South African International referee Craig Joubert takes us behind the scenes to explain the importance of fitness, and the tools used to track their fitness and performance.

Joubert is one of the IRB’s top 20 elite panel referees and firstly explains how important fitness is for referees, and what they do to keep fit.

As Joubert explains, “Physically when you start to get tired, mentally you start to make poor decisions.”

To aid the referees, they utilise a GPS tracking device which analyzes their speeds and fitness. Joubert shows us this technology at work.





Joubert has had an important 2010. He was in charge of the 2010 Super 14 final between the Bulls and Stormers in Soweto, Bledisloe Cup games and the Currie Cup final.

Despite all the technology and his great fitness, like Schalk Burger and Alistair Coetzee after the Super 14 final (during which my side the Bulls won!), I still don’t believe he is on of the better refs, believing his interpretations to be inconsistent and at times one sided.

There are some things that fitness just can’t change!

The International Rugby Board’s (IRB’s) Game Analysis Unit published a detailed statistical review/analysis of the 2010 Tri Nations.

The detailed report provides analysis of all aspects of play including;
Scoring
Winning margins
Impact of penalty goals on match results
Rate of try conceding
Source of tries
Try locations
Timing of tries and penalty goals
Ball in play and possession
Passing
Rucks and mauls
Kick-offs and restarts
Lineouts
Free kicks
Penalties conceded
Penalty options taken
Cards

The full IRB Tri-Nations report.

Over the last year or so there has been increasing concern over the rules and shape of the modern game.

A large focus of this debate has centered on the lack of tries being scored, and the large amount of (aimless) kicking in matches.

TRIES

Both the Tri-Nations and 6 Nation competitions have seen a steady reduction in the number of tries being scored over the last decade. There has been about a 60-70% decrease since the beginning of the decade.

It is interesting how closely the two competitons mirror each other in terms of the number of tries scores, especially since in the southern hemisphere we criticise those up north for playing boring, unattractive rugby.

In the 2010 Tri-Nations, there were 52 tries scored.
Compared with the 27 in 2009, the number almost doubled!

All teams scored more tries in 2010 than 2009.

The percentage of points scored from tries increased from 34% in 2009 to 53% (However in 2008 it was 56%).
This reduced the points from penalties from 51% in 2009 to 32% (but less than the 25% in 2008).

Despite the large number of tries, matches were just as competitive.

One factor that could have improved the try-scoring rate was the lower number of kicks per hand which decreased from about 60 per game in 2009, to just 37 in 2010 (the lowest recorded since detailed game analysis started 2 decades ago).

Whilst the number of kicks were lowered, it was specifically kicks where the receiving play catches or picks up the ball with no pressure on him that has been the greatest concern. These have averaged about 30 per game, but during the 2010 Tri-Nations this was reduced to an average of 11 per game.

While the All Blacks scored 8 tries from possession gained within their own half, the Springboks could manage only 1. Meanwhile the Boks conceeded a staggering 12 tries from opponents who gained possession within their own half compared to just 1 of the All Blacks.

In 2010 1 in 3 tries came from possession obtained with the scoring teams half, compared with 2009 (1 in 9) and 2008 (1 in 5).

Almost half the tries were preceeded by 3 or fewer passes, and 70% of tries were preceeded by 3 or fewer second phases, indicating primary possession is still the best platform to attack from.

BALL IN PLAY MORE

With the reduction in aimless kicking during matches, it means the ball is in play more often and other facets of the game take on greater frequency and importance.

These contributed to the ball being in play more (45% or 36 mins) compared with 2009 (42% or 33 mins).

These facets increase the physicality and speed of the game, plaving a greater demand on the players and their physical conditioning. If the law interpretations stay this way, it could mean a change in tactics and game plans for players and coaches.

RUCKS AND MAULS

Rucks and mauls increased by over 40% (from 131 to 186 per game).

The rate of rucks and mauls was relatively similar for all 3 countries.

SET PIECES

The average number of scrums per game was 14 (2009=19).

PASSING

Passes went up by 35% (from 222 to 300 per game).

Both the All Blacks and Wallaby backs made 100% more passes than their forwards, yet the Bok backs managed only 24% more.

Both Australia and New Zealand made 33% more passes than the Boks, and had a higher rate of passes per minute of possession. SA (7.1), New Zealand (8.6) and Australia (9.0)

When analysing the difference it is evident that the Springbok backs make substantially less passes than their opponents (about 170 less passes)!

PENALTIES AND TRIES

The ratio of penalty goals to tries differed substantially from 2009.
In 2009 the ration was just over 2.5 penalty goals per try, yet 1 to 1 in 2010.

New Zealand were the highest penalised side in relation to their opponents yet had the least number of yellow cards.

KICKS

The Springboks kicked 50% more than the Wallabies.

The Boks kicked more than the other 2 teams for each minute they had the ball.

The All Blacks scored 8 tries from opposition kicks, but the Boks were unable to score any (Aus=1).

The Boks conceeded 6 tries from their own kicks yet the All Blacks only had 1 and Australia 2.

The Springboks had the most accurate goal-kicking missing just 2 attempts for a success ration of 94% compared with Australia (75%) and New Zealand (66%).

POINTS

The average number of points per game were 55, which was substantially more than 2006-09 (ranged from 40-46).

Television Match Official (TMO) Johan Meeuwesen explains the role of the TMO and how the television match official process works.

The video was made by Supersport, intervieing TMO Johan Meeuwesen before the test match between the Springbok and the Wallabies in Bloemfontein. Meeuwesen explains his job and how the TMO process works.

Assistant coach of the Springboks, Gary Gold has performed an in-depth analysis of the refs in the first round of this year’s super 14.

A copy of the article can be found on Gary’s rugby page.

Interestingly there were 2 local derbies in each country, and the penalty counts varied significantly when compared to the other match also in the same country. Are the refs being consistent? That for me is the biggest problem in rugby. It’s not that one ref is good, or one bad, it is the fact that they can differ so vastly from 1 game to the next, the poor players don’t know how to play.

That is the aim of these new law interpretations, but it’s silly to think players cannot concentrate fully on simply playing the game. They have to worry how the ref is going to handle the game, and that is not good for the game.

A great example was the game between the Sharks and Cheetahs in round 2. I thought Jonathan Kaplan was quite average, and after he was replaced at half-time by Pro Legoete the way the game was handled changed significantly.

Gary also discovered that 73% of the penalties in week 1 were awarded to the attacking side. Whilst this is a change SANZAR wanted, I don’t believe it is healthy for attacking sides to know that they are unlikely to be penalised unless something extreme happens. Both sides should be able to compete for the ball, and I’d probably prefer a 50-60% average for the attacking side.

All the talk ahead of the 2010 Super 14 has centered around the interpretation of the breakdown.

Will the opensider flanker be rendered useless as refs have been instructed to ‘favour’ the attacking side?

Whilst I”m not a real fan of the new interpretations, favouring a more even approach where the ball can be contested between both sides, and 1 side cannot monopolise possession without displaying the skill of ball protection.

I do however believe there will always been a case for the true openside flanker. His role may change slightly, but you always need a tearaway flank that plays to the ball, and can either win you turnovers or slow opposition ball down. Even if only for a split second.

Here Springbok forward coach, Gary Gold from Rugby IQ analyses Heinrich Brussow at the breakdown during the Springbok European tour in 2009.

Brussow is a great example of a genuine openside flanker, and whilst he may not win as many turnovers this year, his role is just as important as ever. It’ll change the way flanks play the game, but those that are successful will adapt to the new interpretations and the ‘gang tackle’ may become back in vogue with one person being the primary tackler and releasing the tackled player, while the second player can effect the turnover.

It promises to be another exciting season and I’m sure Brussow will be once again be one of the top flankers in 2010!