| Carries | Metres Gained | Linebreaks | Gainlines | Passes | Passes / Carry | M Per Carry | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Winner | 317 | 660 | 14 | 175 | 355 | 1.12 | 2.08 |
| Loser | 376 | 807 | 17 | 213 | 498 | 1.32 | 2.15 |
A Closer Look At Carries Per Passes In Rugby Union
1 Introduction
I have been coaching in the AIL for 11 years and over the last four seasons I have pushed my teams to get 1.3 passes per carry (PPC). In short this is the number of passes we can make between phases or breakdowns during one attack. I never researched this number as a game winning metric, it was more to align with my coaching philosophy. More established game winning metrics are; how many visits to the oppositions 22 you have, how few visits you give them, low penalty against count, linebreaks created and kicking distance. This research is my own personal deep dive into PPC and how it affects AIL games. The data below is pulled from the All Ireland League (AIL) Division 2A of the 2025/2026 season. The sample is from the first four games played by Old Crescent. Round 1 vs Ballymena at home, round 2 vs Cashel away, round 3 vs Greystones at home and round 4 vs Barnhall away. There was a total of 694 attacks ending in carries, with the pass count ranging from 0 to 6 between each phase.
2 Winners and Losers
We see in the Table 1 above the winning team had less overall carries therefore they had less metres gained, less passes and created less linebreaks. This aligns with professional rugby data that suggests having less of the ball and kicking more leads to more wins. Sam Larner goes into great detail on this in his new book Attacking The Space. I am more interested in what is happening when teams do have the ball and want to keep it.
3 Home and Away
| Carries | Metres Gained | Linebreaks | Gainlines | Passes | Passes / Carry | M Per Carry | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Home Team | 364 | 856 | 19 | 212 | 466 | 1.28 | 2.35 |
| Away Team | 329 | 611 | 12 | 176 | 387 | 1.18 | 1.86 |
There is a clear link to team performance and home advantage with the home team coming out on top of all the stats above. The home team had 35 more carries or attacks, gaining an extra 245 metres which is just on average 62 extra metres a game and creating 7 more linebreaks. The difference between PPC is 1.28 for the home team and 1.18 for the away team. This suggests that the away teams passed the ball less per phases and this is connected to less linebreaks.
4 How Do The Games Look?
| Carries | Metres Gained | Linebreaks | Gainlines | Passes | Passes / Carry | M Per Carry | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Old Crescent v Ballymena | 165 | 192 | 3 | 86 | 220 | 1.33 | 1.16 |
| Cashel v Old Crescent | 210 | 355 | 10 | 117 | 258 | 1.23 | 1.69 |
| Old Crescent v Greystones | 187 | 509 | 11 | 114 | 225 | 1.20 | 2.72 |
| Barnhall v Old Crescent | 131 | 411 | 7 | 71 | 150 | 1.15 | 3.14 |
What stands out here is the game with highest number of PPC is Old Crescent V Ballymena which also had the lowest number of linebreaks, I believe this is an outlier. The PPC in that game was 1.33 and there was a linebreak every 66 passes. Whereas the other three games grouped together had an average PPC of 1.19, with a linebreak every 22.6 passes. The two games with the highest volume of carries had the same PPC of 1.2 and most linebreaks of 10 and 11.
5 A Closer Look At Linebreaks
| Pass Count | Attacks Leading to Linebreaks | Number of Attacks / Pass Number | % of Attacks Laeding to Linebreaks |
|---|---|---|---|
| 0 | 5 | 158 | 3.2% |
| 1 | 9 | 333 | 2.7% |
| 2 | 8 | 123 | 6.5% |
| 3 | 2 | 51 | 3.9% |
| 4 | 4 | 21 | 19.0% |
| 5 | 1 | 5 | 20.0% |
| 6 | 2 | 2 | 100.0% |
The connection between % of linebreaks and the higher pass count a team has between carries (or phases) is hugely evident here. Five linebreaks from attacks with zero passes looks very high when most 0 pass attacks would be pick and goes but when we divide it by the overall volume of 158 attacks with 0 passes its only 3.2%. Whereas attacks with 4 and 5 passes in them had linebreaks 19% and 20% of the time, with a huge jump to 100% on attacks with 6 passes. Its worth noting that this is a very small sample size of four AIL games and total attacks with four or more passes was 28 with 7 of these attacks leading to linebreaks. This may be a very small sample size, however as a coach I find it notable and how it should affect what we do in attack.
5.1 Passes / Carries and Linebreaks to Outcomes
Scatterplot 1 shows that a linebreak had an average of 2.00 PPC which suggests a higher PPC results in linebreaks, but turnovers against being the next highest at 1.75 shows the risk / reward element of a higher PPC rate. There was 27 linebreaks in the 4 games and a total of 80 turnovers against from all attacks. Again this would suggest a more cautious style of rugby is more rewarding. Penalties won and gainline carries are the other positive outcomes and both were the on the lower end of the PPC scale. A key match winning stat has always been linebreaks created and there is a clear link from Table 4 and Scatterplot 1 that linebreaks happen with more passes between phases.
5.2 Defenders Beaten
| Defenders Beaten | Number of Attacks | Metres Gained | Total Passes | Metres / Carry | Passes / Carry |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 56 | 496 | 88 | 8.86 | 1.57 |
| 2 | 23 | 319 | 44 | 13.87 | 1.91 |
| 3 | 3 | 113 | 4 | 37.67 | 1.33 |
Table 5 above outlines again as with linebreaks there is a connection between higher PPC and beating defenders. 56 times an attack lead to one defender beaten; gaining on average 8.86 metres each carry, when an attack lead to two defenders beaten the metres / carry jumps to 13.87 which happens 13 times across the 4 games with an average PPC of 1.91. Three times three defenders were beaten leading to 37.67 metres gained on average.
6 How Does the First Reciver Affect PPC
In Scatterplot 2 we see that backrow forwards get on the ball most often and have the greatest volume of passes output, outhalves are the 2nd most first receivers but have the biggest passing output. If we look at Scatterplot 3 below where we only look at phase play by removing all kick returns and starter plays from lineouts and scrums, we still see backrows and outhalves highest for both figures. What stands out for me is how high prop forwards are as first receivers. In Barchart 1 we can see why props at first receiver may not be ideal for your attack.
6.1 First Receivers and Metres Gained
Barchart 1 shows the overall volume of metres gained per player position of all attacks. These attacks range from 0 passes to 6 passes. Below in Barchart 2 shows the average metres gained of each attack, again we are looking at each attack per player position.
When we look at metres gained as an output we see that props drop right to the bottom. This suggests that a team should avoid having props at first receiver. This graph also suggests the more often wingers and fullbacks are on the ball the better. To further this point the data also showed when examined that props gained on average 1.6 m/carry on 0 passes. Zero passes would occur on pick and goes and kick returns. The rest of the forwards averaged 1.09 m/carry on 0 passes while centers had a big 5.12 m/carry and back three players (wingers and fullbacks) were up to 6.85. This shows props huge power in the pick and go area. However when we look at it for 1 pass, now the scrumhalf has passed to a first receiver and that player has carried; props m/carry drops to 0.21, the other forwards averaged 0.72, centers 0.82 and back three 4.56. To further the point when we examined 2 passes, this would be the first receiver passing to the next player and that player carried; these attacks with props at first receiver gained on average 0.28 m/carry, the rest of the pack gained 3.31, centers averaged 2.00 and the back three had averaged 5.25 m/carry. This really supports the idea that once props are the first player receiving a pass the teams ability to gain metres drops sharply.
7 Where Does The Action Happen?
Below we look at very simple rugby pitch maps to examine where the action starts from and the volume of play created. I broke the pitch up into 12 zones. Left, Middle and Right. Goal Line to 22, 22 to 50, 50 to 22 and 22 to Try Line.
All teams were analysed in the same direction, this means all data showed below have all the teams attacking from bottom to top.
7.1 Zone Analysis Comparison For Total Passes Made
The above pitch’s are broken into three groups, all teams data, winning team only and losing team only data. We can see that the main action zone is the middle of 50 to 22. The zones from each teams goal line to halfway is very similar but in the other half teams that lost had more passes.
7.2 Zone Analysis Comparison For Passes / Carry
We see here that the losing teams really had a much higher volume of Passes / Carries.
7.3 Zone Analysis Comparison For Total Carries
Again, the losing teams continues to be darker suggesting they are playing more with the ball. Here we see them having more carries. We also see that the main pitch zone is still middle 50 to 22.
7.4 Zone Analysis Comparison To Compare Linebreak Pitch Source
The bulk of the linebreaks started from the middle of the pitch which makes sense as teams find it much easier to defend from an edge.
8 Conclusion
From the four games analysed there is a clear trend in these AIL games that mirrors professional rugby where winning teams have less of the ball, carry less, pass less and play only in the high value pitch areas. This study was more for me to look deeper at passes / carry and if I should continue to push this as a key match data point and how it blends in my coaching philosophy, I don’t mind admitting I was disheartened with the first dataset I produced that showed winning teams had a lower passes / carry rate. However looking closer at the data we can see that a higher passes / carry rate is very strongly connected to linebreaks and defenders beaten.
The higher the pass count number is in each attack, the higher the probability of a linebreak. We also looked at who needs to be at first receiver to help the teams attack. The data point towards outhalves and back three should be getting on the ball more but also that prop forwards inhibit the teams metres gained once a pass occurs but props had huge value in the pick and go area. I do not believe we can run an effective attack without props passing the ball therefore it is important that props catch and passing skills are brought up to par with the rest of the team. I also see big gains in the teams attack the more often centers get on the ball either with 0 pass attacks or when at first receiver.
The middle zone from 50 to 22 is where teams come to play. Defence teams still need to hold two in the back field and attacking teams are more willing to hold the ball more and push the pass count higher leading to a higher passes / carry rate right across the 50 to 22 left, middle and right zones and this lead to a higher concentration of linebreaks too. We have seen in Scatterplot 1 a higher passes / carry rate leads to more linebreaks but also more turnovers. There is a clear risk / reward element to a higher passes / carry rate.
Taking all this data on board will my coaching philosophy change?
Yes and no. Yes, because it’s very clear where on the pitch you should be playing attacking rugby from and where you should not. Teams that win do not force rugby in their own half, they are happy to have less carries, less passes and therefore less possession. Winning teams do not play rugby their own half. It’s very clear the risk / reward element of higher passes / carry, if turnovers against are part of this philosophy then these turnovers can not be happening in our own half.
No, I will still continue to push a higher pass / carry rate. The data shows a clear link between linebreaks and defenders beaten with a higher passes / carry rate. I believe now more than ever that catch pass skills are one of the most important skills in rugby union. The data shows that once the ball is passed more than three tmes in an attack the likelihood of linebreak and beating defenders jumps considerably.