The box kick

Here’s a question for all you sports fans

Is the box kick the most pointless “weapon” in a team’s arsenal or is it a tactic that many 9s are told to use but they simply haven’t practised it to do it right?

I’m putting the box kick on the same level as the goal kick in football where goalies whack the ball as hard as they can and 9 out of 10 times it lands on the opposition and you just lose possession.

In soccerball, why not pass it 30ft to your defender for him to pass it 20ft to a midfielder and then you get the ball in the middle of the park.

In rugby, why not pass it 10 ft back to the 10 or 15 to leather the ball into the opposition 22. Why do 9s boot it up in the air when half the time no one in their team contests it. You just hand the ball to the opposition.

Is it like goal kicking where everyone just says, to coin a borders phrase “it’s aye been” and because every 9 who has played before has done it, the current 9 must do it too???

Is it a pointless ploy or is it poor execution by the 9 or even the winger who is supposed to chase it.

Arguably SA just won teh world cup on the back of a good box kicker.

I would also suggest your pass of 10ft to the FH to kick is usually more like 10m.

Defensively I see the point of the box kick (to touch) - the SH is usually well in advance of his 10 and the ball can just be cleared quicker with less risk of a mistake. However too many SHs are crap at it.

The "attacking" box kick is so dependent upon the ability of the winger to chase AND the accuracy of the kick. Neither of which are often good enough.

Yet in so many games we see teams try to keep the ball in had, get driven ever further behind the gain-line before either conceding possession/penalty or making a hurried kick.

Box kick is effective if accurate, but I agree many halfbacks are inconsistent in execution.

What irks the life out of me is the setup. Everyone and his dog sees it coming, the raking/rolling of the ball back should be outlawed. Get the damn thing out and kick ir already, the boxkick takes longer than a scrum.

Yeah, the "periscope" of a few years ago, and now the "ladder" drive me crazy.

LondonTiger wrote:

The "attacking" box kick is so dependent upon the ability of the winger to chase AND the accuracy of the kick. Neither of which are often good enough.

I think the success rate would be increased if the winger wasn't often 'checked' by some lazy opposition players who should'a gone to Specsavers when they just innocently get in the way, guv
I mean, it's the opposition and disinterested refs that are killing the art that might indeed make box kicking a more sexy tool than critics on this page seem to think that it is.

tigertattie wrote:Here’s a question for all you sports fans

Is the box kick the most pointless “weapon” in a team’s arsenal or is it a tactic that many 9s are told to use but they simply haven’t practised it to do it right?

I’m putting the box kick on the same level as the goal kick in football where goalies whack the ball as hard as they can and 9 out of 10 times it lands on the opposition and you just lose possession.

In soccerball, why not pass it 30ft to your defender for him to pass it 20ft to a midfielder and then you get the ball in the middle of the park.

In rugby, why not pass it 10 ft back to the 10 or 15 to leather the ball into the opposition 22. Why do 9s boot it up in the air when half the time no one in their team contests it. You just hand the ball to the opposition.

Is it like goal kicking where everyone just says, to coin a borders phrase “it’s aye been” and because every 9 who has played before has done it, the current 9 must do it too???

Is it a pointless ploy or is it poor execution by the 9 or even the winger who is supposed to chase it.  

Answered your own question. Passing back to the ten concedes territory at the other end of the kick. Rugby Union is all about where on the pitch you are setting up the defensive line these days.

Isn't the sport called Rugby Football? Pretty much every kick gives possession away except for penalties to touch. At least the box kick stands a chance of keeping possession. It's not just dependent on the chaser competing in the air either. The very presence of a chaser may pressurise the receiver into a mistake or if the kick is well directed the receiver may find himself bundled into touch.

Stone Motif wrote:

tigertattie wrote:Here’s a question for all you sports fans

Is the box kick the most pointless “weapon” in a team’s arsenal or is it a tactic that many 9s are told to use but they simply haven’t practised it to do it right?

I’m putting the box kick on the same level as the goal kick in football where goalies whack the ball as hard as they can and 9 out of 10 times it lands on the opposition and you just lose possession.

In soccerball, why not pass it 30ft to your defender for him to pass it 20ft to a midfielder and then you get the ball in the middle of the park.

In rugby, why not pass it 10 ft back to the 10 or 15 to leather the ball into the opposition 22. Why do 9s boot it up in the air when half the time no one in their team contests it. You just hand the ball to the opposition.

Is it like goal kicking where everyone just says, to coin a borders phrase “it’s aye been” and because every 9 who has played before has done it, the current 9 must do it too???

Is it a pointless ploy or is it poor execution by the 9 or even the winger who is supposed to chase it.  

Answered your own question. Passing back to the ten concedes territory at the other end of the kick. Rugby Union is all about where on the pitch you are setting up the defensive line these days.

See that’s the bit I can’t get my head around.

A box kick tends to go 40m up in the air and only 20m forward. So that’s a 20m gain. Meanwhile if you chucked it to the 10 or 15, even standing 10m further back, surely they could get more than 30m from the kick. Either in to touch or into the middle of the pitch.

Chris Cook put one in yesterday that made about 60m. Depends what you are trying to do with it.

If we look at most premiership grounds with the tiny in goal areas, a defensive ruck 10m from the line, the scrum half may clear to the 10m line or beyond. Fling a pass back to a guy almost on the dead ball line and they make a hurried kick that struggles to get out of the 22.

Maybe I’m stuck watching really poor quality players trying it

tigertattie wrote:

Stone Motif wrote:

tigertattie wrote:Here’s a question for all you sports fans

Is the box kick the most pointless “weapon” in a team’s arsenal or is it a tactic that many 9s are told to use but they simply haven’t practised it to do it right?

I’m putting the box kick on the same level as the goal kick in football where goalies whack the ball as hard as they can and 9 out of 10 times it lands on the opposition and you just lose possession.

In soccerball, why not pass it 30ft to your defender for him to pass it 20ft to a midfielder and then you get the ball in the middle of the park.

In rugby, why not pass it 10 ft back to the 10 or 15 to leather the ball into the opposition 22. Why do 9s boot it up in the air when half the time no one in their team contests it. You just hand the ball to the opposition.

Is it like goal kicking where everyone just says, to coin a borders phrase “it’s aye been” and because every 9 who has played before has done it, the current 9 must do it too???

Is it a pointless ploy or is it poor execution by the 9 or even the winger who is supposed to chase it.  

Answered your own question. Passing back to the ten concedes territory at the other end of the kick. Rugby Union is all about where on the pitch you are setting up the defensive line these days.

See that’s the bit I can’t get my head around.

A box kick tends to go 40m up in the air and only 20m forward. So that’s a 20m gain. Meanwhile if you chucked it to the 10 or 15, even standing 10m further back, surely they could get more than 30m from the kick. Either in to touch or into the middle of the pitch.

Can't imagine many only go 20m.

tigertattie wrote:

Stone Motif wrote:

tigertattie wrote:Here’s a question for all you sports fans

Is the box kick the most pointless “weapon” in a team’s arsenal or is it a tactic that many 9s are told to use but they simply haven’t practised it to do it right?

I’m putting the box kick on the same level as the goal kick in football where goalies whack the ball as hard as they can and 9 out of 10 times it lands on the opposition and you just lose possession.

In soccerball, why not pass it 30ft to your defender for him to pass it 20ft to a midfielder and then you get the ball in the middle of the park.

In rugby, why not pass it 10 ft back to the 10 or 15 to leather the ball into the opposition 22. Why do 9s boot it up in the air when half the time no one in their team contests it. You just hand the ball to the opposition.

Is it like goal kicking where everyone just says, to coin a borders phrase “it’s aye been” and because every 9 who has played before has done it, the current 9 must do it too???

Is it a pointless ploy or is it poor execution by the 9 or even the winger who is supposed to chase it.  

Answered your own question. Passing back to the ten concedes territory at the other end of the kick. Rugby Union is all about where on the pitch you are setting up the defensive line these days.

See that’s the bit I can’t get my head around.

A box kick tends to go 40m up in the air and only 20m forward. So that’s a 20m gain. Meanwhile if you chucked it to the 10 or 15, even standing 10m further back, surely they could get more than 30m from the kick. Either in to touch or into the middle of the pitch.

It is much easier for a wing to chase a 20 meter box kick than a 30-40 meter kick

The general aim of the box kick is to either put pressure on the reciever and force a mistake or compete for possession and retain it.

Half the box kicks I see go into touch so that doesn’t stack up

Then there’s the number of times where the receiver catches the ball and there’s no one around him.

It just looks like the majority of times the box kick isn’t effective.

Like I said, maybe I’m just being exposed to a crap standard though. I’m watching Scottish rugby most of the time

Old Man wrote:

tigertattie wrote:

Stone Motif wrote:

tigertattie wrote:Here’s a question for all you sports fans

Is the box kick the most pointless “weapon” in a team’s arsenal or is it a tactic that many 9s are told to use but they simply haven’t practised it to do it right?

I’m putting the box kick on the same level as the goal kick in football where goalies whack the ball as hard as they can and 9 out of 10 times it lands on the opposition and you just lose possession.

In soccerball, why not pass it 30ft to your defender for him to pass it 20ft to a midfielder and then you get the ball in the middle of the park.

In rugby, why not pass it 10 ft back to the 10 or 15 to leather the ball into the opposition 22. Why do 9s boot it up in the air when half the time no one in their team contests it. You just hand the ball to the opposition.

Is it like goal kicking where everyone just says, to coin a borders phrase “it’s aye been” and because every 9 who has played before has done it, the current 9 must do it too???

Is it a pointless ploy or is it poor execution by the 9 or even the winger who is supposed to chase it.  

Answered your own question. Passing back to the ten concedes territory at the other end of the kick. Rugby Union is all about where on the pitch you are setting up the defensive line these days.

See that’s the bit I can’t get my head around.

A box kick tends to go 40m up in the air and only 20m forward. So that’s a 20m gain. Meanwhile if you chucked it to the 10 or 15, even standing 10m further back, surely they could get more than 30m from the kick. Either in to touch or into the middle of the pitch.

It is much easier for a wing to chase a 20 meter box kick than a 30-40 meter kick

The general aim of the box kick is to either put pressure on the reciever and force a mistake or compete for possession and retain it.

Nah it's pure territory gain

tigertattie wrote:Half the box kicks I see go into touch so that doesn’t stack up  

Then there’s the number of times where the receiver catches the ball and there’s no one around him.

It just looks like the majority of times the box kick isn’t effective.

Like I said, maybe I’m just being exposed to a crap standard though. I’m watching Scottish rugby most of the time

Using your example above -

SH kicks it 20
Back 3 oppo kicks it back 30 and chases his kick
Your 10/15 takes it sweeping then hammers it down into the empty space which is a contestable ball

Stone Motif wrote:

Old Man wrote:

tigertattie wrote:

Stone Motif wrote:

tigertattie wrote:Here’s a question for all you sports fans

Is the box kick the most pointless “weapon” in a team’s arsenal or is it a tactic that many 9s are told to use but they simply haven’t practised it to do it right?

I’m putting the box kick on the same level as the goal kick in football where goalies whack the ball as hard as they can and 9 out of 10 times it lands on the opposition and you just lose possession.

In soccerball, why not pass it 30ft to your defender for him to pass it 20ft to a midfielder and then you get the ball in the middle of the park.

In rugby, why not pass it 10 ft back to the 10 or 15 to leather the ball into the opposition 22. Why do 9s boot it up in the air when half the time no one in their team contests it. You just hand the ball to the opposition.

Is it like goal kicking where everyone just says, to coin a borders phrase “it’s aye been” and because every 9 who has played before has done it, the current 9 must do it too???

Is it a pointless ploy or is it poor execution by the 9 or even the winger who is supposed to chase it.  

Answered your own question. Passing back to the ten concedes territory at the other end of the kick. Rugby Union is all about where on the pitch you are setting up the defensive line these days.

See that’s the bit I can’t get my head around.

A box kick tends to go 40m up in the air and only 20m forward. So that’s a 20m gain. Meanwhile if you chucked it to the 10 or 15, even standing 10m further back, surely they could get more than 30m from the kick. Either in to touch or into the middle of the pitch.

It is much easier for a wing to chase a 20 meter box kick than a 30-40 meter kick

The general aim of the box kick is to either put pressure on the reciever and force a mistake or compete for possession and retain it.

Nah it's pure territory gain

There are two types of territory gain.

Tactical, to kick out in most cases, and then territory gain with possession retained, granted it is a 50/50 result, but a well trained team will chase for possession.

Old Man wrote:

Stone Motif wrote:

Old Man wrote:

tigertattie wrote:

Stone Motif wrote:

tigertattie wrote:Here’s a question for all you sports fans

Is the box kick the most pointless “weapon” in a team’s arsenal or is it a tactic that many 9s are told to use but they simply haven’t practised it to do it right?

I’m putting the box kick on the same level as the goal kick in football where goalies whack the ball as hard as they can and 9 out of 10 times it lands on the opposition and you just lose possession.

In soccerball, why not pass it 30ft to your defender for him to pass it 20ft to a midfielder and then you get the ball in the middle of the park.

In rugby, why not pass it 10 ft back to the 10 or 15 to leather the ball into the opposition 22. Why do 9s boot it up in the air when half the time no one in their team contests it. You just hand the ball to the opposition.

Is it like goal kicking where everyone just says, to coin a borders phrase “it’s aye been” and because every 9 who has played before has done it, the current 9 must do it too???

Is it a pointless ploy or is it poor execution by the 9 or even the winger who is supposed to chase it.  

Answered your own question. Passing back to the ten concedes territory at the other end of the kick. Rugby Union is all about where on the pitch you are setting up the defensive line these days.

See that’s the bit I can’t get my head around.

A box kick tends to go 40m up in the air and only 20m forward. So that’s a 20m gain. Meanwhile if you chucked it to the 10 or 15, even standing 10m further back, surely they could get more than 30m from the kick. Either in to touch or into the middle of the pitch.

It is much easier for a wing to chase a 20 meter box kick than a 30-40 meter kick

The general aim of the box kick is to either put pressure on the reciever and force a mistake or compete for possession and retain it.

Nah it's pure territory gain

There are two types of territory gain.

Tactical, to kick out in most cases, and then territory gain with possession retained, granted it is a 50/50 result, but a well trained team will chase for possession.

They chase more to pressure the kick return than compete.

tigertattie wrote:Half the box kicks I see go into touch

... that would be a touch kick then.
A 'box' kick has to land in the imaginary area where re-possession is possible.

With defences improving all the time, kicking is becoming more important as seen with the increased use of the kick pass. The grubber is used a lot more too and the chip/regather is tried far more often. If there is a 'problem' it isn't the box kick but rather too many players on the pitch.

Box kick is the type of kick not the result of it.
I think most teams see the box kick as a defensive thing rather than an attacking one as 90% of the time it's used deep in a teams own half. It used to find touch and reset further down the field, merely to try and tackle the player catching. Trying to place it near to touch to then force a catching playing out of the field or to try and retain the ball with a kick chase. Theres nothing wrong with a box kick but there probably is something wrong with a lot of teams tactics when using it or their execution.