What sets a pro apart from a really good club player?

[RF9]

You see pros make alot of mistakes and i read an article how only two centres in japan van pass accurately. I know making the pros is super tough but what sets players apart?

 

[Kempistry]

You see pros make alot of mistakes and i read an article how only two centres in japan van pass accurately. I know making the pros is super tough but what sets players apart?

Like any sport the answer is simply that the "pros" are better. This could be in any number of different ways: stronger, faster, bigger etc. It could also relate to a players skills, be it passing, kicking, tackling, scrummaging technique etc. I'm sure with any amateur you could pinpoint a couple of areas where they are deficient. I also disagree that pro rugby players at the highest level make "a lot of mistakes." They certainly make mistakes, but not a ton when you consider how fast the pace of the game is, the kind of pinpoint accuracy required. They also tend to make very difficult plays look easy.

As an amateur myself I can say confidently that I am not big/strong or fast enough to ever be a professional rugby player at any position. That is probably the first mark against 95% of amateurs. The other 5-10% likely have most of the physical attributes, but are lacking elsewhere.

 

[Peat]

The first thing, I think, is mental strength and dedication. My club is littered with players who had shots at being pro and for whatever reason, passed it up. The constant training - the hours in the gym - the attention they have to pay to their nutrition - not everybody wants to live like that. There's plenty of people who'd rather be chasing tail, or smoking pot, or getting rich instead. Ultimately, a player has to want it badly and I don't think most people want it that badly.

The second thing is having the body for it. The pace, the strength, the size - they'll all fairly rare commodities and you see plenty of really promising schoolboy players fail to make it because they simply aren't good enough athletes. Not uncommon either to see talented players bulk up to find that last bit of athleticism needed and find their bodies can't hack it.

The third thing is consistency. Coaches hate players who are brilliant one game and poor the next two. There's no use to being able to land kicks from 60m if you only get one in ten, or throw perfect miss passes off both hands if half the time you do it ends up with the spectators. Also, not a lot of use being able to do a couple of things extremely well and most other things poorly. Props need to be able to run, fly-halves more and more need to know how to tackle, and so on.

Sadly, technical ability and mental ability comes after those three most of the time. Of course, you'll see tiny players with outstanding decision making and technical skills make it from time to time, but they are a rarity. There is a very conscious decision at a lot of academies to make rugby players out of athletes than the other way around. The NZ posters will no doubt pipe up with "Not here", which is true, but I suspect that's got more to do with not having to make the choice that often; there's no shortage of young men in NZ (and in other rugby strongholds) who are both.

But ultimately the big difference comes down to being willing to work like mad. That's how I see it from the outside anyway.

 

[RF9]

What about a scrumhalf? Since a traditional scrumhalf rarely runs and when he does its in close quarters he bases most of his game off quick passes which seems to be fairly simple. How do you swt a pro scrumhalf from a amateur scrumhalf?

 

[McTallshort]

You see pros make alot of mistakes and i read an article how only two centres in japan van pass accurately. I know making the pros is super tough but what sets players apart?[/QUOTE]

Thats easy, the modern Pro rugby player could never hack the end of year club tour. No Way would you see Chris Robshaw prancing down Blackpool high street, half cut wearing a pair of plastic boobs an hour before a tour game. He would cry like a little girl at the thought of not having a protein shake for whole weekend and could you imagine George Ford drinking port at half time after already chucking his ring up from the previous nights access? No chance.

The old boys like Dean Richards and Sean Fitspatrick could mix it with the best but the pros today just couldnt hack it

 

[Kempistry]

What about a scrumhalf? Since a traditional scrumhalf rarely runs and when he does its in close quarters he bases most of his game off quick passes which seems to be fairly simple. How do you swt a pro scrumhalf from a amateur scrumhalf?

Most scrumhalfs are still extraordinarily quick and many have top end speed. That is still important, both for making runs/breaks and setting up other players. You also need to have elite level passing and kicking, combined with superb decision making. You will rarely see a dumb scrumhalf. All of those attributes in one person are very rare.

 

[Don't Skip Leg Day]

I think a lot of it comes down to performing under pressure. Any scrum half can pass, but can they pass in the heat of the game on the opposition 5 meter line?

Performing difficult tasks under pressure makes a pro in my opinion.

 

[goodNumber10]

The persistent ability to perform skills under pressure.

/the end

 

[RF9]

But for the top end speed and quickness what if they are a traditional scrumhalf and never run the ball? For example some coaches only have scrumhalfs run the ball as a last resort.

 

[Don't Skip Leg Day]

But for the top end speed and quickness what if they are a traditional scrumhalf and never run the ball? For example some coaches only have scrumhalfs run the ball as a last resort.

You still need to get to the breakdown pretty quickly to pass the ball. SHs have to have speed and fitness

 

[RedruthRFC]

Maybe I'm being too cynical, but the biggest difference to me is that the pros have bodies better suited to professional rugby. There are plenty of amateur players with the skills and vision to play professionally, but who lack the size, speed or strength, depending on position - dedication to training only goes so far to improve the genetics you were born with. Similarly, (most) pros are blessed with bodies capable of standing up to the incredible workload that professional players put their bodies through.

 

[ncurd]

Sometimes it's just plain and simple luck.

For example I am told my father was a pretty damn good rugby player (played fly-half) who was playing for his school's year 11 rugby team whilst in year 7. Once he reached year 11 he broke his collar bone first game and missed out the entire season. Bearing in mind this is the 70's so before professionalism. After that he pretty much dedicated himself to swimming more and never quite made it there. I've spoken to people who use to watch him play at club level (I barely remember) and most generally agree he was pretty damn good for the level he played at. What could of happened had he had chances? Nobody will ever really know.

However also proof breeding doesn't always work...I'm terrible at playing sport of any kind.



On the other hand sometimes your just not quite good enough my brother-in-law and fraternal twin both played Cricket at the level below county (his twin actually played a few county games but was dropped). They were high class players at level they played but could never make it to the step above despite dedication and opportunity. Think of it as those players who excel at domestic professional level but don't quite cut it at international.

 

[Feicarsinn]

I've always found that the biggest difference between good players and great players that I've played against is speed of thought and action. This isn't athletic pace, but rather how quickly you reach a decision as to what you're going to do and how quickly you can execute your skill. If you ever listen to players talk about the difference between club and international level for example they'll always mention how much quicker the game is.