The England Rugby Football Union (RFU) Elite Player Performance Pathway (EPPP) is a player development system, structured into five playing squads (Under 18 [U18], Under 20 [U20], National academy [NA, age: 18-23 years], Saxons [Saxon, age: 18+ years] and Senior National Squad [SNS, age: 18+ years]), which attempts to develop players to play within the SNS. Despite its importance however, there is yet to be any scientific appraisal of its efficacy in successfully producing SNS players. Appraising the performances of 396 players enrolled on to the EPPP between 2008 and 2014, the purpose of this programme of research was therefore to investigate the nature of player transition and determine the key features associated with match performance between respective squads of the EPPP. To achieve this, the progression rates to subsequent squads, and the anthropometrical and position-specific technical performance data was quantified in conjunction with individual player progression within the EPPP system. Of the 396 players assessed within the thesis, 121 reached the SNS. Involvement in the EPPP was defined by high rates of de-selection during progression to subsequent squads and this was most apparent within the U18, U20 and NA squads. Analyses revealed the proportion of selected players for higher squads was 48.70%, 37%, 57.10% and 61% for U18-U20, U20-NA, NA-Saxon and Saxon-SNS squads, respectively. Within the SNS (n = 121), only 5.80% experienced a linear development (U18-U20-NA-Saxons-SNS) whereas all other players displayed variability with respect to squad pathway trajectories (NA-SNS 0.82%, Saxon-SNS: 50.4%, U20-Saxon-SNS 4.95%, NA-Saxon-SNS 12.39%, U18-U20-NA SNS:2.57%, U18-U20-Saxon-SNS 3.30%, U20-NA-Saxon-SNS 2.47%, side entries [selection from outside the EPPP system] 17.35%) within the EPPP. Thus, progression within the talent development (TDE) system was typified by variable patterns of sequential selection and de-selection processes throughout U18 to senior squads. The prerequisite level of technical performance indicators (TPI), related to generic and position-specific performance characteristics, and anthropometrical features (body mass and stature) specific to six predefined positional groups (front row [FR], second row [SR], Back row [BR], scrumhalf [SH], inside backs [IB], outside backs [OB]), were examined. The SNS revealed similar TPIs to the Saxon squad in all positional groups, only SNS FR were heavier (p ≤ 0.01; r = 0.18) and taller (p ≤ 0.001; r = 0.25) than Saxons FR. Likewise, the results demonstrate that anthropometrical characteristics consistently differentiated respective squads though, on occasion, there were aspects of TPIs that discriminated youth (U18) adult (U20, NA) and senior (Saxons, SNS) age international squads for the six positional groups within the EPPP. Used in isolation therefore, TPIs might offer benchmarks across the respective squads, however the extent of the observed differences between younger (U18 and U20) and older (NA, Saxons & SNS) squads suggests they could be used in conjunction with coach intuition to improve the objectivity of player selection to future squads. Where the performances of progressed and non-progressed players were considered results revealed that taller and heavier players, competing within a higher number of matches, for an increased period of time, were the most important variables influencing progression or deselection from the programme. Where the match TPIs were considered, there were stochastic differences between groups though it appeared as though selected players typically outperformed the non-selected group albeit by small margins and there were fewer differences between progressed and non-progressed in older age squads. Finally, in players selected to progress and those deselected, there was notable within-group variation in the technical demands. Such variation was typified by overlapping IQRs when groups were compared meaning selected players could perform more, or less, effectively than deselected players in any given match. Clearly, such an issue suggests that the technical performance during competition cannot be used to determine talent in such instances. Collectively, the results provide insight to the key requirements of the EPPP, which could be used to develop future coaching, scouting methods, player TDE systems by providing normative levels of attainment for aspiring players, both enrolled or not, within the elite player developmental system.

This thesis presents novel findings relating to the position-specific locomotive and performance-related characteristics of elite (club) level rugby union players in England using data gathered via global positioning systems and time-motion analysis over three seasons (2010 – 2013). In terms of sample size, this investigation represents one of the largest conducted and therefore provides information that is more representative than any published thus far. Moreover, the findings reported in the first study (of this thesis) directly challenge the practice adopted previously by researchers in this field of not considering the running capabilities of individual players when calculating their locomotive activities. The consequence of this is that for certain measures (involving speed zones), the values reported herein are a more appropriate reflection of elite players’ movement patterns than has been previously reported. For example, it emerged that had previous approaches been used, the average distances covered by players in a match would have been either under- or over-estimated by up to ~ 80% in high intensity running (HIR), and 86% in sprinting. In adopting subsequently the use of speed categories defined in relative terms, position-related differences were observed in locomotion. Namely, as a group, the backs covered the greatest distances, with the scrum half position covering the most (6,542 m) and the tighthead prop the least (4,326 m). The outside backs were found to “sprint” the most, albeit up to ten times less than previously reported. Similarly, position-specific performance behaviours were identified, with the forwards participating in ~ 40% more static exertions than the backs, the second row involved in the most rucks (~ 34% of team total) and the back row the most tackles (12 per match). Among the backs, different demands prevailed; the scrum half executed most passes (over 50% of team total), whereas the inside backs engaged in most tackles (8 per match) and the outside backs carried the ball the most (7 times per match). When broken down into 5-minute periods of play, notable changes in demands were evident. For instance, reductions in total distances (~ 7%), and distances at HIR (~ 16%) occurred in 5 the second half compared to the first, implying that the onset of fatigue and/or the employment of pacing strategies. Moreover, reductions in HIR following the most intense periods of play were seen (when compared to the average) for the inside (~ 23%) and outside backs (~ 20%), as was the number of static exertions for the front row (~ 21%), back row (~ 24%) and outside backs (~ 45%), suggesting the occurrence of ‘transient fatigue’ during a match. Collectively the current research provides a comprehensive overview of key physical demands of English Premiership rugby union. Not only does it provide ‘typical’ position-related data, but also provides some insight into the most intense scenarios for elements of locomotive movement and static exertions, which together could assist practitioners/coaches in devising individualised training programmes to prepare players optimally for competition.