IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/rpanxx/v19y2019i1p131-141.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Investigating lineout performance between the top and bottom four English Premiership rugby union teams in the 2016/17 season

Author

Listed:
  • Adam Henryk Migdalski
  • Joseph Antony Stone

Abstract

This study investigated lineout performance between the top and bottom four English Premiership rugby union teams during the 2016/17 season. A season long review was conducted analysing all of the top four (n = 1152) and bottom four teams’ (n = 1124) lineouts. Findings showed the number of tries scored originating from a lineout play for the top four teams’ (1.57 tries per match) was higher in comparison to the bottom four teams’ (1.10 tries per match) (p < .05). Lineout success did not change between the top (87%) and bottom (85%) four teams (p > .05). However, the top four teams were more effective in stealing opposition possession at a lineout (17%) compared to the bottom four teams (9%, p < .05). Additionally, top four teams showed a more forwards orientated style of play using binding actions (top = 62%, bottom = 56%, p < .05) and maul formation (top = 55%, bottom = 47%, p < .05). These results suggest coaches should focus on analysis of opposition tactics in lineout play in an aim to develop effective strategies to steal opposition possession at a lineout.

Suggested Citation

  • Adam Henryk Migdalski & Joseph Antony Stone, 2019. "Investigating lineout performance between the top and bottom four English Premiership rugby union teams in the 2016/17 season," International Journal of Performance Analysis in Sport, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(1), pages 131-141, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:rpanxx:v:19:y:2019:i:1:p:131-141
    DOI: 10.1080/24748668.2019.1570459
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/24748668.2019.1570459
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/24748668.2019.1570459?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:rpanxx:v:19:y:2019:i:1:p:131-141. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RPAN20 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.