Effective strategies at the ruck in men’s and women’s World Rugby Sevens Series

Abstract

Despite the growth of research on rugby sevens since its inclusion into the 2016 Olympic Games, some performance aspects of the game remain in their infancy. The ruck is one such area that has had little examination. The aim of this research was to examine the relationships between ruck actions and ruck success. A series of men’s (N = 2521) and women’s (N = 1474) rucks were coded from a sample of men’s (N = 117) and women’s games (N = 65) played within the World Rugby Sevens Series in 2014. Both attacking and defensive ruck actions were analysed. Variables included player numbers in the ruck, the actions of the first players to the ruck, ball placement from the tackled player, the body height, weight distribution and position of the attacking player in the ruck. Chi squared analysis identified that one versus one rucks were most commonly formed. If an attacking player arrived first, then there was a greater chance of maintaining possession compared with the first arrival being from the defensive side (p < 0.001). Findings suggest that the squeeze ball placement technique is risky due to its association with turnovers and penalties against the attacking team in men’s rugby sevens (p < 0.001). The body position of the first arriving attacking player requires the attacking player to lower their shoulders below the opposition shoulders (p < 0.001), use the tackled player to support their weight (p < 0.001) and aim to ruck to a position past the ball rather than stopping with their bodies over the ball (p < 0.001). Analysis of opposition actions identified that an early jackal was most successful at producing turnovers (p < 0.001). Results illustrate successful ruck strategies in rugby sevens from both an attacking and a defensive viewpoint. Successful ruck actions are similar in both men’s and women’s rugby sevens.

Keywords

Gender differences performance analysis rugby football

Introduction

Since its inclusion into the Olympic Games, research on rugby sevens is growing; however, some performance aspects of the game remain in their infancy. One such performance variable that has had little investigation within rugby sevens is the ruck. A ruck is an aspect of the game that occurs when a tackled player is brought to the ground, and one or more players from each team, who remain on their feet and in physical contact, compete for the ball on the ground through a variety of pushing and grappling movements.¹ Rucking involves a combination of both high intensity bursts of muscular power^2,3 and strategic functional roles.⁴ Each ruck is essentially an opportunity for the team in possession to set up for their next wave of attack or for the opposition to regain possession via a turnover.^4,5

Previous research in 15-a-side rugby union has identified strong relationships between rucking and success. Findings from the 1991 Rugby World Cup identified that successful teams were better at rucking than unsuccessful teams.⁶ A similar trend was detected throughout the 2007 Six Nations, Tri-Nations and Rugby World Cup, with the most successful teams generating the largest number of successful rucks.⁷ Finally, the ability to turnover possession at the ruck was identified as an indicator of successful performance. Winning teams won more turnovers at the ruck than losing teams,⁸ and ruck turnovers were related with try scoring movements.⁹

In rugby sevens, similar findings to 15-a-side rugby union have been identified. Ruck retention and possession correlated with an increase in point scoring and a higher tournament ranking, while turnovers conceded and an increase in rucks formed were associated with lower scores.^10,11

While the above research has identified the importance and value of the ruck to success in both formats of rugby union, further investigations have identified tactical aspects of the ruck contest. In 15-a-side rugby union, an inquiry into ruck dynamics determined that if the attacking team committed more players to the ruck than the defending team they would most likely be successful in retaining possession. The most common ratio of attackers to defenders in the ruck was two to one.⁴ Defensively, it was ascertained that an early counter ruck (competing for the ball by removing support players) or jackal (competing for the ball by attempting to pick it up) were effective at turning the ball over when it had not reached the gain line. A late jackal, however, was recognised as a poor strategy due to its association with penalties being awarded to the attacking team.⁵

Ruck options identified by Kraak and Welman⁴ and Wheeler et al.⁵ may be a beneficial tactic for sevens. Contesting the ruck was reported¹² to be an effective tactic for defensive teams in sevens for the following reasons: contesting the ruck may require the attacking team to commit more players to win the ruck leaving less available options in attack. Alternatively, this tactic could effectively slow down the speed of the ruck to give the defending team more time to set their defensive line. Finally, the contest could create a turnover in possession.¹²

While promising tactics for ruck play have been identified in both rugby sevens¹² and 15-a-side rugby union,^4,13 the dynamic nature of sevens needs to be considered as a potential problem in prescribing these tactics alone. Sevens is a game where athletes undergo periods of repeated high intensity efforts of tackling, rucking and sprinting.³ This could lead to fatigue and become a major factor in athlete decision making.¹⁴ Each ruck situation requires a set of decisions before the player enters the ruck. Because of fatigue and other external factors such as weather and the number of players involved, no two situations will be identical. Therefore, decisions by the surrounding players could result in a variety of outcomes.¹⁵ In sevens, rucking players need to accurately execute their roles and coordinate their actions within limited space and time to bring about successful outcomes.¹⁶ With the correct execution of a series of ruck actions, the tactics behind the action may result in improved results.

While previous examinations of ruck actions serve as positive tactical options in both 15-a-side rugby union and rugby sevens, there still remains some uncertainty as to what constitutes effective body positioning in the ruck. Until now, research on this aspect of the game remains limited to physiological characteristics that enhance performance^2,17 or the physiological toll of repeated high intensity collisions.¹⁸ Body position and the techniques upon entering the ruck is an area that has limited research in both forms of rugby union. This includes how players should use their bodies in order to maintain possession or potentially turnover possession. The variations of rucking skills in sevens therefore require further investigation in order to identify the most successful techniques in order to inform athletes and coaches for correct decision making in a variety of situations.

The aim of this study is to identify and understand any relationships between ruck actions and ruck success in rugby sevens. This will include the attacking numbers to the ruck, the actions of the first attacking and defending players to the ruck, the role of the tackled player in their placement of the ball, the body height, shape and the balance of the attacking player in the rucking action.

Method

Sample

Video recordings of nine men’s World Rugby Sevens Series tournaments and five women’s World Rugby Sevens Series tournaments played in 2014 were used as part of this investigation. Thirteen games from each tournament were coded, including all pool games played by the champion and runner up, and all Cup knockout and Cup final games (total games: men N = 117; women N = 65). These games were selected for analysis in order to understand the rucking actions of the more successful teams. From these games, a sample of (N = 2521) men’s rucks and (N = 1474) women’s rucks was analysed.

Game variables

All rucks were analysed according to the researcher’s previous work, where a ruck was defined as any player in possession of the ball being brought to ground by a tackler, and one or more players from either team, who are on their feet, use their body to protect the ball (tackled player) that is on the ground.¹⁹ This definition of a ruck identified only one participant from either team to classify a ruck, as opposed to World Rugby laws which require a player from each team to form a ruck.²⁰

Rucks were then coded according to the variables in Table 1.

Table 1.

Ruck variables and definitions.

Ruck variables	Definitions
Numbers in the ruck
Attacking	The number of players contesting the ball on the attacking side.
Defensive	The number of players contesting the ball on the defending side.
Difference	The difference between the attacking players and the defensive players.
Ball placement technique
Long placement	The tackled player lies in a longitudinal position with their feet pointing the attacking try line and their hands out stretched toward their own goal line placing the ball toward the supporting players of their own team.
Wide placement	The tackled player lies in a crosswise position with their feet and head pointing toward the side lines of the field and their hands out stretched toward their own goal line placing the ball toward the supporting players of their own team.
Rolled	The tackled player rolls the ball toward their own goal line.
Squeeze ball	The tackled player forms a bridge over the ball in a kneeling position and squeezes the ball back through their legs.
Hands to feet	The tackled player lies in a longitudinal position bending at the hip with their hands out stretched toward their own feet and goal line placing the ball toward the supporting players of their own team.
First arriving player to the ruck
Tackler reload	The first arriving player at the ruck is the player who makes the tackle, they release the tackled player and return to their feet before attempting to either steal the ball (jackal) or counter ruck.
Attacker	The first player to arrive at the ruck is a supporting player from the attacking team.
Defender	The first arriving player at the ruck is another defensive player who was not a tackler.
Body position in the ruck
Shoulders below	The first attacking player to reach the ruck makes contact with their opponent placing their shoulders below their opponent’s shoulders.
Shoulders above	The first attacking player to reach the ruck makes contact with their opponent placing their shoulders above their opponent’s shoulders.
Weight on feet	The first attacking player to reach the ruck maintains their weight on their feet throughout the ruck and does not use either the ground or the tackled player to balance.
Weight on tackled player	The first attacking player to reach the ruck places their hands on the tackled player in order to maintain balance during the ruck contest.
Weight on ground	The first attacking player to reach the ruck places their hands on the ground in order to maintain balance during the ruck contest.
Ruck to the ball	The first attacking player to reach the ruck, rucks to a position where the ball remains under their legs.
Ruck past the ball	The first attacking player to reach the ruck, rucks to a position where they have gone past the ball.
Opposition action
No contest	The defensive team do not contest the ruck but stand in a defensive position at the ruck only
Jackal	The defensive team attempt to steal the ball using their hands.
Counter ruck	The defensive team attempts to push the attacking players away from the ball by rucking to or past the ball.
Lazy tackle	After completing the tackle, the tackler lies in a position which obstructs the tackled player from placing the ball back and obstructs the supporting attacking team from rucking to or past the ball.
Outcome
Maintain possession	The ruck is won by the attacking team.
Penalty attack	A penalty is awarded to the attacking team for an infringement from the defensive team.
Penalty defence	A penalty is awarded to the defensive team for an infringement from the attacking team.
Turnover	The ruck is won by the defensive team or a scrum is awarded to the defensive team.

Procedure

All footage used in this study was publicly available. Microsoft Windows Media Player was used to view all games. Computerised notation was performed using Microsoft Excel. Each ruck was recorded on a spreadsheet and coded according to the defined variables in Table 1. The spreadsheet was designed so that a drop down menu would select the variable that fitted the situation occurring at each ruck. The researcher has previously used this procedure for data collection and analysis.¹⁹

Reliability

Intra-rater reliability testing was performed on 9% (n = 16) of all coded games (n = 182). Reliability was determined by using a series of Kappa tests. Intra-rater agreement were translated as: poor (0–0.20), fair (0.21–0.40), moderate (0.41–0.60), strong (0.61–0.80), and almost perfect (0.81–1.00). Analysis identified that intra-rater reliability was almost perfect (Table 2). Coding was performed by one analyst; therefore, inter-rater reliability was not tested.

Table 2.

Kappa test–retest statistics.

Ruck	Numbers	Ball placement	First arriving	Body Position 1	Body position 2	Body position 3	Opposition action	Outcome
1.00	0.99	0.93	0.98	0.94	0.86	0.83	0.93	1.00

Data analysis

All notational data were entered into Microsoft Excel, and then imported into Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) version 22 for statistical analysis. A series of chi squared (χ²) tests of association (independence) were used to determine if varying aspects of ruck execution were related to ruck success and or ruck turnovers. Associations between variables deemed statistically significant were set at an alpha level of 0.05. Standard residual (SR) measurements were also used to identify if the observed frequency of each variable was above or below the expected value of ±1.96. In the instance, if a value was greater than or less than ±1.96, then the variable being tested was deemed to have a significant association with another variable and hence either a greater chance or a reduced chance of occurring.²¹ Cramer’s V (ϕ_c) was used to report the strength of the relationship for practical purposes. Values for Cramer’s V, below 0.1 suggest a weak association between variables. Values between 0.10 and 0.30 suggest a moderate association and values above 0.30 indicate a stronger association between the variables.^22,23

Results

Ruck outcomes by count and percentage are illustrated in Table 3. The most common outcome in both men’s and women’s sevens was for the attacking team to maintain possession of the ball (men = 69.2%; women = 72.5%).

Table 3.

Number and percentages of ruck outcomes and differences in numbers at the ruck in men’s and women’s sevens.

Match variable	Men		Women
	N	Percent	N	Percent
Outcome
Maintain possession	1744	69.2	1069	72.5
Penalty attack	268	10.6	121	8.2
Penalty defence	270	10.7	138	9.4
Turnover	239	9.5	146	9.9
Numbers in ruck
Attacking greater	451	17.9%	280	19%
Equal numbers	1551	61.5%	994	67.4%
Defence greater	519	20.6%	200	13.6%

Descriptive analysis of men’s sevens revealed that both attacking and defending teams consistently committed one person to the ruck (attack 83.2% of all rucks, n = 2521, m = 1.15, SD = ± 0.407; defence 61.3% of all rucks, n = 2521, m = 1.19, SD = ± 0.678). Analysis of women’s sevens revealed similar results (attack 89.6% of all rucks, n = 1474, m = 1.08, SD = ±0.344; defence 68.9% of all rucks, n = 1474, m = 1.03, SD = ±0.585).

Table 3 illustrates that teams predominantly commit equal numbers to the ruck. Analysis from a chi square test of association (independence) identified that when the defence committed more numbers to the ruck than the attacking team, there was a significant increase in turnovers (men SR = 4.5; women SR = 3.4) and penalties awarded to the attacking team (men SR = 8.7; women SR = 5.3). When numbers were equal at the ruck, there was a significant reduction in penalties being awarded to the attacking team in men’s sevens only (SR = −2.2). When the attacking team committed more players, they were significantly more likely to maintain possession (men SR = 4.0; women SR = 2.7), and a further reduction in penalties being awarded to the attacking team (men SR = −5.2; women SR = −3.1) was identified (men: χ² (6, n = 2521) = 197.602, p < 0.001, ϕ_c = 0.20), (women: χ² (8, n = 1474) = 81.274, p < 0.001, ϕ_c = 0.17).

Table 4 represents the counts and the associations between the first arriving player and the ruck outcome in men’s and women’s sevens. The attacking team supplied the first player to the ruck in 61% (men) and 67% (women) of all rucks. If the first player to the ruck was an attacking player, then the attacking team was significantly more likely to maintain possession (men SR = 8.0; women SR = 5.6). The tackler was able to regain their feet and contest the ball in 20.3% (men) and 17.8% (women) of all rucks. If the tackler was able to regain his/her feet and contest for the ball before the support of the attacking team, then there was a significant chance of a turnover (men SR = 9.1; women SR = 4.9), penalty defence (men SR = 6.3; women SR = 7.5) or penalty attack (men SR = 2.4; women SR = 4.4). Another defensive player was able to compete at the ruck first in 18.6% (men) and 15.1% (women) of all rucks. If another defensive player was first to arrive and compete for the ball, then there was also a significantly greater chance of a turnover (men SR = 3.5; women SR = 5.9), penalty defence (men SR = 10.0; women SR = 7.2) or in men’s sevens a penalty attack (men SR = 5.7); (men: χ²(6, n = 2521) = 595.659, p < 0.001, ϕ_c = 0.34), (women: χ²(8, n = 1474) = 374.806, p < 0.001, ϕ_c = 0.36).

Table 4.

Number and standard residual association between the first arriving player and the ruck outcome in men’s and women’s sevens.

First player	Maintain possession, N (SR)	Penalty attack, N (SR)	Penalty defence, N (SR)	Turnover, N (SR)	Total, N (%)	χ²	DF	P	ϕ_c
Men
Attacking player	1327 (8.0)	106 (−4.5)	47 (−9.2)	59 (−7.2)	1539 (61)	595.659	6	<0.001	0.34
Defensive player	190 (−7.5)	90 (5.7)	121 (10.0)	68 (3.5)	469 (18.6)	595.659	6	<0.001	0.34
Tackler reload	227 (−6.8)	72 (2.4)	102 (6.3)	112 (9.1)	513 (20.3)	595.659	6	<0.001	0.34
Women
Attacking player	866 (5.6)	55 (−2.9)	22 (−7.3)	45 (−5.3)	988 (67)	374.806	8	<0.001	0.36
Defensive player	95 (−5.2)	24 (1.3)	54 (7.2)	50 (5.9)	223 (15.1)	374.806	8	<0.001	0.36
Tackler reload	108 (−6.8)	42 (2.4)	62 (6.3)	51 (9.1)	263 (20.3)	374.806	8	<0.001	0.36

Figure 1 illustrates in percentages which forms of ball placement are most commonly used in men’s and women’s sevens. Analysis revealed a significant association between ball placement and ruck outcomes in men’s sevens only (χ²(4, n = 2521) = 23.216, p < 0.001, ϕ_c = 0.10). The squeeze ball technique was associated with negative outcomes (SR = 3.5) including turnovers and penalties for the defence. The squeeze ball was associated with penalties for holding on in both men’s (SR = 3.5; χ²(28, n = 2521) = 74.717, p < 0.001, ϕ_c = 0.08) and women’s sevens (SR = 3.9; χ²(28, n = 1474) = 49.193, p = 0.008, ϕ_c = 0.09). In men’s sevens, the wide place was less likely to result in a negative outcome (SR = −2.0).

Table 5 illustrates the counts and standard residual association between the shoulder positioning, weight distribution and rucking positions with the ruck outcome in men’s and women’s sevens, respectively. Analysis of the supporting player’s body position within the ruck identified significant associations with ruck outcomes. Keeping the shoulders below the opponent’s shoulders, placing hands on the tackled player to support the body weight and rucking past the ball was associated with maintaining possession.

Table 5.

Counts and standard residual association between the shoulder positioning, weight distribution and rucking positions with the ruck outcome in men’s and women’s sevens.

First player	Maintain possession, N (SR)	Penalty attack, N (SR)	Penalty defence, N (SR)	Turnover N (SR)	Total, N (%)	χ²	DF	P	ϕ_c
Men
Shoulders Above	453 (−8.1)	158 (5.6)	193 (8.9)	154 (6.6)	958 (38)	437.720	6	<0.001	0.30
Shoulders Below	1289 (6.9)	107 (−4.4)	70 (−7.4)	71 (−6.2)	1537 (61)	437.720	6	<0.001	0.30
Hands on ground	257 (1.0)	16 (−3.5)	57 (3.2)	20 (−2.3)	350 (13.9)	374.582	9	<0.001	0.22
Hands on player	896 (6.3)	85 (−2.5)	29 (−7.9)	41 (−5.9)	1051 (41.7)	374.582	9	<0.001	0.22
Weight on feet	589 (−6.1)	164 (4.4)	177 (5.5)	164 (5.9)	1094 (43.4)	374.582	9	<0.001	0.22
Ruck to ball	986 (−3.5)	208 (3.0)	221 (3.9)	176 (2.0)	1591 (63.1)	595.659	6	<0.001	0.34
Ruck past ball	756 (5.2)	57 (−4.0)	42 (−5.6)	49 (−4.0)	904 (35.9)	595.659	6	<0.001	0.34
Women
Shoulders Above	198 (−7.2)	61 (3.9)	102 (9.1)	93 (7.2)	454 (30.8)	333.596	8	<0.001	0.35
Shoulders Below	869 (5.2)	57 (−2.8)	33 (−6.3)	44 (−5.6)	1003 (68)	333.596	8	<0.001	0.35
Hands on ground	117 (0.4)	11 (−0.5)	22 (1.9)	6 (−2.4)	156 (10.6)	207.386	12	<0.001	0.22
Hands on player	627 (4.4)	43 (−2.1)	23 (−5.5)	33 (−4.6)	726 (49.3)	207.386	12	<0.001	0.22
Weight on feet	323 (−4.6)	64 (2.4)	90 (4.9)	98 (5.4)	575 (39.0)	207.386	12	<0.001	0.22
Ruck to ball	672 (−1.2)	90 (1.2)	110 (2.0)	98 (0.2)	970 (65.8)	61.658	8	<0.001	0.16
Ruck past ball	395 (2.2)	28 (−1.9)	25 (−3.0)	39 (−1.3)	487 (33.0)	61.658	8	<0.001	0.16

Shoulder position when entering the ruck identified that the attacking players had their shoulders lower than the defensive players 61% (men) and 68% (women) of all rucks. Analysis of the supporting player’s body position within the ruck identified significant associations with ruck outcomes. Firstly, keeping the shoulders below the opponent’s shoulders was associated with maintaining possession (men SR = 6.9; women SR = 5.3), having the shoulders above the opponents shoulders led to a significant increase in turnovers (men SR = 6.6; women SR = 7.2), penalties against the attacking team (men SR = 8.9; women SR = 9.1) and penalties for the attacking team (men SR = 5.6; women SR = 3.9), (men: χ²(6, n = 2521) =437.720, p < 0.001, ϕ_c = 0.30), (women: χ²(8, n = 1474) = 333.596, p < 0.001, ϕ_c = 0.35).

Weight distribution during the ruck also had a significant association on ruck outcomes. If the support player placed their hands on the ground to support their body weight, then there was an association with penalties against the attacking team (men SR = 3.2; women SR = 2.0) (men: χ²(9, n = 2521) = 374.582, p < 0.001, ϕ_c = 0.22) (women: χ²(12, n = 1474) = 207.386, p < 0.001, ϕ_c = 0.22). When the supporting player placed their hands on the tackled player to support their body weight, there was an association with a positive outcome (men SR = 4.9; women SR = 3.5). When the supporting player maintained their weight on their feet, an increase in turnovers was evident (men SR = 8.1; women SR = 7.4) (men: χ²(3, n = 2521) = 261.169, p < 0.001, ϕ_c = 0.32) (women: χ²(3, n = 1474) = 158.288, p < 0.001, ϕ_c = 0.33).

Rucking to a position past the ball was associated with maintaining possession of the ball (men SR = 5.2; women SR = 2.2) and a reduction in penalties against the attacking team (men SR = −5.6; women SR = −3.0). Rucking to the ball was associated with turnovers in men’s sevens (SR = 2.0) and a higher penalty count both for (SR = 3.0) and against (SR = 3.9) the attacking team as well as a lower rate of maintaining possession (SR = −3.5), (men: χ²(6, n = 2521) = 193.965, p < 0.001, ϕ_c = 0.20), (women: χ²(8, n = 1474) = 61.658, p < 0.001, ϕ_c = 0.16). Descriptive statistics illustrate that attacking players more commonly ruck to the ball despite its association with negative outcomes (men = 63.1%, n = 1591; women = 65.8%, n = 970).

Defensively, the jackal had a significantly greater association with turnovers (men SR = 7.7; women SR = 7.0) and penalties being awarded to the defending team (men SR = 11.7; women SR = 8.7) than all other options (men: χ²(9, n = 2521) = 573.502, p < 0.001, ϕ_c = 0.28) (women: χ²(9, n = 1474) = 317.742, p < 0.001, ϕ_c = 0.27).

Further analysis of the opposition actions at the ruck was layered with the first arriving player data. The effect of counter rucking differed largely depending on the first player arriving at the ruck (men: χ²(6, n = 827) = 77.998, p < 0.001, ϕ_c = 0.22), (women: χ²(6, n = 445) = 72.377, p < 0.001, ϕ_c = 0.31). When a member of the attacking team arrived first, there was a significantly lower chance of a turnover occurring despite the action of a counter ruck (men SR = −2.6; women = −2.6). Counter rucking was associated with turnovers when the tackler was able to regain their feet and counter ruck before another player arrived (men SR = 4.8; women SR = 4.0). This action was also associated with an increase in penalties awarded for both the attack (men SR = 2.3; women SR = 2.2) and defence (men SR = 2.6; women SR = 5.2). If another defensive player aside from the tackler was the first player to the ruck and counter rucked, then there was an association with penalties being awarded to the attacking team in men’s sevens (SR = 2.5) and an increased chance of a turnover in women’s sevens (SR = 2.8).

Associations between the jackal technique and ruck outcomes were also dependent on the first arriving player (men: χ²(6, n = 867) = 54.692, p < 0.001, ϕ_c = 0.18), (women: χ²(6, n = 470) = 33.392, p < 0.001, ϕ_c = 0.19). If the first arriving player was a member of the attacking team, despite an opposition jackal attempt, then there was an association with the attacking team maintaining possession (men SR = 3.5; women SR = 3.0) and a reduction in penalties against the attacking team (men SR = −4.2; women SR = −3.8). However, if the tackler was able to reload and move into a position to jackal for the ball prior to the attacking support arriving, then there was a further increase in turnovers in men’s sevens only (SR = 2.1). If the first arriving player was the defensive player aside from the tackler, then the use of the jackal technique was associated with an increase in penalties against the attacking team in men’s sevens only (SR = 2.7). There were no other notable associations between the jackal and first arriving player in women’s sevens.

When the tackler lay in the tackle zone on or across the ball, an association with ruck outcomes was evident (men: χ²(3, n = 2521) = 406.887, p < 0.001, ϕ_c = 0.40) (women: χ²(3, n = 1474) = 243.270, p < 0.001, ϕ_c = 0.41). The lazy tackle option was associated with positive outcomes (men SR = 4.2; women SR = 2.5) and a reduction in negative outcomes (men SR = −8.3; women SR = −5.2) for the attacking team.

Discussion

This study investigated rucking strategies used in both men’s and women’s international rugby sevens. The results established that the attacking team commonly maintained possession of the ball at the ruck, a finding also reported in previous research conducted on 15-a-side rugby union.^4,5,7 Variations to these findings were evident, with retention of the ball in 15-a-side rugby union occurring in over 90% of rucks^4,5,7; this study revealed a retention rate of 69% for men and 73% for women. This difference may be attributed to the number of players on the field and the number of players available to contest each ruck. In 15-a-side rugby union, the attacking team commonly commits one more person to the ruck than the defensive team and commonly use two or three attacking players in the ruck.⁴ The results from this study identified that in sevens, both the attacking and defending teams regularly commit one player, creating a one versus one contest. The nature of rugby sevens encourages minimal ruck participation from the attacking team.²⁴ If a team can successfully maintain possession by committing one player to the ruck, then it leaves more players available to attack.¹² The one versus one contest during rucks in sevens promote a greater opportunity for turnovers in possession and necessitate the need for effective decision making and techniques to ensure that possession is retained.

One of the greatest influences on ruck success is the first arriving player. Once the tackle is made, the next player involved has a significant opportunity to influence the outcome of the ensuing ruck. The results indicate that if the first arriving player is a supporting member of the attacking team, then possession is more likely to be maintained. Alternatively, if the first arriving player is a member of the defensive team, then the chances of a successful outcome decrease significantly. Findings support previous literature comparing defensive strategies at the ruck in 15-a-side rugby union which identified that an early contest was favourable for defensive outcomes compared with a late contest.⁵ Building on previous literature, this study analysed both the tacklers and the supporting defenders actions. In men’s sevens, findings suggest that if the tackler is able to regain their feet and contest for possession, then there is a greater chance of creating a turnover when applying a counter ruck or jackal. If another defender is first to the ruck, then there is a higher chance of a penalty being awarded to the defence following an attempted jackal. Reasons for these differences require further investigation. It could be presumed that the tackler reloads faster than the time supporting players take to run to the ruck. The short time difference could allow a brief period of uncontested opportunities in the ruck. It could be further speculated that once the contest evolves into one versus one competition, penalties may be more common than turnovers. Alternatively, women’s sevens identified little differences between the outcomes of the tackler and the defensive player in this situation. The variations between men’s and women’s results require further investigation.

Ball placement is an aspect of rucking that is yet to be studied in either form of the game. While coaching manuals tend to encourage a long place,^24–26 descriptive statistics identified the hands to feet technique as the most commonly used technique for ball placement. It could be speculated that ball placement is dictated by the tackle being performed and the position the player with the ball lands in. The long place forms a narrow entry gate for opposition to enter the ruck and increases the length of the ruck thereby increasing the distance between the attack and defensive line.²⁵ The long place should therefore be the most effective method to use. The wide place, however, resulted in less negative outcomes than all other techniques in men’s sevens. This technique of ball placement increases the space where the opposition can enter the ruck and is therefore less popular in practical coaching terms.²⁷ The squeeze ball technique serves as a momentary way to protect the ball from the opposition and should only be used sparingly²⁴ as it is associated with penalties for the tackled player not releasing the ball.

Body position techniques that enhanced ruck success were analysed in three steps. Firstly, the initial contact of the ruck was studied by comparing the shoulder height of the attacking player with the defensive player. The results clearly identified that shoulder height is a significant factor in ruck success. Entering the ruck as low as possible with the shoulders lower than the opponents’ shoulders has been described as a general rule in sevens rucking.²⁴ Having the shoulders higher than the defender is related to turnovers and penalties being awarded to both the attacking and the defending teams. An increase in penalties suggests that entering the ruck with shoulders above the defender could result in a wrestle and a breakdown in play rather than a cleanly contested ruck.

The weight distribution was the second aspect to be analysed with three variations being tested against ruck outcomes. The most successful method used was to place hands on the tackled player in order to support the weight. Despite this form of weight distribution contravening the laws of the game, Law 16.3(a) states that ‘players in a ruck must endeavour to stay on their feet’,²⁰ players who used this technique had a significantly greater chance of maintaining possession than other forms of weight distribution. Gripping the tackled player formed an anchoring role strengthening the position by reducing the impact of any opposition counter ruck.

Placing hands on the ground creating a bear crawl position was associated with penalties being awarded to the defence and is potentially a clearer decision-making tool for referees to penalise in complex rucking scenarios.²⁸ This method also meant that in most cases the player had their head and shoulders lower than their hips contrary to law 16.3(e).²⁰ Laws of rugby union encourage players to maintain their weight on their feet in the ruck; however, using this technique was heavily associated with turnovers and penalties. Maintaining weight on the feet when entering a ruck invariably increases the height of the shoulders reducing the ability to get lower than the opponent does, which again results in a wrestle and a breakdown in play rather than a cleanly contested ruck.

The final aspect of the rucking player’s body position that was analysed was the position where the first attacking player rucked to in relation to the position of the ball. Attacking players have the choice of trying to ruck to the ball or past the ball in order to protect it from the opposition. Rucking to a position where the player’s body was above the ball was considered less successful than rucking to a position past the ball. Rucking past the ball reduces the chance of a successful counter ruck, as the defender has to push the supporting player back further. Rucking to the ball on the other hand creates an easier target and it is for this reason that coaching manuals encourage rucking players to go beyond the ball first.²⁴

Contesting the ruck has been identified as a valuable tactic for defensive teams,¹² because it may commit more attacking players reducing the number of players in the attacking line. It could also slow down the ruck allowing more time for the defence to position themselves. Committing an extra player to the ruck in defence was also associated with a higher number of turnovers. This tactic was deemed effective¹² due to its relationship with a reduction of points conceded by the defence. It is, however, a tactic that may come at a cost, due to its association with an increase in penalties being awarded to the attacking team. This tactic contradicts findings related with competing at the ruck in 15-a-side rugby which identifies one defender being more successful in generating turnovers than multiple defenders.⁴ Reasons for this difference are unknown and require further investigation.

The results indicate that the jackal method is most successful in creating turnovers and penalties for the defence, despite coaching resources encouraging the use of counter rucking before a jackal.²⁴ A counter ruck does require quick decision making to work effectively together with an extra player coming into an acting half position in order to remove the ball from the ruck. Failure to do this may result in the counter ruck being unsuccessful.

It appears that negative phases (failing to cross the gain line) result in greater numbers of turnovers in both 15-a-side rugby union⁵ and men’s rugby sevens. Results also identified the tendency for women to counter ruck negative phases and men to counter ruck neutral phases that finished on the gain line.

Rucking is a complex scenario with many interacting elements. No two rucks will be identical due to the range of attacker and defender dyads that are produced.¹⁴ The force a player will apply to a ruck in the first minute of play will likely be very different by the last minute of play.^29–31 In sevens, players must make constant decisions while under fatigue. While in the process of running to a ruck, players need to first assess the situation (e.g. the actions of adjacent players, the placement of the ball), and then calculate their own actions (e.g. can I run that distance before the opponent? what force do I need to apply?) while adhering to the laws of the game. In the space of 1 or 2 s, the decisions need to have been finalised and players must use their bodies efficiently in order to win or maintain possession at the ruck. Results from this study can assist players and coaches develop a set of specific skills in order to enhance ruck success in sevens.

These findings should be taken in light of the following limitations. Firstly, this study analysed the ruck in isolation and did not consider the impact of tackle technique or the possible defensive strategies on ruck actions.^32–34 Additionally, environmental factors or variations in referee interpretations were not considered during the analysis. Future studies may want to consider how tackle technique and defensive strategies influence ruck actions.

Conclusion

This study determined strategies for successful rucks in world Rugby Sevens Series competition from both an attacking and a defensive viewpoint. The results identified that successful ruck actions are similar in both men’s and women’s rugby sevens. To maintain possession, attacking players need to ensure they are first to the ruck, beating both the tackler and other defenders to the contest. Attacking players should always enter the ruck with their shoulders below their opponent’s shoulders, transfer their weight onto the tackled player and ruck to a position beyond the ball. Defenders should likewise aim to win the race to the ruck, whether the tackler can reload and contest the ball or another defender can arrive first is paramount to creating turnovers. Committing more players to the ruck is a successful strategy; however, it does reduce the number of defenders in the defensive line. Therefore, this tactic should be used cautiously. Defensively, the use of the jackal is the most successful strategy for creating turnovers. In men’s rugby sevens, when the tackler reloads and attempts to jackal, there is a greater chance of a negative outcome for the attacking team compared with women’s rugby sevens.

Application for coaches

To increase the chances of maintaining ruck possession, coaches should encourage players to follow the three techniques identified within the results of this study. These include:

Lowering the shoulders below the shoulders of an opponent when entering a ruck or preparing to move a player away from the ruck with force;

Using the tackled player to assist in maintaining a balanced position in a low body height and using the tackled player as an anchoring mechanism to reduce the impact effect of a counter ruck from an opponent;

Rucking to a position beyond the ball rather than rucking to the ball. Rucking beyond the ball provides a safer distance between the opposition players and the ball.

In addition, it is recommended that coaches develop support lines, so that the tackled player has support in close proximity after the tackle has been performed to reduce the threat of opposition counter rucks and jackals. Results identified that the first arriving player to the ruck has a significant role in the outcome of the ruck.

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

References

IRB. Laws of the game: rugby union 2014. International Rugby Board, www.irblaws.com/index.php? (accessed 13 May 2014).

Smart

Hopkins

Quarrie

et al.

The relationship between physical fitness and game behaviours in rugby union players. Eur J Sport Sci 2014; 14(sup1): S8–S17.

Ross

Gill

Cronin

. Match analysis and player characteristics in rugby sevens. Sports Med 2014; 44: 357–367.

Kraak

Welman

. Ruck-play as performance indicator during the 2010 six nations championship. Int J Sports Sci Coach 2014; 9: 525–537.

Wheeler

Mills

Lyons

et al.

Effective defensive strategies at the ruck contest in rugby union. Int J Sports Sci Coach 2013; 8: 481–492.

Standhope

Hughes

et al.

An analysis of scoring in the 1991 rugby union world cup. Notational Anal Sports 1997; III: 58–74.

van Rooyen

Diedrick

Noakes

. Ruck Frequency as a predictor of success in the 2007 Rugby World Cup Tournament. Int J Perform Anal Sport 2010; 10: 33–46.

Ortega

Villarejo

Palao

. Differences in game statistics between winning and losing rugby teams in the Six Nations Tournament. J Sports Sci Med 2009; 8: 523–527.

Sasaki

Saito

Ueno

et al.

Scoring profiles and defense performance analysis in rugby union. Int J Perform Anal Sport 2007; 7: 46–46.

10.

Higham

Hopkins

Pyne

et al.

Patterns of play associated with success in international rugby sevens. Int J Perform Anal Sport 2014; 14: 111–122.

11.

Higham

Hopkins

Pyne

et al.

Performance indicators related to points scoring and winning in international rugby sevens. J Sports Sci Med 2014; 13: 358–364.

12.

Ross

Gill

Cronin

et al.

Defensive and attacking performance indicators in rugby sevens. Int J Perform Anal Sport 2016; 16: 569–580.

13.

Wheeler

Wiseman

Lyons

. Tactical and technical factors associated with effective ball offloading strategies during the tackle in rugby league. Int J Perform Anal Sport 2011; 11: 392–409.

14.

Passos

Araújo

Davids

et al.

Manipulating constraints to train decision making in rugby union. Int J Sports Sci Coach 2008; 3: 125–140.

15.

Passos

Araújo

Davids

et al.

Power law distributions in pattern dynamics of attacker-defender dyads in the team sport of rugby union: phenomena in a region of self-organized criticality?

Emerg: Complexity Organiz 2009; 11: 37–45.

16.

Eskenazi T, Van Der Wel R and Sebanz N. Mechanisms of skilled joint action performance. In: Hodges N and Williams MA (eds) Skill acquisition in sport: research, theory and practice. Routledge: Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon, 2012, p. 229.

17.

Ross

Gill

Cronin

et al.

The relationship between physical characteristics and match performance in rugby sevens. Eur J Sport Sci 2015; 15: 565–571.

18.

Suarez-Arrones

Arenas

López

et al.

Positional differences in match running performance and physical collisions in men rugby sevens. Int J Sports Physiol Perform 2014; 9: 316–323.

19.

Barkell

O'Connor

Cotton

. Characteristics of winning men's and women's sevens rugby teams throughout the knockout Cup stages of international tournaments. Int J Perform Anal Sport 2016; 16: 633–651.

20.

World_Rugby. Laws of the game: Rugby union, Dublin, Ireland: World Rugby, 2016.

21.

Brace

Snelgar

Kemp

. SPSS for psychologists, 5 ed. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2012.

22.

Pallant

. SPSS survival manual: a step by step guide to data analysis using SPSS 2011; Vol. 4, Crows Nest, NSW: Allen & Unwin.

23.

Field

. Discovering statistics using SPSS 2009; Vol. 3, London: SAGE.

24.

Blackburn

. Coaching rugby sevens, 2nd ed. London: Bloomsbury, 2014.

25.

World_Rugby. Key factor analysis, unit skills, rucking, http://coaching.worldrugby.org/index.php?module=1&section=5&subsection=31 (2015, 20 June 2017).

26.

Cottrell

. Long place ground work training drill, Surrey: Green Star Media Ltd, 2016. https://www.rugbycoachweekly.net/rugby-drills-and-skills/rucking-mauling/long-place-ground-work-training-drill/.

27.

Robilliard

Eddy

Grimison

et al.

Sevens workbook, Sydney, Australia: Australian Rugby Union, 2010.

28.

Mascarenhas

Collins

Mortimer

et al.

A naturalistic approach to training accurate and coherent decision making in rugby union referees. Sport Psychol 2005; 19: 131–147.

29.

Carreras

Kraak

Planas

et al.

Analysis of international rugby sevens matches during tournaments. Int J Perform Anal Sport 2013; 13: 833–847.

30.

Gabbett

. Influence of fatigue on tackling technique in rugby league players. J Strength Condition Res 2008; 22: 625–632.

31.

Granatelli

Gabbett

Briotti

et al.

Match analysis and temporal patterns of fatigue in rugby sevens. J Strength Conditio Res 2014; 28(3): 728–734.

32.

Hendricks

Roode

Matthews

et al.

Defensive strategies in rugby union. Perceptual Motor Skills 2013; 117: 65–87.

33.

Sewry

Lambert

Roode

et al.

The relationship between playing situation, defence and tackle technique in rugby union. Int J Sports Sci Coach 2015; 10: 1115–1128.

34.

Hendricks

Matthews

Roode

et al.

Tackler characteristics associated with tackle performance in rugby union. Eur J Sport Sci 2014; 14: 753–762.