Declining participation and ARU plans for the future

[WorkingClassRugger]

I can only speak of this area. PSSA rugby competition stopped as far as I can tell in the 90s. I'm not sure why, I do know that it was replaced by league, despite the fact that there are 4 junior rugby clubs in our PSSA zone and 1 junior league club.

CHS North Shore zone rugby competition ceased late 90s/early 00s. Availablity of coaches was a reason that I was told. Not sure if there were other reasons.

What I could say is that had rugby had the sort of programmes in that are now being talked about, then it's highly likely that neither would have fallen over. And I'm fairly confident is saying that getting them going again will take much more time, money and resources than trying to keep them going would have.

The only Rugby played in my area was in the form of knockouts. League has always been the entrenched version alongside Soccer and AFL.

 

[barbarian]

Was doing a bit of reading on the RFU's tactics to build the game in England, and one of their targets was to have 2015 coaches accredited as Level 2 by the end of 2015. They achieved that aim.

I think that is a great idea.
.

 

[dru]

I brought this over from the "ARU takes over the Force" thread. Declining age group conversation, issue for the Force too, but I think germane here:

And if people don't want to believe you and I, there's a significant body of scientific evidence out there which suggests that these early junior programmes actually limit skill aquisition and lead to low retention rates.

Sound familiar?

http://nsw.baseball.com.au/Portals/...gagement from a Developmental Perspective.pdf

Thats a really interesting report. If Im reading it right it says:
1. Declining participation is normal, or at least common for age group particpants across many (all?) sports.
2. Early specialisation reaps performance benefits, but works against retention.
3. Some movement between clubs and time out can increase application if the age athlete returns.

That second part is a little interpretive by me.

If the report is right, consistent within rugby, and my interpretation is close, the Go Rugby programme can be speculated to have little result on retention - of adult players impacting the professional realm. Obviously some impact on youth numbers.

Strategy to increase participation at grass roots might need a different strategy for professional.

Another bit of interpretation is that the multiple rugby format thing, which I'm not very comfortable with, if it has similar impact to changing clubs, may well help retention even into professional level.

Increased participation is a good thing for rugby in and of itself, and you would think would increase the fan base. But if it doesnt help the retention into the pro ranks there may well be a missing plank in the five year plan.

My thanks to QH for this report.

 

[Hugh Jarse]

,snip>

At a participation level the game is moving away from long-form Saturdays on turf pitches in whites (though that will always exist), and we are seeing big growth in midweek and weekend T20 matches. Some of these are 8-a-side, with an emphasis on speed and enjoyment rather than what you would call ‘pure’ cricket.

<snip>.

Isn't that called baseball?

 

[Quick Hands]

I brought this over from the "ARU takes over the Force" thread. Declining age group conversation, issue for the Force too, but I think germane here:



Thats a really interesting report. If Im reading it right it says:
1. Declining participation is normal, or at least common for age group particpants across many (all?) sports.
2. Early specialisation reaps performance benefits, but works against retention.
3. Some movement between clubs and time out can increase application if the age athlete returns.

That second part is a little interpretive by me.

If the report is right, consistent within rugby, and my interpretation is close, the Go Rugby programme can be speculated to have little result on retention - of adult players impacting the professional realm. Obviously some impact on youth numbers.

Strategy to increase participation at grass roots might need a different strategy for professional.

Another bit of interpretation is that the multiple rugby format thing, which I'm not very comfortable with, if it has similar impact to changing clubs, may well help retention even into professional level.

Increased participation is a good thing for rugby in and of itself, and you would think would increase the fan base. But if it doesnt help the retention into the pro ranks there may well be a missing plank in the five year plan.

My thanks to QH for this report.

Nice summary dru.

 

[Quick Hands]

Isn't that called baseball?

Digressing slightly, but the Super 8 format as it's called is still very much cricket. Everyone bowls 2 overs, batsmen have to retire after 4 overs (I think) and batsmen who have retired may come back when the whole team has dismissed. Each innings takes about 45 mins, so the game is over in 90.

Much better than the traditional cricket junior format, where the best 3 or 4 kids bowled all the overs and batted first.

 

[Braveheart81]

Much better than the traditional cricket junior format, where the best 3 or 4 kids bowled all the overs and batted first.

Isn't this traditional cricket where the best bowlers bowl most of the overs and the best batsmen bat in the key positions?

 

[Quick Hands]

Isn't this traditional cricket where the best bowlers bowl most of the overs and the best batsmen bat in the key positions?

Yes it is, but typically in junior teams the same 3 or 4 kids are the best batsmen and the best bowlers. So if those kids do most of the batting and the bowling, the other 7 or 8 spend 2 or 3 hours on one Saturday standing on the boundary and 2 or 3 hours on the next Saturday watching their team mates bat.

Not so good for retention of kids - which to their credit CA worked out and introduced Super 8s.

Difficult to improve one's batting and bowling skills if one isn't ever allowed to bat or bowl in a game.

 

[Braveheart81]

Yes it is, but typically in junior teams the same 3 or 4 kids are the best batsmen and the best bowlers. So if those kids do most of the batting and the bowling, the other 7 or 8 spend 2 or 3 hours on one Saturday standing on the boundary and 2 or 3 hours on the next Saturday watching their team mates bat.

Not so good for retention of kids - which to their credit CA worked out and introduced Super 8s.

Difficult to improve one's batting and bowling skills if one isn't ever allowed to bat or bowl in a game.

I was being a bit tongue in cheek.

As an adult park cricketer, the same largely holds true up until a fairly high standard.

I understand part of the idea behind Super 8s was also to make it possible to play with fewer people. I have heard that country areas in particular have been struggling for numbers and like any sport, once a team folds because they can't field a team, it's very difficult to get it started up again.

When I played junior cricket, under 10s was average cricket where each pair got 4 overs to bat and the team's average was determined by dividing the total number of runs by total number of wickets. That ensured everyone got a bat but it also meant that one terrible pair could cost your team the game.

 

[papabear]

I was watching rugby 360 (or whatever its called) last night where they went through the impact of sevens.

I have to say the hoff singing at hong kong and the atmosphere looked really really fun. Essentially, that is what entertainment is all about making sure that punters have a good time.

The talk from then from the host was how to translate that interest into 15s interest. I think that is the wrong attitude. Imagine if that was the attitude rugby talk in respect of the world cup when it first came out instead of just focusing on the event, thought of it as a vehicle to onsell other products.

Focus on the sevens format and excitement of the event. Most likely, it will have a positive impact on 15s, but really thats not what its about, it should be about engaging maximum audiences / revenue from the sevens product.

 

[papabear]

I was being a bit tongue in cheek.

As an adult park cricketer, the same largely holds true up until a fairly high standard.

I understand part of the idea behind Super 8s was also to make it possible to play with fewer people. I have heard that country areas in particular have been struggling for numbers and like any sport, once a team folds because they can't field a team, it's very difficult to get it started up again.

When I played junior cricket, under 10s was average cricket where each pair got 4 overs to bat and the team's average was determined by dividing the total number of runs by total number of wickets. That ensured everyone got a bat but it also meant that one terrible pair could cost your team the game.

It depends on the team.

First cricket team I played for was a joke, with the coaches son doing everything and everyone else just watching.

Second cricket team (which felt more successful) engaged everyone and the batting and bowling was relatively liquid depending on form, except for one bloke who was an absolute weapon, but he was always in form and pretty much carried us.

Oddly enough that second cricket side pretty much stuck together (atleast while I was there to attest to it) and always had people wanting to join. Not sure what happened to the first side.

 

[barbarian]

Digressing slightly, but the Super 8 format as it's called is still very much cricket. Everyone bowls 2 overs, batsmen have to retire after 4 overs (I think) and batsmen who have retired may come back when the whole team has dismissed. Each innings takes about 45 mins, so the game is over in 90.

Much better than the traditional cricket junior format, where the best 3 or 4 kids bowled all the overs and batted first.

One of the growing senior cricket formats is done in a comp called 'last man stands', where it's teams of 8, 20/20 with 5-ball overs. Max 4 overs a bowler, retire at 50 and come back at the end.

Bit of hit-and-giggle, but a lot of fun and can knock over a game in just 2 hours with everyone being part of the action.
.

 

[Braveheart81]

One of the growing senior cricket formats is done in a comp called 'last man stands', where it's teams of 8, 20/20 with 5-ball overs. Max 4 overs a bowler, retire at 50 and come back at the end.

Bit of hit-and-giggle, but a lot of fun and can knock over a game in just 2 hours with everyone being part of the action.
.

It is absolutely massive.

The guy who runs it in Sydney is part of the group that originally started the competition in the UK and he does it as a full time job.

I don't know how many teams they currently have playing across Australia I believe it is well over 500.

 

[barbarian]

Yeah. I don't think CA has anything to do with it, either.

 

[Quick Hands]

It depends on the team.

First cricket team I played for was a joke, with the coaches son doing everything and everyone else just watching.

Second cricket team (which felt more successful) engaged everyone and the batting and bowling was relatively liquid depending on form, except for one bloke who was an absolute weapon, but he was always in form and pretty much carried us.

Oddly enough that second cricket side pretty much stuck together (atleast while I was there to attest to it) and always had people wanting to join. Not sure what happened to the first side.

I had a similar experience. Coach's son, manager's son and scorer's son used to open the bowling and keep wicket. When one of the bowlers got tired they became wicketkeeper etc. No one else bowled an over all season. They also were the first 3 batsmen. The rest of us occasionally got a bat, but only if two of them got out before they won the match. Funnily enough the team folded the next year.

 

[RugbyReg]

Well our Jnr club (Taylor Bridge Bullsharks) have 355 players this season - up 9% on last year.

So we're doing our bit.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Ozee316]

In New Zealand, sevens is quite popular and most often run in open parks by touch associations.

If the ARU were smart they would hand VIVA7s over to local clubs along with the funding and get them to send out their local volunteers. Instead of making it an ARU event it Should be a place where the referees are local club rugby players wearing their club colours and representing their club, signing up players, inviting people to dance parties and balls and BBQ's at their clubrooms for Christimas. Advertising coaching sessions for young players, women and men, signing people up to their club. This doesn't require money it requires the local clubs to organize an army of volunteers to at out and do the work to grow the grassroots.

Get local club players to pound the streets, gyms, schools, businesses and neighborhoods wearing their club blazers looking for new players and putting them into teams. Get the club colours out there.

Local men and women who are interested would be interested in more and alongside Viva-7s club players could showcase a game of real 7s sometimes and sign players up or give them training clinics.

That is how you attract new players. Get dirty. Put in the time. Rewards will come when clubs, supported by the ARU give something to the neighbourhood and schools.

The ARU doesn't need to hire hundreds of development officers. Every playing member of a club can be a development officer. The more senior the player the more one can do. Running coaching clinics for local school boys and coaches. Playing exhibition Sevens matches at a local high school.

Completely off topic. I played 5-a-side social netball and touch when I was at university. Interesting, fun, met new people. Just a laugh and something to do and meet new people and keep fit. Well it's such a short game really. People love it. It suits a lot of social groups from students to workers.

 

[Quick Hands]

In New Zealand, sevens is quite popular and most often run in open parks by touch associations.

If the ARU were smart they would hand VIVA7s over to local clubs along with the funding and get them to send out their local volunteers. Instead of making it an ARU event it Should be a place where the referees are local club rugby players wearing their club colours and representing their club, signing up players, inviting people to dance parties and balls and BBQ's at their clubrooms for Christimas. Advertising coaching sessions for young players, women and men, signing people up to their club. This doesn't require money it requires the local clubs to organize an army of volunteers to at out and do the work to grow the grassroots.

Get local club players to pound the streets, gyms, schools, businesses and neighborhoods wearing their club blazers looking for new players and putting them into teams. Get the club colours out there.

Local men and women who are interested would be interested in more and alongside Viva-7s club players could showcase a game of real 7s sometimes and sign players up or give them training clinics.

That is how you attract new players. Get dirty. Put in the time. Rewards will come when clubs, supported by the ARU give something to the neighbourhood and schools.

The ARU doesn't need to hire hundreds of development officers. Every playing member of a club can be a development officer. The more senior the player the more one can do. Running coaching clinics for local school boys and coaches. Playing exhibition Sevens matches at a local high school.

Completely off topic. I played 5-a-side social netball and touch when I was at university. Interesting, fun, met new people. Just a laugh and something to do and meet new people and keep fit. Well it's such a short game really. People love it. It suits a lot of social groups from students to workers.

Manly JRU have been running pre-season 7s for a few years now.

 

[papabear]

sometimes, things are almost better run when they are out of the hands of officialdom and they are just run by a keen bunch of enthusiasts in whatever sport.

whether that be
super 8s
touch
tag sevens

 

[Braveheart81]

Except you're never going to get enough volunteers in areas where there is little or no rugby.

Part of the problem for a long time has been the reliance on purely organic growth (or moreso not losing ground rather than growth), but it slowly falls away as volunteers and coaches get too old or move on.

Where things like public school rugby have disappeared it has often come about because one person drove the participation as the coach and then eventually retires and there is no one to replace them.

There is no doubt the ARU need paid development officers to help run the activities, empower the volunteers and get things going in the right direction.