on the web regarding the much talked about rolling mauls and other tecniques teams apply on the pitch… So which country’s S14 teams are currently setting the tone at being the so called innovators ? Read and decide for yourself…
By GREG FORD – Sunday Star Times
As much as it pains Peter Thorburn to admit it, when it comes to setting trends and rugby’s playing agenda on the international stage, New Zealanders are now “followers rather than leaders”.
And what stings most is the game’s great innovators now come from, drum roll please, South Africa.
Not long ago you’d have been laughed out of the room for suggesting as much. South African rugby and cutting edge originality were never comfortable bedfellows.
With a couple of notable exceptions (Dannie Craven springs to mind) effective yet dour old-fashioned, forward-oriented play was South Africa’s lot: was being the operative word, as their rugby now reeks of innovation and progressive thinking.
Don’t believe me?
Take a look at their trophy cabinet.
The Rugby World Cup holders cleaned our clogs in last year’s Tri Nations thanks to their tactical superiority and their Super rugby franchises are going from strength-to-strength with the Bulls from Pretoria leading the charge.
Only the most optimistic Kiwi rugby fan would argue this current state of affairs is merely a cycle with South Africa enjoying a (brief) moment in the sun.
A power shift has taken place. The question is, how did it happen and how do we stop it? Both questions, if Thorburn is to believed, can be answered the same way.
“Creativity – that’s the key,” said the former All Blacks selector. “We need to be innovative.
“Don’t get me wrong. We have some fine coaches in this country who are doing their best. But I don’t think we are being creative enough. I have thought that for a while now.
“The big thing about [Graham] Henry, [Wayne] Smith and [Steve] Hansen is when they were appointed back in 2004 they brought back innovation.
“Rather than followers we became leaders again.
“You should talk to them about that some time. I know they have some views about what they are seeing this year.”
Nice idea that, to talk to the coaches. Unfortunately it won’t be possible for another couple of weeks. The All Black coaches are a no-go zone for the New Zealand media, for now. But what they are seeing this year, according to Thorburn, is the introduction of another innovation.
Nothing is new under the sun, so appropriately the old fashioned rolling maul which all but vanished from rugby is, as former All Black prop Craig Dowd colourfully put it last week is “back with a vengeance” and you guessed it, the South Africans are leading the charge, flexing their muscles and using it as an attacking platform to great effect.
Thorburn has a love-hate relationship with rolling mauls.
Go back 10 years and Thorburn was at the vanguard of writing the current set of laws that govern mauls. Back then everyone was fed up with the Brumbies and their repetitive phase-after-phase style of play.
The Brumbies were experts at exploiting the tackled ball laws of the day (sound familiar?) going to ground, often voluntarily, to protect possession. The ball carrier, back then, held all the cards. It was a common sight to see them recycle the ball 20 or more phases. It was effective but boring so the lawmakers intervened and tried to encourage players to keep their feet, and maul.
// A five-second grace period was proposed to allow teams that mauled to reset and go again if it became static. The lawmakers liked the idea so much they allowed teams to have two bites at the cherry: two five-second period instead of one.
As is the case so often in rugby, the game evolved in an organic and different direction. Mauls went out of fashion. But the overly protective laws stayed the same, and are now being exploited.
There were signs South Africa would maul more last year. But this year there has been a marked increase because sacking the maul has been banned.
“So they are basically impossible to stop,” said Thorburn.
“The point of mauling is to draw people into an area you have control over and open up space somewhere else. But the South Africans use it as a strike weapon. They have gone beyond creating space.
“Good on them. They are being imaginative.
“The best mauling I have seen so far this year was the Lions against the Highlanders last weekend.
“They did something different, they were putting 12 guys into a maul from a lineout close to the line. Even if it doesn’t work, it shows they are thinking, being imaginative and creative, using the talent you have in your team and looking how it can be used. Our guys should have been leading this from the start. But we have become followers in this area.”
The question now is, is the current state of affairs where the maul reigns supreme, just another cycle in the game to be endured?
Should we sit tight and wait it out, given we are not much chop at them, and seize upon the next trend to sweep the game?
Thorburn believes we simply can’t afford to. He believes mauling will define the game over the next couple of seasons; that our biggest foe will try to exploit their advantage at test level when the Tri Nations starts; that unless we can set a new trend that diffuses the maul, our five super rugby teams should be put on a strict diet of remedial maul training.
“Training is committing conscious acts to the subconscious. We can’t take a diverse group of guys from five franchises five days before a test if they have not been training mauling session after session and expect them to maul and counter the maul.
“I feel for the All Black coaches. They are worried about this, believe me. But they can’t go and tell the Super rugby coaches what to do. They can tell them what they are thinking. But they can’t instruct them. That would mean our five Super rugby teams were all the same.”
Very interesting article. There is another inovation that the author has not identified yet which is mainly used by the bulls.
Before I explain the inovation (missed by the author) I need to just take a step back and explain how this other inovation came about and why it is so significant. Since the introduction of the leaque defence systems a couple of years ago backlines have started lining up flatter; out of this followed that you need a good defender and a good playmaker (player with good foot skills) on 10. Now Morne is not such a player (Cooper of the Reds and Gitua are such players and are the reason why those teams do well). So the Bulls had to make a plan becuase Morne is neither a good defender nor is he a no 10 with mecurial foot skills like Cooper.
So the inovation developed offer the last two years first with Spies (mostly they also used Gutro, Danie Roussow and Pedrie to do this) standing flat and receiving the ball directly FdP to drive up. They players waere then also in position to defend the 9/10 and 10/12 channel.
This year the inovation went a step further namely that started to use three players to “stormram” through the 9/10 or 10/10 channel(s). Esentially two players binding onto the ball carrier and keeping him upright and also pushinig him through the defence line. Once thorught the firts line of defence they have runners like Gutro storming up on the recycled ball bursting through a few more tackles. They will keep on doing this 3 or so and if close to the line they will tehen use the Stormram thing again to get over the goal-line.
If that doesn’t work the will after 5 pahses or so play the ball wide with Morne running at a 45 degree angel and one of the wingers or centers coming in on a sharp angle receiving a reverse pass.
If you want to stop this you need to stop them at the first attempt to “stormram” thought the defnce line. THis is exactly what the blues did; they had numbers waioting for the stormram and countered it by driving upwards into the chest of the ball carrier preventing him from going down and the driving the ball carrier and his two supporters back by coming in with speed, working hard with the legs and having low body positions. This soppped all the bulls forward momentum and essentially took them out of the match.
I am waiting for the next direction this inovation is going to take but I have a gut feeling they are now going to start a maul at the point of contact. The ball carrier being held up are going to turn at moment of contact mare players are goint to join and the ball are going to be moved to a player at the back of the maul.
Going back to the point that this started because the bulls did not have a natural playmaker like Cooper or Gitua on 10. This is a incerdibly significant inovation by the bulls if you start thinking about it mainly becuse you are now not longer dependent on one gifted athlete like Cooper of Gitua to create play. The Reds are successful this year because the have two playmaker namely Genia on 9 and Cooper; harder to defend. Brumbies with only Gitua as playmaker is struggling because once you take Gitau out of the game they can’t create play. Way to win the reds is to slow their ball down and to dominate them at the breakdowns. Reds is useless the moment Genia and Cooper are targeted and boxed in.
Sorry to many typo’s on 31. Was too much in a hurry. Here it is again with the typo’s corrected.
Very interesting article. There is another inovation -that the author has not identified- which is mainly used by the bulls.
Before I explain the “other” inovation (missed by the author) I need to take a step back and explain how this “other” inovation came about and why it is so significant. Since the introduction of the leaque defence systems, a couple of years ago, backlines have started lining up flatter; out of this followed that you need a good defender and a good playmaker (player with good foot skills) on 10.
Now Morne is not such a player (Cooper of the Reds and Gitua are such players and are the reason why those teams do well). So the Bulls had to make a plan because Morne is neither a good defender nor is he a no 10 with mecurial foot skills like Cooper.
So the inovation developed over the last two years; first with Spies (mostly, they also used Gutro, Danie Roussow and Pedrie to do this) standing flat and receiving the ball directly from FdP to drive-up. These players -standing off waiting for the flat pass- were then also in position to defend the 9/10 and 10/12 channel should the opposition steel the ball.
This year the inovation went a step further namely the bulls started to use three players to “stormram” through the 9/10 or 10/10 channel(s). Essentially, two players binding onto the ball carrier and keeping him upright and also pushinig him through the defence line. Once throught the first line of defence they have runners like Gutro storming up on the recycled ball bursting through a few more tackles. They will keep on doing this 3 times or so and if they are then close to the goal-line they will use the Stormram thing again to get over and score. Normally at this stage their are so many holes in the defence that Morne bassically scored or on of the forwards picking the ball up from the ruck.
If that doesn’t work they will keep going with this pattren for up to 5 or 8 phases and then play the ball wide with Morne running at a 45 degree angle and one of the wingers or centers coming in on a sharp angle receiving a reverse pass.
If you want to stop this you need to stop them at the first attempt to “stormram” through the defence line. This is exactly what the blues did; they had numbers waiting for the stormram and countered it by driving upwards into the chest of the ball carrier preventing him from going down and then proceeded by driving the ball carrier and his two supporters back by getting more players coming in with speed, working hard with the legs and having low body positions. This stoppped all the bulls forward momentum and essentially took them out of the match.
I am waiting for the next direction this inovation is going to take but I have a gut feeling they are now going to start a maul at the point of contact; essentially rotating out of the forward drive of the defenders. The ball carrier being held up are going to turn at moment of contact more players from the attacking team are goint to join and the ball are going to be transferred through the hands to a player at the back of the maul.
Going back to the point that this started because the bulls did not have a natural playmaker like Cooper or Gitua on 10. This is a incredible significant inovation by the bulls if you start thinking about it, mainly because you are now not longer dependent on one gifted athlete like Cooper of Gitua to create play. The Reds are successful this year because the have two playmaker namely Genia on 9 and Cooper on 10; harder to defend. Brumbies with only Gitua as playmaker is struggling because once you take Gitau out of the game they can’t create play. The way to win the reds is to slow their ball down, dominate them at the breakdowns and put extreme pressure on Genia. If you rattle Genia Cooper is out of the match. Reds will be useless the moment Genia and Cooper are taken out of the match.
#31 & #32
You refer to the ‘stormram’ which is more commonly (for our NZ and Oz readers) known as the ‘Muck’ – really a combination between a maul and a ruck or a mini-maul.
The idea is to keep the ball carrier on his feet for as long as possible crossing the gain-line.
It is a very effective way to draw in defenders, even more so since you more often than not need more tacklers to do this.
Also your primary ball carriers for this are the guys with effective ‘footstrikes’ (explained that in one article on this site a while back) to drive through tackles.
What makes this more effective than just setting up phases (single ball carriers attacking the advantage line) is that defenders does not need to commit too much to such phases and also, once tackled the tackler gets up and forms a pillar or post defence again quite quickly.
With the ‘muck’ or mini-maul you usually gain a lot more meters over the advantage line only if through sheer momentum where single ball carriers are tackled more often than not on, or before the advantage line, meaning the defenders or defensive lines do not need to adjust much for the next wave of attack – with the ‘muck’ however they need to run back to get on-side.
I doubt you will see this develop into a fully-fledged maul in future as it takes too long to set one of those, you ideal ‘muck’ is 3, max 4 players. A maul will only be an option if the play is slowed down significantly and if it is static.
Lastly, with the new law interpretations at the breakdown the ‘muck’ becomes even more effective for not only crossing the advantage line, but the ball carrier is almost never isolated and possession is guarranteed…
Interesting observation nonetheless.
Morne@33 you are on par with my line of thinking. Including your third last paragraph: “I doubt you will see this develop into a fully-fledged maul in future as it takes too long to set one of those, you ideal ‘muck’ is 3, max 4 players. A maul will only be an option if the play is slowed down significantly and if it is static”
That was excaltly my line of reasoning namely the counter strategy used by the blues the previous weekend was to drive upward into the face of the ball carrier keep him upright and then stop the bulls forward momentum by counter rucking them backwards and in doing so (in your words) make the play static. I would think that there is only two ways the bulls can really counter such a counter strategy; one is to play the ball from the beginning wide or away from the contact point; this might work because positioning three or more player to stop the mini-maul has to create space somewhere else.
However, the strategy that I think would work best is to “roll or rotate” out of the contact if you can not break through and if your ball carriers are kept upright by the first tackler. So if your mini-maul are stopped and forced back you get more players to join and start rotating the mini-maul essentially creating a full fledge maul. This is of course just my opinion on the matter.
I am quite keen to see how the bulls are going to counter this blueprint provided by the blues.
Mmmmmm, at last some thought is put into a rugby discussion!
McLook, very astute observation of how the Blues countered the Bulls….
Another thing the Bulls will have to look at is not to employ the “up-and-under and chase” method which they have used so effectively but which has become somewhat predictable and which depends on ABSOLUTE ACCURACY in execution. This especially in the case of teams with very good strike runners from the back, like the Blues, Chiefs, Crusaders, Stormers….
I’d like to see the Bulls keep more ball in hand and to push their possession percentages up, the Blues had way too much possession against the Bulls, stemming from clever play and analysis like you detailed above.
There has to be greater patience showed with ball in hand… ons gets the idea that the Bulls sometimes force that last move rather than applying a snippit more patience.
#34,
The only problem you have in turning a muck into a fully fledged maul is that the defending team usually brings them down (tackles the ball carrier who is essentially in front of the muck).
If the ball carrier is however held up, with 2 guys on his flanks and another player from the opposition is bound to this muck, then yes, turning it into a fully fledged maul would be very interesting where the ball can now be moved to the back (of the now fully fledged maul).
This will take absolute precision in execution however and accurate communication.
I also believe this should only be done in the oppo 22.
The Bulls, once static can employ what they have been pretty good at in the past, have the 2 pods standing off a ruck or collapsed muck (maul) and shift the contact point 5 meters away and then possibly, depending on the success of the now set up tackled phase (crossing the gain line and speed of possession) set up another muck with the majority of forwards back to the original contact point.
Under the new laws, possession is paramount, and as GBS mentioned, the kick-chase tactic not the best way to play.
It is commonplace that MOST rolling mauls are formed from ONE FACET of play, namely the LINE-OUT (Morne see ** underneath)… it would indeed be an interesting situation to see whether there is the same amount of control in utilising rolling mauls from a “Mini-Rumble” like McLook suggested.
There will be many hidden advantages, ie. the ROLLING MAUL would be more in-field from the touchline, exposing other possible avenues of attack BOTH SIDES of such rolling maul and not only towards the open side of the field as is the case with rolling mauls from line-outs.
** Morné, getting back to yesterday’s discussion…… I believe there is ALWAYS an “Equal Opportunity to the Ball” situation before EVERY ROLLING MAUL… in the case of a rolling maul from a line-out, the line-out serves as that “Equal Opportunity” situation. The line-out and rolling maul is then also so indivisible from one another and actually forms part of the same phase of play… so there, that adds the EQUAL OPPORTUNITY to the rolling maul…. hehehehe
I’ve been wondering about last years tactic namely the up-and-under-chase. It does require precison kicking and fast chasers. Also the stricter application of the offside rule has made it harder for the bulls to apply pressure as the forwards has to be put onside (this was always tha case of course but I think the bulls got away with it last year).
However, I think it is something that could be tried against the chiefs with Mills out and Sivibathu suspect under the high kick. If you can high kick on Sivibatu and box him in against the touchline you m ight be able to force mistakes or at least get a lineout. Is something they should try as a variation rather than standard game plan.
Morne@36 good point to just keep shifting the contact point 5 meter left or right. This could work if you can get the ball back quick enough after the min-maul. So if the defenders tackle into your face and use numbers to force you back the bulls could bring the ball back and have a runner on either side of the mini-maul that could take it up again. Instead then of trying to break the defence line with the first hit you just use it to pull in the defenders and shift the ball 5 meters sideway and try and breech the defece line there. I like that, it could work.
GBS,
The maul unfortunately is a completely different phase of play in rugby union, it is reckognised as a phase on its own, with specific laws to that phase of play which is different from open play or any other phase play.
A maul can be formed from anywhere, obviously, it is easier from a line-out for obvious reasons.
But do not fall into the trap thinking it is not a phase on its own.
The laws manual has a whole section dedicated just to that specific phase.
McLook,
Not only a great way to suck in primary defenders, the Bulls are good at it too!
Problem with the kick-chase this year for the Bulls, is that they do not have Habana who was as important to this tactic as the kicker (Fourie) himself.
39@ Morne – Ag old tjom, I just like the rolling maul and you don’t…
Whilst it exists in the Law book, and while it is a common strong point amongst SA sides, we must use it as a potent weapon, I suppose!
GBS
There is a difference
The ball is in a scrum..you playing for the ball by pushing…it is in noones hands. The maul, the ball is being carried, in hands, this carrier is protected by players in front of him.
I remember the days when playing rugby where you could wipe out all the obstructors. In bygones one could defend against the maul by collapsing, then you could not, now one could somewhat. The non collapsing of a maul is a new law so dont think RSA are that good or anyone else for that matter. A good maul is when it is set up and continues to work whilst defenders are trying to collapse it.
Rolling maul without being allowed to defend/collapse is obstruction.
GBS,
It is an effective weapon no doubt.
I also know for a fact it takes great precision and technical skill to perfect the maul, it is not an easy thing to do.
Still think it is obstruction however.
GBS 12
Rolling mauls are part of rugby…not being able t defend them is not rugby.
As I said earlier banning collapsing of mauls is a nnew law when you look at the history of the game. The maul has always been there but now one cannot defend it in its entirety.
We could 15 years ago tackle the legs of the front players in a maul. If mauls can be defended like as time gone by then bring on all mauls.
42@ Morne & 41@ Walla – While it is on the Law book, it is there to use… just like any other phase or situation… just like you have to adapt in each game to a specific refereee’s interpretations in general…
43 – Walla howzit, Going to answer here what you asked on another thread about the bonus points.
My opinion there should be no bonus points at all. A win should count for everything. So the team with the most wins get to top the log and hold the semi or final at home. Those teams should be rewarded for winning. Losing teams should get nothing. Losing and getting bonus points makes no sense to me. You lose you should get nothing. That is it in most sports. Never should a losing team get rewarded. The winning team should take all the points.
I don’t even agree with the losing team getting bonus for losing by less than 7 or by getting a bonus for the 4 tries. Nah, they should get nothing for losing. Even the winning team should only pick up the 4 points for winning.
I have never ever accepted this bonus points system. It is here though so have to live with it. Just makes a mockery of the winning side getting 4 points and sometimes a losing team picking up 2. Like last year the Saders got a big fat 0 points on the board against the Landers but collected a point by not losing by more than 7? So daft that, to get no points on the board by a team collects a point out of that game? How can a team get rewarded for such a rubbish game as it was last year?
I know the 4 tries makes for better rugby to watch but not always. So if there is a bonus point only the winning team that gets 4 tries get a bonus, that is it. Still think only winning should pick up points. Maybe get 5 points for a win. The losing team no matter what should pick up 0 for losing.
Users Online
Total 55 users including 0 member, 55 guests, 0 bot online
Most users ever online were 3735, on 31 August 2022 @ 6:23 pm
No Counter as from 31 October 2009: 39,506,798 Page Impressions
_