Junior rugby based on weight classes

[Eric]

South, so have I got this right... .. you reckon you learnt to tackle and become a hardnut because you had to tackle blokes who were twice to two and a half times your weight? You must rush over the ditch then and tell the AB's all about it. Keiran and the rest of that lot who have come through the NZ juniors had , at best, only had to tackle blokes who were 50% heavier than themselves. What a disadvantage they must have?!

In fact these guys had to learn how to kick, catch pass and have a rugby brain and look where it has got them?! . .. oh that's right . ... they are doing ok ... (I'd bet you wouldn't see them throwing a ball one off for 15+ phases because they have nothing else to offer in attack)

Mate I will rest my case on your post. If you can't see that, in this day and age, a contact sport involving 3 or 4 40 kilo kids clinging onto a 100kilo kid while he dots the ball down is not a complete joke, then you ought to whack a couple of leather elbow patches on your sports coat and get a job with the marketing department at the ARU.
Here is a tip - they are looking for reasons for the declining junior participation rate. Apparently there are lots of sports for talented kids with ball skills to choose from - so all you have to do is tell 'em to find the kids (and the parents) that want to rise to the challenge of tackling kids twice their size. It should go over a treat. A heads up though - just hold off a bit if the insurance guy is in the room - the buggers get real twitchy when 'duty of care' 'second impact syndrome' 'early onset dementia' - all injuries caused by concussion - are mentioned in the same conversation.

OK. a bit of a smart *rse post. I had a great time playing - never good enough to go on with it after school - but a bloody good time ... and I played before Islanders came on the scene - and for the record my son is bigger so he won't be one of the 40 kilo squids in the team tackling the 100 kilo kid. But I see this sport dying quickly. My club fielded only 2 U6 teams this year down from 4 last year and 5 the year before that.

We have to change the way we do business or soon there won't be business to change.

 

[southsider]

i appreciate your response Eric

 

[BAR]

It was interesting to see that this year's registration in the SJRU required the weight and height of players to be provided.

 

[BAR]

Almost 12 months since this blew up in the Sydney papers (junior State Champs weekend), we've seen a letter to clubs from the SJRU in response to the press, we've seen compulsory recording of height and weight in SJRU registration this season but, does anyone have any idea where junior RU going with this? Would be nice to know.

Personally, I'd also like to be confident that the Junior State Championships in a few weeks will get positive press this year rather than have this issue resurface and undermine the public perception of this big weekend for junior rugby.

If I was a media adviser for any of the RU bodies, I'd be aiming to proactively address the issue to minimise the risk of someone using this event to hijack the media - again.

 

[Scrubber2050]

^^^^^
So if they are recording heights and weights are they doing anything to prohibit those huge lads from certain age groups.

We want all boys to play rugby but it must be on a level field or one in which the gradient isn't too great.

Irrespective of age those larger lads need to be playing in an age group in which their size is not ONLY their key to success.

 

[Micheal]

Does this go into opens in NZ?

Realistically, many of my friends no longer play because they work professionally and can't afford to do a shoulder / collar bone etc. and be out of action for a number of weeks.

It's also gotten to the point where I'm simply not big enough to play the position I've played my whole life (blindside) in opens anymore.

If there was an u85kg league I'm sure a lot of those problems would be alleviated.

(how the hell do props work in such a league???)

 

[Micheal]

I think a problem with rugby is that its so unaccessible for most people in the way its currently played.

I could sign up to a football comp or an AFL comp tomorrow and go fine, but I remember in one of our finals in colts Subbies two years ago the opposition team fielded these two centres that were absolute behemoths.

They looked like they'd be bred (or built) in a laboratory somewhere in Russia as prototypes for the Russian Olympics program. If you told me they were on the juice I would've believed you.

Some of the shots they put on our boys were ridiculous.

And they weren't alone in their size. You see ex-Aussie schoolboys / NSW players trotting around in Subbies comps all over the place.

^ that alone makes rugby unaccessible for the average punter.

 

[Scrubber2050]

^^^^^^
Maybe a special dispensation need to be applied to the front row, say a 10-20% allowance.

But your point is taken Michael !

 

[BAR]

^^^^^
So if they are recording heights and weights are they doing anything to prohibit those huge lads from certain age groups.

We want all boys to play rugby but it must be on a level field or one in which the gradient isn't too great.

Irrespective of age those larger lads need to be playing in an age group in which their size is not ONLY their key to success.

Your question is the basis of my post. Despite the requirement for this info to be Collected this season at registration there has been no communication I am aware of about what the intent is.

 

[BAR]

Does this go into opens in NZ?

Realistically, many of my friends no longer play because they work professionally and can't afford to do a shoulder / collar bone etc. and be out of action for a number of weeks.

It's also gotten to the point where I'm simply not big enough to play the position I've played my whole life (blindside) in opens anymore.

If there was an u85kg league I'm sure a lot of those problems would be alleviated.

(how the hell do props work in such a league???)

My understanding is that in NZ the weight grading ends after U13s.

 

[Dan54]

My understanding is that in NZ the weight grading ends after U13s.

The U85 kg grade is a senior grade, as for props etc, I think they have to be same weight, I guessing the grade is for senior players who are concerned about playing against big men, whilst not a social grade neither is it as important as Prems or even probably next 2-3 grades down.

 

[Twoilms]

I think a problem with rugby is that its so unaccessible for most people in the way its currently played.

I could sign up to a football comp or an AFL comp tomorrow and go fine, but I remember in one of our finals in colts Subbies two years ago the opposition team fielded these two centres that were absolute behemoths.

They looked like they'd be bred (or built) in a laboratory somewhere in Russia as prototypes for the Russian Olympics program. If you told me they were on the juice I would've believed you.

Some of the shots they put on our boys were ridiculous.

And they weren't alone in their size. You see ex-Aussie schoolboys / NSW players trotting around in Subbies comps all over the place.

^ that alone makes rugby unaccessible for the average punter.

Yeah i've missed many a tackle on some juiced up ex-professional hitman centre. It doesn't really make the game inaccessible it just means you'll lose. Which doesn't matter too much in subbies.

 

[Micheal]

Yeah i've missed many a tackle on some juiced up ex-professional hitman centre. It doesn't really make the game inaccessible it just means you'll lose. Which doesn't matter too much in subbies.

The problem is more so the tackles they're making on you.

Got a fresh Grad job that you've studied for 3+ years for? Yeah, nah, I'd rather not lose use of my right arm for 2+ months at a time post surgery.

Working a trade? A friend of mine simply can't drive cranes without his shoulder / collarbone etc., and time out of work would really affect him.

Besides, I have 23 year old friends who have had multiple shoulder reconstructions on the same shoulder and this will probably have real implications for them later in life.

To go back to my original point - rugby isn't accessible for your average 75-85kg male, who doesn't live at the gym, when you have 100kg+ roid monsters running around in the "social" grades.

 

[Scrubber2050]

There is a touch of "brutality" in our game. That is just the nature of a true contact sport. There will always be injuries, minor, major and even, dare I say it, potential loss of life.

The secret is TRYING to eliminate obvious risks - and the biggest one is a huge behemoth playing against a skinny beanpole.

In junior rugby a weight for age should apply to help minimise unnecessary injury.

Senior rugby is a bit different. If you aren't prepared to accept the potential risks then Touch Footy may be the go.

 

[USARugger]

To go back to my original point - rugby isn't accessible for your average 75-85kg male, who doesn't live at the gym, when you have 100kg+ roid monsters running around in the "social" grades.

This is super hard to police, in my experience it's generally left up to the discretion of the club. It takes a special group of assholes to play a freak athlete in a truly "social" grade game.

The problem I'm seeing with your posts so far is that you're talking about, presumably, Premier Colts.

Isn't the entire purpose there to prepare younger guys for higher honors in Senior Men's rugby and maybe beyond? You're going to get athletes of a higher caliber in there by default, and unfortunately there may also be some guys who are just there making up the numbers depending on which club you're playing for. That's just an unpreventable reality of a club sport where you can have grades ranging from semi-pro to beer league in the same club.

Isn't the whole purpose of Premier Colts and Men's 1st XV to be a "serious" social sport?

This distinction is pretty clearly drawn at every club I've been involved with and sometimes even taken to the extent of the "beer league" sides forming their own separate club to make scheduling matches against equivalent opposition simpler and less of a logistical headache.

The comparison with AFL/Soccer is silly, they aren't collision sports.. of course bulk is going to be less of a factor and injuries from contact are going to be much less prevalent.

If in fact these guys in your story were fielding their 1st XV center pairing in a Colts 3 or "social" grade game, then the match shouldn't have gone on to begin with. The opposing club should have been shunned by their local competition until they got their shit in order, I've seen this exact scenario played out a few times myself over here. Sometimes a few dickheads band together and lead their club to doing some dumb shit like this, but they seem to fall in line pretty quickly when they run out of teams to play because they're fielding 1st XV athletes in a purely social league.

You can't expect to compete at the higher levels of a collision sport even at the amateur level if you're not willing to take the risk, put in the work required to become that fit, and have the genetics to back up the hard work. That's just life, honestly.

Beyond all this, I don't see this as an issue that's very relevant to the overall development of the sport (and especially the professional side of the game stemming from club roots, which is the main focus of weight grading in youth rugby - you get higher participation because of less pushback from parents and ultimately wind up with more skillful players, give later-developing kids more opportunity to show their wares and get their names in the hat for higher honors later on). The scenario you described is pretty much the whole reason there are multiple grades the club game is played in.

And yeah there will always be dudes on 'roids but there's no real recourse to deal with this in amateur sports. The money, infrastructure, and organization required to test just doesn't exist at that level of play in nearly any sport. While steroids won't put you in the poor house, they aren't exactly free either and even at the higher levels of club play the guys willing to shell out the cash and take the associated risks are in the minority.

 

[brokendown]

played in weight divisions from the age of 5 to 16.I was always very light for my age and can remember as a young nipper putting stones in my pockets at weigh ins so i could play in a higher weight division with my mates!
managed to play senior rugby in NZ at only 60 kg,without any major injuries- but had enough nous about me by then to avoid tackling 100kg plus,front rowers-LOL

 

[The_Brown_Hornet]

Interesting that this topic has come up again. This is not rugby related, but Aussie Rules, so bear with me.

My boy hasn't grown a great deal in the last 12 months (though he's showing all the signs of shooting up very soon) and is playing Yr 8 grade for his local footy club. There are enough numbers for two teams in his year, but rather stupidly the coach has decided that all his big bodied super stars will play in one team in a higher division and the midgets like my boy will all play together in a lower division. Well the first two rounds have had the lads lose by 124 and 71 points. In. Year. Eight. Footy. The blokes these poor kids are playing against are monsters by comparison and our lads are so thoroughly outclassed and outmatched that it breaks your heart. When you have such a big size difference in underage contact sport it's carnage. Weight for age would deal with this issue, though in the case of our club we've brought on ourselves, but that's because the head coach of the year is a fucknuckle who I would love to smack in the mouth.

 

[BAR]

Interesting that this topic has come up again. This is not rugby related, but Aussie Rules, so bear with me.

My boy hasn't grown a great deal in the last 12 months (though he's showing all the signs of shooting up very soon) and is playing Yr 8 grade for his local footy club. There are enough numbers for two teams in his year, but rather stupidly the coach has decided that all his big bodied super stars will play in one team in a higher division and the midgets like my boy will all play together in a lower division. Well the first two rounds have had the lads lose by 124 and 71 points. In. Year. Eight. Footy. The blokes these poor kids are playing against are monsters by comparison and our lads are so thoroughly outclassed and outmatched that it breaks your heart. When you have such a big size difference in underage contact sport it's carnage. Weight for age would deal with this issue, though in the case of our club we've brought on ourselves, but that's because the head coach of the year is a fucknuckle who I would love to smack in the mouth.

There is no value for anyone in having uncompetitive teams in junior sports - when it is avoidable. Putting together a junior team of sports stars is all about the parents/coaches with dreams of glory - it's not in the interests of the players. True competition is where skills and character develop.

My son played in what was a very weak League competition. There was one team which was a team of "superstars" (relatively speaking). Over a 2-3 year period (U10-U12) they won every game and most of their results went to a mercy rule. The problem with this was the club had two teams in the age group and the club & the coach of the better team refused to balance them out (despite protestations from parents of both of their teams) so as to have two competitive teams. Worse still, the coach (who might make a great mate for your head coach) chased better players from other clubs and treated the weaker team like a reserve grade "selecting" who he wanted to play for them when they were short of players (and - can you believe it - refusing to allow some players to help out 'cause they weren't good enough). It was appalling.

That age group imploded for the club. The weaker team's players either left the club for other teams or left the sport because of the culture. The "superstar" team decided to join another competition to find glory and found that their skills weren't so great after all. They had been the big fish in a small pond, and in the absence of balanced competition they hadn't developed as players and struggled to compete.

Back to the point of this discussion topic. I think that balancing competition is the biggest driver for weight grading. Personally, I think the risk of injury from size imbalance is no greater than the risk of injury from numerous other factors on the field (not to say any injury risk shouldn't be addressed). But, junior athletes need to enjoy what they are doing and if they haven't got a chance to compete (either one-on-one within games, or as a team) because of wildly varying size then they are not going to enjoy the sport, or even enter it in the first place.

 

[BAR]

At the NSW State champs this weekend height and weight data is being collected.

http://rugbynews.net.au/other/27981/

 

[One eyed pirate]

There is no value for anyone in having uncompetitive teams in junior sports - when it is avoidable. Putting together a junior team of sports stars is all about the parents/coaches with dreams of glory - it's not in the interests of the players. True competition is where skills and character develop.

My son played in what was a very weak League competition. There was one team which was a team of "superstars" (relatively speaking). Over a 2-3 year period (U10-U12) they won every game and most of their results went to a mercy rule. The problem with this was the club had two teams in the age group and the club & the coach of the better team refused to balance them out (despite protestations from parents of both of their teams) so as to have two competitive teams. Worse still, the coach (who might make a great mate for your head coach) chased better players from other clubs and treated the weaker team like a reserve grade "selecting" who he wanted to play for them when they were short of players (and - can you believe it - refusing to allow some players to help out 'cause they weren't good enough). It was appalling.

That age group imploded for the club. The weaker team's players either left the club for other teams or left the sport because of the culture. The "superstar" team decided to join another competition to find glory and found that their skills weren't so great after all. They had been the big fish in a small pond, and in the absence of balanced competition they hadn't developed as players and struggled to compete.

Back to the point of this discussion topic. I think that balancing competition is the biggest driver for weight grading. Personally, I think the risk of injury from size imbalance is no greater than the risk of injury from numerous other factors on the field (not to say any injury risk shouldn't be addressed). But, junior athletes need to enjoy what they are doing and if they haven't got a chance to compete (either one-on-one within games, or as a team) because of wildly varying size then they are not going to enjoy the sport, or even enter it in the first place.

Agree 100%. Games need to be close. If a team is winning by plenty they need to go up a division and vice versa regardless of age and/or weight. My boy plays soccer and rugby. His soccer team gets regraded every 4 rounds. One sided rugby results are bad for the sport and don't help either team.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk