Giants of the midfield – the rise of the 100kg inside centre in rugby

Over the past few decades the bodyweight of international rugby players has been consistently increasing. In the main such increases have occurred gradually, a reflection of improvements in resistance training and nutrition which have enabled hypertrophy gains without sacrificing speed and mobility.

A comparatively recent development, however, seems to be a deliberate preference for the use of very heavy players in the backline, most notably in the inside centre position. This would appear to reflect a fundamental rethinking of the role of the 12. Consider the following table showing the body weights of midfielders used by major countries in the European Autumn internationals:

Body Weights of Tri Nations and 6 Nations Midfielders - Nov 2010

	Five-eighths		Inside Centres		Outside Centres
Australia	Cooper	84	Barnes	88	Ashley-Cooper	98
England	Flood	91	Hape	102	Banahan	115
France	Traille	100	Jauzion	105	Rougerie	104
Ireland	Sexton	92	D'Arcy	93	O'Driscoll	95
Italy	Orquera	78	Sgarbi	101	Canale	94
New Zealand	Carter	92	Nonu	102	Smith	95
Scotland	Parks	91	Morrison	103	Ansbro	92
South Africa	Steyn	88	de Villiers	100	Steyn	100
Wales	Biggar	90	Bishop	93	Hook	92
Data from espnscrum.com site

The table lists players in the 10, 12 and 13 positions for the nine Tri Nations and 6 Nations teams in matches played on the 19th and 20th of November. It can be seen that six of the nine inside centres weighed 100kg or more. Only three outside centres and one five-eighth met that weight standard.

Of the sub-100kg 12s, D’Arcy of Ireland and Bishop of Wales each weighed 93kg while the Australian Barnes weighed only 88kg. Significantly the Wallabies have also played the 85kg Giteau at 12 on this tour while the All Blacks have made use of the 108kg Williams.

Traditionally the 12 was the more thick set of the two centres although by no means a huge player. He could play a crash ball type game but also had the speed and agility to be able to exploit gaps. He was expected to be a very solid defender who could cover if necessary for the less robust 10.

Reflecting its labelling of the 10 and 12 positions as first five-eighth and second five-eighth, New Zealand pioneered the practice of replacing a conventional inside centre with a player whose skill set and experience were those of a 10. More recently there has been a general tendency and expectation for five-eighths to attack the line rather than playing an essentially “white shorts” game. Having two light-framed players side by side each attempting to explore gaps encourages a very aggressive defensive reaction.

Possibly because of this many countries, including New Zealand, have gone back to a more conventional inside centre but with the important difference that these players are now very large and physically imposing. The notable exception to this trend is Australia.

The Deans experiment

Robbie Deans has now been coaching the Wallabies for just under three years. I have previously written about the physical conditioning regime which Deans and his strength and conditioning coach Peter Harding have implemented (“The Wallabies – sprinters not stayers”). But it is the type of backline structure and play that he has been developing that will distinguish his tenure as national coach.

As can be seen from the table below, when Deans took the Wallabies to Europe in 2008 their body weight and age profiles were little different to what they were two years previously. Two years later the average body weight and average age of the backs have declined dramatically:

Body Weight and Age Statistics - Wallabies 2006 to 2010

	2006 Squad	2008 vs. England (Nov)	2010 vs. England (Nov)
Average body weight (kg)	102.6	102.1	99.7
Average body weight - forwards	111.1	110.6	110.3
Average body weight - backs	91.8	92.4	87.6
Average age (yrs)	26.1	26.6	25.1
Average age - forwards		26.8	26.4
Average age - backs		26.4	23.6
2006 data from “Building bigger and stronger rugby players – the Sydney University experiment”; 2008 and 2010 data from espnscrum.com.site

The 2010 backs are on average 4.8kg lighter than those of 2008 and 2.8 years younger. The inside centre on the earlier tour was Stirling Mortlock who at 100kg was 15kg heavier than his successor Matt Giteau. During his tenure Deans has taken on tour quite a number of very young and small backs while ignoring or discarding heavier and more robust players. His desire to groom such players creates a potential imbalance which would seem to be reflected in the figures in the table.

Typically his backlines contain four players who would be classed as playmakers and inevitably the 12 position is filled by a back-up five-eighth. Having a small 12 and multiple playmakers in the one backline may prove to be an inspired strategy, although it hasn’t yet yielded obvious dividends. Clearly this approach is at odds with the current thinking of the other leading nations who all appear to have identified the inside centre position as requiring a very big player. Presumably next year’s World Cup will determine which approach prevails.
Read more...

Robbie Deans on wanting

It's not often you get an insight into the mental processes of an international rugby coach. Here's Wallabies coach Robbie Deans interviewed after his team's win in the Bledisloe Cup match in Hong Kong:

"James is one of those blokes who wants the ball in those moments as you saw with his carry, and that's what you want.
"The bloke who's got the ball you want to want to have the ball."

Rugby is the most cerebral of games.
Read more...

The Wallabies - sprinters not stayers

Two months ago, before the start of the 2010 Bledisloe Cup series, I posted an article titled “Are the Wallabies being properly conditioned for the Tri Nations Tests?” I started off by pointing out:

“A characteristic of the Deans era Wallabies is their seeming inability to sustain their performance over the full 80 minutes of a game. This raises the question of whether their training methods are appropriate for the intense physical demands of modern international rugby. In short, is there enough emphasis on strength training?”

In that article I argued that the best way to assess the Wallabies’ performance was in Tests against the All Blacks. This was because “distance travelled is not really a relevant factor and both nations always endeavour to select their strongest team, so these matches provide an ideal environment to search for consistent patterns evident over a number of matches.”

We have since played another three Bledisloe matches.

On July 2008, in Deans’s first match against his home country, the Wallabies won the second half 17-7 and also won the match. From then on it has been an unbroken succession of losses in both the second half and the overall match. Here is the record of second half scores:

2 August 08 0-18
13 September 08 14-25
1 November 08 14-19
18 July 09 3-12
22 August 09 6-16
19 September 09 6-33
31 October 09 3-19
31 July 10 14-17
7 August 10 0-3
11 September 10 8-17

So that’s our sorry record. Ten straight games; ten losing second halves; ten matches lost.

In the second half we have scored on average 7 points; the All Blacks scored 17.9.

The reason is glaringly obvious – the physical conditioning of the Wallabies is inappropriate. Forget about half time scores; no one cares which horse is first past the post the first time around in the Melbourne Cup. And to pursue the horse racing analogy further, a horse won’t “get two miles” if it’s been trained to run a mile.

Rugby is a physically draining game played over eighty minutes. It is also not really an aerobic sport but rather an anaerobic sport where there is a huge premium on strength and power.

On June 28 the Sydney Morning Herald ran an article titled, “Don’t despair – fitter Wallabies might rise from last in Tri Nations rankings”. The author, Spiro Zavas, wrote:

“It is an open secret that many Waratahs and Brumbies players shirked their full training obligations in the Super 14. An unfortunate feature of the Wallabies, this season and last season, has been the way they have faded in the second half of Test matches. A fitter Wallabies team might convert those half-time leads to full-time victories.”

To address this problem “the Wallabies conditioning coach will monitor the entire squad with GPS tracking devices that will record the intensity of their training.” In other words the focus was on getting the players more aerobically fit.

It would appear that the traditional Australian approach of placing less emphasis on strength and physicality than any of the other major rugby countries has become more pronounced in the Deans era. Rather than pursuing maximum strength the Wallabies’ weights sessions have reportedly seen a heavy focus on bar-speed routines using loads as little as 30% of 1RM.

At what point will Robbie Deans and his strength and conditioning coach Peter Harding face up to the fact that the current approach is not working and requires fundamental revision?

Read more...

Are the Wallabies being properly conditioned for the Tri Nations Tests?

A characteristic of the Deans era Wallabies is their seeming inability to sustain their performance over the full 80 minutes of a game. This raises the question of whether their training methods are appropriate for the intense physical demands of modern international rugby. In short, is there enough emphasis on strength training?

It is difficult to draw any firm conclusions from the team’s patchy performances in the June Tests as quality of the opposition and the effects of long distance travel were complicating factors. A more valid measure is how the team has performed against its closest neighbour. In contests between Australia and New Zealand distance travelled is not really a relevant factor and both nations always endeavour to select their strongest team, so these matches provide an ideal environment to search for consistent patterns evident over a number of matches.

In the ten Trans-Tasman Tests prior to Robbie Deans assuming control the Wallabies led at half-time in 3 matches, were level in 2 matches and were behind in 5 matches. In the second half the Wallabies outscored their opponents 4 times, scored equal points once and were outscored 5 times. Overall they won 3 games and lost 7.

There have been 8 Wallabies-All Blacks games since Deans has taken over. During this period the Wallabies won an impressive 6 out of 8 first halves, but lost 7 out of 8 second halves and 7 out of 8 matches! The one time when the Wallabies won the second half and the match was in July 2008, when Deans and his assistants had just taken over. Since then the team has lost every second half and every match.

On June 28 the Sydney Morning Herald ran an article titled, “Don't despair - fitter Wallabies might rise from last in Tri Nations rankings”. The author, Spiro Zavas, wrote:

“It is an open secret that many Waratahs and Brumbies players shirked their full training obligations in the Super 14. An unfortunate feature of the Wallabies, this season and last season, has been the way they have faded in the second half of Test matches. A fitter Wallabies team might convert those half-time leads to full-time victories.”

To address this problem “the Wallabies conditioning coach will monitor the entire squad with GPS tracking devices that will record the intensity of their training.” Distance covered is hardly an appropriate measure of intensity given that rugby players spend much of a training session in prolonged static physical engagements. But having been labelled “shirkers” it is totally predictable that the players will run themselves into the ground to impress their masters.

Unofficial feedback from Wallaby training in the lead-up to the Tri Nations is that the players are running hills three times a week as well as having forwards running 100 metres 10 times with a 20 second rest between and 200 metres 10 times with a 20 second rest.

So the overwhelming emphasis appears to be on trying to improve aerobic fitness which ignores the fact that rugby is a strength-oriented sport, certainly the most strength-oriented of all the football codes. Players need to have a solid strength base to be able to compete for 80 minutes.

Traditionally Australian rugby has placed less emphasis on strength and physicality than any of the other major rugby countries, and it appears that this has become more pronounced in the Deans era. Rather than pursuing max strength the Wallabies’ weights sessions have reportedly seen a heavy focus on bar-speed routines using loads as little as 30% of 1RM.

One of the enduring impressions of the 2007 World Cup was the ferocity of the Northern Hemisphere teams at the breakdown. It is probably too late to do much about the upcoming Tri Nations, but unless the approach to training changes dramatically the Wallabies are likely to be physically overpowered in New Zealand next year.
Read more...

Are Deans's Wallabies physically conditioned to last 80 minutes?

While there were some very encouraging signs in the Wallabies' performance against England in Perth it is significant that the home side was not able to build on their 14 point lead at half time and in fact lost the second half. This continues a quite worrying trend.

Last year there was intense speculation over the causes of the poor performance of the Wallabies during the Deans era, but one issue that has not been raised is whether their training has been appropriate for the intense physical demands of modern international rugby.

One indication that something is seriously wrong is the fact that the team has very frequently squandered a first-half lead. Of course there are so many factors that can influence how a game plays out that not much can be read into the scores in a particular game. The effects of long distance travel or a country fielding an under-strength team can have a major impact on the pattern of scoring.

However in contests between Australia and New Zealand distance is not really a relevant factor and both nations always endeavour to select their strongest team, so these matches provide an ideal environment to search for consistent patterns evident over a number of matches. Let's look at the last ten matches played between these countries prior to Robbie Deans taking over as coach. Australia is listed first with the first half scoreline, second half scoreline and overall result shown for each match.

15 Nov 03 13-7 W, 9-3 W, 22-10 W
17 Jul 04 0-3 L, 7-13 L, 7-16 L
7 Aug 04 12-12 D, 11-6 W, 23-18 W
13 Aug 05 13-3 W, 0-27 L, 13-30 L
3 Sep 05 5-20 L, 19-14 W, 24-34 L
8 Jul 06 7-14 L, 5-18 L, 12-32 L
29 Jul 06 6-10 L, 3-3 D, 9-13 L
19 Aug 06 20-11 W, 7-23 L, 27-34 L
30 Jun 07 6-15 L, 14-0 W, 20-15 W
21 Jul 07 9-9 D, 3-17 L, 12-26 L

It can be seen that the Wallabies won 3 of the first halves, drew 2 and lost 5. They won 4 second halves, drew 1 and lost 5. Overall they won 3 games and lost 7.

Now let's look at the stats for the eight Wallabies-All Blacks games since Deans has taken over:

26 Jul 08 17-12 W, 17-7 W, 34-19 W
2 Aug 08 10-21 L, 0-18 L, 10-39 L
13 Sep 08 10-3 W, 14-25 L, 24-28 L
1 Nov 08 14-9 W, 0-10 L, 14-19 L
18 Jul 09 13-10 W, 3-12 L, 16-22 L
22 Aug 09 12-3 W, 6-16 L, 18-19 L
19 Sep 09 6-16 L, 0-17 L, 6-33 L
31 Oct 09 16-13 W, 3-19 L, 19-32 L

Here we see that the Wallabies won an impressive 6 out of 8 first halves, but lost 7 out of 8 second halves and 7 out of 8 matches! Once the Deans coaching team had settled in, i.e., after the first Bledisloe match in July 2008, their team has lost very second half and every match. This looks like something more than random chance. The most likely culprit would seem to be inappropriate physical conditioning.
Read more...

Rugby's Age of the Low Skinfold Giants

In 1991 England's international rugby forwards and backs weighed, on average, 100 kg and 83 kg respectively. Their counterparts in 2003 weighed 109 kg and 90 kg. (England Rugby Injury and Training Audit 2002-04)

By comparison in this year's Test against the Wallabies the England squad's average weight had further risen to 113.4 kg for the forwards and 93.4 kg for the backs. Thus in just 18 years elite level forwards had increased their weight by some 13 kg and the backs by 10 kg. And a much greater proportion of the bulk of the modern player is lean body mass.

Present day players are not just bigger, but also stronger and fitter and, certainly with the forwards, much quicker than those of the pre-professional era. Thus there is massively greater force being generated in the game's collisions, even without taken account of the modern two-on-one techniques of tackling. Little wonder then that the coaches' preferred teams have been decimated by injury from both playing and training.

For this Test the Wallaby forwards were outweighed by about one kg per man and the backs by two kg. But there was a very significant weight discrepancy in the front row. England's engine room five averaged a massive 119 kg while their opponents were a relatively puny 114 kg.

One of the greatest differences between the squads was in the players' ages. Ten of the home team's squad of 22 were aged 29 or older. By contrast the Australians, who seem to be taking the view that anyone over 30 is ready for the Golden Oldies, had just three.

There is a ten-year age gap between the ages of the reserve outside backs. Ayoola Enrile is 29 while James O'Connor is just 19. But this is inconsequential compared to the massive difference in their body weights. Enrile weighs 110 kg, a full 30 kg heavier than O'Connor!

Small wonder then that The Australian in late October attributed to Robbie Deans the view that "there could come a time when the Matt Giteaus, James O'Connors and Will Genias of the game simply find themselves too small to survive at the top level.”

Read more...