Quote: J. Willard Gibbs "And that couple of extra metres can be made up by the fact that you're running almost full tilt when you receive the ball, as opposed to having to accelerate due to hanging level to the guy with the ball, and trying not to overrun him.
Not to mention that you have additional momentum to help carry you further in (or even through) tackles.
You're running the risk of interceptions, of course, and it takes better timing in some cases, but I think it's a very valuable tactic that seems to be quite often neglected.'"
Why can't a player run full tilt (or near enough full tilt) alongside the player with the ball? They'd be further up the field, the player with the ball would know they are there, and the player of the ball wouldn't have to slow down and turn around to pass the ball? Why hang back 3-4m where you would no doubt give the defence every single bit of feedback they need to know you are going to get the ball?
It's neglected for a reason.
Quote: J. Willard Gibbs "
But there are situations where it doesn't give you an advantage, as I've hopefully outlined.'"
The only advantage hanging deeper gives is it allows the player with the ball more decision making time. In a sport where speed is very important, we should be training our players to think quicker, which is probably what is and has been happening and why your said tactic has found its way out of the game in favour of closer flatter lines.
Quote: J. Willard Gibbs "
That's not what you said. You were talking about the passerthese players would be wiped out by the defence before they could even pass the ball[/i'"
That is in relation to if both players are running at full speed with the ball, not (as you put it) one was running full tilt and the other more slowly.
If a player was running full tilt up the field, in your situation they would have to stop or slow down in order to turn when they wanted to make a pass (which takes time) in order to pass the ball. Before, they just had to turn their head and pass.
Which one takes less time? Which one gives the defence more time to make a decision on who to tackle and where to run? And this is all assuming that the player knows that there is another player behind him.
Quote: J. Willard Gibbs "
And the more time you have to put in a better pass, and time it better.
It's swings and roundabouts.'"
And the more time the defence has to make a decision.
In elite sport, every second counts. Coaches know this. This is their philosophy. Every second extra you spend making a decision is a second extra the defence has. Do you really need that much more time and space to pass a ball? Most, if not all, modern day coaches think not. And I agree.
Quote: J. Willard Gibbs "A better pass can do you much more good than making an extra 1m in a tackle. It's all about whether you want to play percentages, and whether you have the right players for a certain approach.'"
A better pass in what way though? You are talking about a player being deeper so he has more time to catch the ball and run with more momentum. If a player is closer to the passer, he already has momentum and also has already made the yards. He has less time to catch the ball, but pro rugby players shouldn't need so much time to catch a ball. This is why they are where they are. At kids age groups, maybe this would be a good tactic, but not at elite level.
Quote: J. Willard Gibbs "Like I've said, I think a deep attack can be very handy but it seems to be a little neglected., Probably for good reason in many cases, but certainly not in all.'"
It has probably being neglected because players can now probably do what deep players could do then but without needing the extra time from being so deep. It's just not necessary anymore.