Rugby Training Program [UPDATED]

After identifying a need for growth and consistency in the disciplinary process across USA Rugby community competitions, regional discipline representatives from the Referee & Laws Committee Development Working Group piloted a new training program for Disciplinary Committee Members within the community in November 2022.

RUFIT-NZ resulted in sustained positive changes in weight, waist circumference, physical fitness, self-reported physical activity, selected dietary outcomes, and health-related quality of life in overweight/obese men. As such, the program should be recommended for sustained delivery beyond this trial, involving other rugby clubs across NZ.

Rugby Training Program

Download 🔥 https://urlca.com/2y5z1M 🔥

RUFIT-NZ was delivered via professional rugby franchises, which participate in the Super Rugby competition across NZ, Australia and South Africa. The five NZ-based Super Rugby franchises were approached and three agreed to participate (the Blues based in Auckland [North Island], Crusaders based in Christchurch, and Highlanders based in Dunedin [both South Island]).

A key focus of RUFIT-NZ was to provide men with a range of skills and strategies they could use to develop and maintain a healthy lifestyle, which included managing their weight. To that end, a range of evidence-based behavior change techniques shown to be effective in improving diet and physical activity were used throughout the education and exercise sessions [24]. Key techniques included: i) identifying autonomous reasons for lifestyle change, ii) goal setting for, and self-monitoring of, weight, physical activity, and healthy diet; iii) intention formation with action plans; iv) experiencing exercise sessions with increased challenges as well as positive feedback on exercise achievements and change reinforcement from trainers to build self-efficacy; and v) identification of barriers and coping planning to help avoid relapse during, and on completion of, the program (see Appendix, for details).

A trial-based economic evaluation was undertaken using data from the RUFIT-NZ trial. The main outcomes for the economic evaluation were the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) in terms of cost per body weight loss (kg), and cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained, for participants enrolled in the program compared with those in the control arm over 52 weeks. Participant HRQoL was measured using the EQ-5D-5L at both 12 and 52 weeks; a utility score was derived using NZ population-specific weights to estimate QALYs gained at 52 weeks for participants enrolled in both treatment and control arms [40, 41]. A minor protocol violation meant that the EQ5-D was not administered at baseline.

Nonparametric bootstrapping with 2,000 simulations was performed around each ICER to address uncertainty around the cost-effectiveness of RUFIT-NZ. Additionally, scenario analyses exploring the cost-effectiveness of RUFIT-NZ were performed for participants with non-missing outcomes data without imputation. The cost of providing RUFIT-NZ across the three rugby clubs was estimated through micro costing (see Appendices). Although no official willingness-to-pay threshold has been established for NZ, contemporary economic analyses have considered a gross domestic product per capita expenditure of $45,000 per QALY to be cost-effective [42, 43]. All costs were expressed in $NZD in 2021 using the consumer price index (CPI) [44].

The aim of our study was to determine the effectiveness of the 12-session, healthy lifestyle RUFIT-NZ program on weight loss, fitness, blood pressure, and lifestyle change at 12- and 52-weeks. Overall, our findings showed the program resulted in sustained changes in weight, waist circumference, physical fitness, self-reported physical activity, alcohol consumption, and HRQoL in overweight men. The RUFIT-NZ intervention, as assessed through cost per kg body weight loss and QALYs gained, was broadly comparable with other economic evaluations of weight loss interventions and was highly likely to be cost-effective at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $45,000 NZD per QALY [45, 46]. The modest gain in QALYs is likely attributed to the short time period (one year) of the evaluation, as the key benefits attributed to weight loss interventions lie in the prevention of downstream events of morbidity and mortality associated with obesity [45, 46]. As such, a separate cost-effectiveness analysis exploring the impact of ongoing weight reduction through RUFIT-NZ on lifetime morbidity and mortality risk is planned. The cost-effectiveness of RUFIT-NZ, in terms of cost per QALYs, was not maintained in a sensitivity analysis of non-imputed data; this is likely attributed to the high proportion of missing HRQoL data.

Given the considerable burden of overweight and obesity on Mori and Pasifika men, we aimed to recruit 50% Mori. While we did not reach this target, our study was successful in recruiting large numbers of both Mori and Pasifika men. Results from our present study highlight the potential for our RUFIT-NZ to be implemented at-scale to engage these populations and to support positive lifestyle changes in a culturally acceptable way. Findings from our pilot trial demonstrated NZ men found RUFIT-NZ was acceptable [9] and features within the program (creation of a team environment, motivating coach, knowledge gained from education sessions) and those men brought to the program (motivation, support of others) created the engagement with it [10]. Combined with experience from FFIT that has shown that word-of-mouth recommendations by past participants to be one way of sustaining delivery [47], we might feasibly expect that more Mori and Pasifika men may be attracted to the program in future on the basis of the positive experience of their peers who took part in RUFIT-NZ.

RUFIT-NZ resulted in sustained positive changes in weight, waist circumference, physical fitness, self-reported physical activity, selected dietary outcomes, and HRQoL in overweight men. As such, the program should be recommended for sustained delivery beyond this trial and might include other rugby clubs across NZ.

The authors wish to acknowledge the rugby clubs who supported this study and contributed their time and resources to RUFIT-NZ. The authors also wish to acknowledge the Trainers, and Nutritionists who delivered the program, and the Research Assistants who helped with the testing sessions. Finally, the authors wish to acknowledge the men who signed up to this program.

Organise your training programmes to focus on strength and power in separate sessions, allowing for sufficient recovery of 48-72 hours between them. It is also important to mix up training cycles with exercise variations and intensity/volume loads.

Rugby players require a lot of energy to fuel their training each day. Thus, they need to eat a high protein, moderate fat, and moderate to high carbohydrate diet, depending on their training volume and performance goals, i.e., increase muscle mass.

Professional rugby players may train multiple times per day, so their bodies need fuelling with the right foods to maximise performance and recovery. Certain things need to be considered when addressing your diet plan as a rugby player diet to help build muscle mass and strength:

Your diet should obey a food first approach. Supplements should only be used to resolve nutrient deficiencies if calorie/nutrient requirements cannot be met through food alone or in the case of convenience or appetite e.g. post-training, anxiety.

Elite rugby players are well-conditioned specific to the sport and their playing position, which requires high levels of muscle mass. Some recreational and semi-pro rugby players may have higher levels of body fat than elite players.

For the vast majority, the rugby season has now come to an end. This is an opportune time to release the structure I use to program off-season training for rugby players I coach. Most importantly, my system uses a conjugate approach with a weekly plan that is split into the three key categories we want to improve:

Speed sessions should always be performed in a rested state, hence why they are performed first on Monday and then Thursday after a recovery day on Wednesday. Many years ago, I had an assistant, Luke Thornley, whom I wanted to lead the speed sessions. So, I tasked him with discovering as much as possible about what other teams were doing with their speed training.

The mechanical elements of the programs focus on improving both strength and size. The sets and reps for this four-week block are as follows (see Table 3). Please note that these refer to the work sets only and that players are once again instructed to stick with the same movements for the full training block.

The selection of the primary movement for the mechanical section of the program will depend on what was performed as part of the French Contrast Method (FCM) section. For example, if a player selected the knee-dominant FCM workout during a lower body workout, they would select a bilateral hip/hinge dominant movement to begin the mechanical lower body program and vice versa (see Table 4).

Next in the program is where the player can select (after input from their coach) what they need to address their main weak point. This will either be hypertrophy work (Armor Plating) or energy systems work (circuits or extra off-feet conditioning). Sets, reps, and methods can vary here, and I am continually updating this list as I come across new ideas. Also, never be scared to ask the athlete for input on what has worked for them.

I believe this to be the most comprehensive program for an off-season athlete I have ever published. If you follow it as shown, you or your athletes will make progress in all aspects of physical performance, which is what conjugate training is all about.

Despite this, smaller props will find it very useful to gain as much usable mass as possible. This usually comes from nutrition and training variables over a long period of time. Becoming a big strong prop does not happen overnight. 17dc91bb1f