[
PLEASE LOGIN TO POST TO THE FORUM
]
|
|
|
HighsideUK
|
Thu, 03 July 08 12:33 GMT
|
PaulDG
Now your posts are ringing the alarm bells.
You are keen to drill the rules in to the kids and seem to view the alternative as teaching them to cheat.
I don't want to teach illegal techniques but nor do I want to get hung up on this year's continuum restrictions.
I want to spend the time on more general skills.
There are two extremes here and any real kid will fall between the two.
At one xextreme you have a player who knows all the rules (according to his coach) perfectly and can follow them faultlessly but has not spent as much time as he could have learning to catch, pass, run, tackle, think, adapt etc...
At the other extrem you have a player who has been developed to 100% of his potential in terms of game skills and thinking for himself and adapting but will break the rules at times because nobody has actually taught him them.
Note that the latter type of player will naturally play whatever rules the ref on the day decides to enforce.
You seem to favour the former over the latter. I think this is a mistake. I'd rather my son tended toward the latter type of player.
All your dire prognostications about those who get away with "cheating" giving up the game when they meet good refs just does not ring true.
The adaptable kids will not worry about good refs or bad - they'll just play the ref like they always have.
It is rather those that are straightjacketed and blinkered by what they are "sure" are the rules that will get despondent when so many referees see things differently to them (as they will). They are the ones that grow up to bleat for months about Wayne Barnes and one forward pass or blame the sub-prime credit crisis when they can't pay their Visa bill. You are teaching the kids to stamp their feet screw their faces up and scream its NOT FAIR!
Spend the time teaching them other skills. By all means emphasise honesty and integrity but also let them learn to expect and cope with the rules wobbling about a bit. They do in real rugby and they do in real life!
|
|
|
simonthomas
|
Wed, 02 July 08 13:54 GMT
|
Going back to DavidGH's original note on 1st July, I totally agree. That is why we as a Society do NOT appoint to any matches covered by the Continuum (in his words we STAY AWAY) - we believe such matches are best officiated by those trained in the Continuum and so covered by Referees & Coaches who are involved with those age groups on a weekly basis.
The different management emphasis and law variations between an adult league match on Saturday and a Youth match on Sunday is hard enough to adapt to, let alone switching to the Continuum.
Any volunteer wanting to progress to Divisional League levels (8 and above) has little enough time to attend the training and development as a League and Youth Referee, plus handle IRB initiatives like CTPE and ELVs, as well as cover up to three matches a week.
This message edited on Wed, 02 July 08 by simonthomas
|
|
|
pauldg
|
Wed, 02 July 08 13:02 GMT
|
>All the stuff about the nasty little cheat not prospering in the long run and putting everbody else off does not have much of a bearing on this either.
I don't mean "nasty little cheat".
I mean those coaches that teach Continuum age kids techniques the coaches *know* (or should know if they read an up to date version of the Continuum) are not allowed are not doing the kids any favours.
Sure they'll win a few more games and a few more festivals. Sure they'll feel pretty good about it. (While the opposition may not).
But eventually, they'll have to play junior rugby on more level terms. The advantage they had when they were learning to run onto the pass suddenly becomes a penalty for a Cavalry Charge, the times they got to spoil the opposition ball at the scrum by following the SH round suddenly becomes even - the opposition SH now follows them round and spoils their ball too.
And for some the decay in their previously excellent results will be a turn off. Just as being beaten by that team several years before was a turn off for other kids.
That's why the spirit is important. Playing to the rules instead of playing the ref is what's important in Continuum age grades. It's actually want the kids respect.
Let them learn to play the ref when they become juniors.
|
-------------------------
--
PaulDG |
|
|
HighsideUK
|
Wed, 02 July 08 12:22 GMT
|
"The Continuum is about *long* *term* results - not learning how to cheat at the free pass..."
You are stretching the definition of "learning to cheat" a long way when what we are talking about is slavishly following a rule that is widely ignored and that in this instance the ref is not enforcing.
All the stuff about the nasty little cheat not prospering in the long run and putting everbody else off does not have much of a bearing on this either.
Give me an example... what exactly has your little anti-hero done to be so damned? Did he realise that the ref was allowing people to run on to the pass from the restart and so do it? And his opposite number is scarred by this experience? What!? If the rules were being reffed differently for each side then I could see your point - but to me, the lad who is not adapting is just not playing as well. Life is not nearly so even-handed and giving up as soon as he finds out rules are actually not what he thought they were is not goind to get him far at all. Not even on his XBox.
And as for our anti-hero spending any time at all in the sin-bin, I am sure you are aware that it is the inflexible, unadaptable players who do NOT any good at "playing the referee" that are far more likely to end up there.
Look - let's get this straight. What I mean by "playing the ref" - and what DavidGH was are talking about in this thread - does NOT include doing things behind the ref's back or walking onto the pitch with the intention of hoodwinking the ref and breaking the laws he is trying to enforce. "Playing the ref" is simply working out what the referee thinks the laws are (remember he IS the law) and playing according to them. There can be nothing remotely "immoral" about that. It is a very valuable skill both in rugby and in life.
|
|
|
pauldg
|
Wed, 02 July 08 11:43 GMT
|
>Secondly, 'Playing the Ref' is not dubious at any level.
I completely disagree.
The Continuum is about learning to learn - and a great deal of it is about providing a level of support for "late developers".
Teaching the able 9 year old how to "play the ref" and score a few victories over the slightly less developed 10 year old on the other team doesn't do anything for the confidence of the 10 year old.
Which is a shame, cos by the time he's 18 and, had he carried on in the sport be outkicking Dan Carter, he'll actually be sitting in front of the Xbox.
And so will that now 17 year old ex-able 9 year old. He was doing fine coming top all the time with his cheating right to the point when his fellows reached puberty and caught up with him and when he started to regularly meet better referees when playing in juniors and as a result spent enough time in the sin bin to decide rugby wasn't for him either.
The Continuum is about *long* *term* results - not learning how to cheat at the free pass or how to get away with fending off, etc.
|
-------------------------
--
PaulDG |
|
|
HighsideUK
|
Wed, 02 July 08 10:48 GMT
|
DavidGH:
You were unlucky to get so many injuries from mauls that had turned into rucks. I know it is wrong and should not be allowed but I never managed to convince anyone of this last season in any of the U10 games we played in and I don't remember anyone getting injured (injured as in damaged in a way that hurt for more than a few minutes). I do remember a couple of people getting trodden on by accident and I know that this is supposed to be pretty much an automatic penalty but I don't think it was a big deal that the game carried on.
When I read these two paragraphs ......
"Allowing 'running on' at free passes and alll sorts of transgressions that we have been carefully training out of the boys all year.
This gives advantage to those who teach - 'Play to the ref' which is pretty dubious at u10"
they made me very uneasy.
Firstly, the "standing start" restart is an utterly artificial "move" that exists for safetey reasons (they say). Now, I would spend a lot of time, for example, drilling it into the kids that they should not put their head the wrong side in a tackle becuase this to me seems clearly dangerous and also they will need to get it right from U9s to Vets Rugby
However, I would not spend all year carefully training the boys to take a ball standing still. Did you spend a long time drilling the boys so that the first pass is taken standing still and immediately popped to the next player who takes the ball on the charge? If so, well done for finding a good legal tactic and well done to your boys for learning to execute it. But this is no safer than just ignoring the rule. And is the skill you have drilled into them (the pass to someone stood still who then simply passes again) of any value at any other time?
Secondly, 'Playing the Ref' is not dubious at any level. The Laws of Rugby, the Rules of the Continuum and even the "rules" of the big wide world in which the boys have to grow up are all poorly defined, open to interpretation, and widely bent/ignored/blatantly flouted.
The skill of adapting to change and thinking on your feet is a good skill. If a scrum half stays in the pocket when the ref wants him to and chases the ball round in the next game when he is allowed, then he is just a better player than the scrum half that does not change his game. This thoughtfulness and flexibility is a good thing to learn.
Would our efforts be better directed at teaching the boys to be flexible rather than making the framework in which they play utterly uniform?
Do we really want the lads to feel hard-done-by and like they have secured a moral victory if the other team adapts better to an eccentric ref and so wins the game?
|
|
|
DavidGH
|
Tue, 01 July 08 23:50 GMT
|
Unfortunately at u10 the result was a string of quite nastycollapsed maul type injuries to small bodies. 3 of our A players off the pitch at one time all nursingvery sore bodies
Also injuries to carefully nurtured sportsmanship, young players who adore clubs like Quins, but when seeing them arrange something so unfairly and causing them injury, they are concerned that the super sportsmen are not so super after all
|
|
|
HighsideUK
|
Tue, 01 July 08 23:26 GMT
|
DavidGH,
You are absolutiely right.
And speaking as a rule-book-pedant myself you have my deep sympathy.
It drives me up the wall when 'uncontested' lineouts are taken to mean you let them catch the ball before you jump on them, or when scrum halves are allowed to chase the ball around the scrum at U10.
BUT
I have to take a deep breath a try to remember that the main point is for the boys to have fun and learn to catch and run and whatnot.
If all these things can be sorted out by talking to the ref/other coach then great but sometimes we just have to "go with the flow".
It would be better if everybody actually knew and stuck to the rules rigorously but it is not a catastrophe if they don't.
|
|
|
DavidGH
|
Tue, 01 July 08 21:41 GMT
|
Agrre with many of the contributors about Coaches knowing the LOTG and more the Continuum as applied to their year group
I THINK WE HAVE A NEW PROBLEM or at least an increasing one, many qualified referees are offering/ being asked to refereee festivals and do so without becoming fully familiar with the rules for the year group they are reffing.
I have had some severe occurences of this in 06/07 and 07/08 both at the Surrey Festival and at the Quins Etihad Curtain Raiser Cup.
LOTG is employed well by experienced refs and they are good junior coaches, in fact some are excellent. BUT they don't know the Continuum and therefore when reffing Semi finals of major competitions are allowing collapsed mauls to pile up, Allowing 'running on' at free passes and alll sorts of transgressions that we have been carefully training out of the boys all year.
This gives advantage to those who teach - 'Play to the ref' which is pretty dubious at u10
WE NEED HELP FROM THE RFU TO GET THIS SORTED - Qualified Refs should KNOW what they are allowed to do and at a minimum understand the structure of the LOTG including the Continuum, and if they don't know the year rules, surely they should STAY AWAY
|
|
|
milligani
- iandmilligan@btinternet.com
|
Tue, 03 June 08 13:51 GMT
|
Afternoon all,
Article from the RFU on the ELVs and their decision on implementing them at Under 19 & continuum levels. IMHO a very sensible solution.
http://www.rfu.com/index.cfm/fuseaction/RFUHome.News_Detail/StoryID/20099
|
-------------------------
Spike |
|
|
rugbytom
|
Sat, 17 May 08 16:05 GMT
|
Definitely agree about U12 - as argued on here many times previously - I would welcome conformity between the Continuum and Schools rugby at U12 - 15 a side full pitch.
Perhaps the necessary re-vamp of the Continuum for the ELV's is the time to do it?
Anyone on the CRG wish to share some thoughts?
This message edited on Sat, 17 May 08 by rugbytom
|
|
|
gittins
|
Tue, 13 May 08 16:49 GMT
|
WB, perhaps adults should have a dialogue and agree a common consensus for the benefit of U12 players? It is not rocket science.
I don't have much faith in the current administrators at both the RFU and Schools, who collectively administer confusion for U12 players.
Perhaps the IRB will ride to the rescue and ban collapsing mauls as an international U19 law variation?
Nick
|
|
|
didds
- scrumtime@hotmail.com
|
Tue, 13 May 08 13:41 GMT
|
"or should the RFU stick to its guns on safety and hope the schools come into line?"
which history has shown they will not unless it suits their own purposes to do so. Hence the current "U12" standoff situation. (that's not to say I disagree with WB incidentally!)
didds
This message edited on Tue, 13 May 08 by didds
|
|
|
the whistleblower
|
Tue, 13 May 08 10:32 GMT
|
Nick, most would agree your call (including, I suspect, most if not all within the RFU), but how do you propose it comes about? Should the RFU put young players in harm's way against its better judgement simply because the schools do, or should the RFU stick to its guns on safety and hope the schools come into line?
Hopefully, the iRB will exempt all U.19 from the ELV on collapsing the maul. If so and the schools ignore it, what then?
|
-------------------------
Whistleblower |
|
|
gittins
|
Mon, 12 May 08 16:21 GMT
|
I note with interest the concern regarding collapsing the maul in earlier posts. I have to respect such opinions, although my mind isn't completed made until I see some kids playing some games to such laws.
However I AM convinced that the introduction of ELVs shouldn't open up difference between School and Club rugby further at U12. It would be intolerable that U12 players to collapse the maul while playing for a school and then are prohibited while playing for their club.
Authors of the continuum should already be seeking consistency with School rugby (by allowing the hand-off to the body for example), not creating more differences.
Law consistency for U12 players please.
Nick
This message edited on Mon, 12 May 08 by gittins
|
|
|
didds
- scrumtime@hotmail.com
|
Fri, 09 May 08 11:20 GMT
|
I am - for once - pretty much lost for words.
I agree with Newbs question... and I understand (and agree also!) with PaulDG's assessment.
I guess all we can do as coaches that DO try and read the ctnm and LoTG is to carry copies of them with us at all times and refer to them should ever arguaments occur. With an offer to refer the hotly debated issues higher (RDO? refs Socienty?) if the black and white words on papoer are not clear enough for the debators.
One question though - I understand the point about not penalising players for actions they have been clearly coached to do (WRT the scrum half "feed") although I coulnd;t personally agree with it. In the long term view of that players' own development wouldn;t (s)he be better off having the method being explained correctly NOW rather than NOT developing a CORRECT method for ... how long? And finally - if a player/side had clearly been coached to punch members of their opposition would that not be penalised/pulled up on as the players "wopuldn;t know any different" ? And if so... where does the line get drawn between letting oit go and not?
didds
ps not bad for someone who was lost for words! ;-)
|
|
|
HighsideUK
|
Fri, 09 May 08 11:16 GMT
|
>How do we overcome this attitude ??
Part of it is simply doing what we are doing here. Talk about it. Reassure one another that we are doing the right thing. Share any ideas.
When I first started helping out at my club, I was viewed as a bit of a nit-picking wierdo when I started talking about the continuum rules as if reading them might be a respectable thing for a coach to do.
It has largely been the views of others on this Forum that have given me the courage of my convictions. Now I've been coaching a bit longer, I am in a position to influence the new helpers/coaches and point them in the right direction.
So do not despair. Fight the good fight. We can all make a difference.
Someone pointed out that a lot of the continuum coaches are at the edge of their competence. I think this is true - a lot of them would benefit simply by having someone give them a printed out copy of the Continuum regs for their age group. We can do this.
|
|
|
pauldg
|
Fri, 09 May 08 07:28 GMT
|
>How do we overcome this attitude ??
I have absolutely no idea.
Fact is, these are volunteers who are mostly (though few would ever admit it) "out of their depth".
Many will be ex-players from quite a while ago, some will be dads who never played but took on coaching because there wasn't any one else to do it.
Almost none will be coaches by "vocation".
Few appear to actually *want* to really improve - "they've done their "level 1", what more is there?" seems to be a common attitude. (Even those who do level 2, etc. seem often to do it as a "badge of office".)
And as for playing regulations - traditionally, no coach has wanted to bothered by Laws - perhaps rightly? After all a coach who tries to coach players to play by the Laws when those Laws are ignored by others including any referees the players are likely to meet is coaching his players to lose, isn't (s)he?
(At recent festivals, we've met 2 mini teams where the SHs were completely blatantly placing the ball at their hooker's feet. So blatantly that even a premiership referee would have to penalise it. And, of course, they always got away with it as the "referees" were either not looking for it or felt it unfair to penalise a child for an action that had plainly been coached.)
|
-------------------------
--
PaulDG |
|
|
pauldg
|
Thu, 08 May 08 14:58 GMT
|
>Just because the continuum makes no mention the LoTG takes over. This is a problem with a lot of continnum coaching in so far as it is hopeful that most coaches of this age group read the continuum but they should also be aware of the LoTG too.
My experience is that few coaches of any age group read either the LoTG or the Continuum.
They far prefer to work with "hearsay" in the form of what they see on the TV and, in minis & juniors, based on "what the year above said they did when we had a chat about it in the bar last April".
|
-------------------------
--
PaulDG |
|
|
milligani
- iandmilligan@btinternet.com
|
Thu, 08 May 08 14:17 GMT
|
Didds as ever makes a good point,
Just because the continuum makes no mention the LoTG takes over. This is a problem with a lot of continnum coaching in so far as it is hopeful that most coaches of this age group read the continuum but they should also be aware of the LoTG too.
This message edited on Thu, 08 May 08 by milligani
|
-------------------------
Spike |
|
|
didds
- scrumtime@hotmail.com
|
Thu, 08 May 08 13:36 GMT
|
"The current continuum rules do not allow for the collapse of the maul "
Not AFAIK (happy to be shown I am wrong!) in that the ctnm expressly forbids it... its currently forbidden as it is patt of the LoTG.
As the LoTG would next season permitt pulling ,auls down, then as the ctnm (unless adapted) still has no specific mention then the LoTG apply and pulling down mauls would be definition then be permitted.
I am not defending the ELV necessarily.
didds
|
|
|
the whistleblower
|
Wed, 07 May 08 16:45 GMT
|
Two respected adn authoritative contributors say independently that no Union can decide to walk a different path than that determined in the iRB Dublin vote. The RFU seems to be taking a more conservative stance than the NZRU, which has apparently unilaterally decided that the 13 iRB ELV's don't go far enough, and they'll use 3 more in their domestic rugby, including the ones about changing the sanction from a PK to a FK. (http://tinyurl.com/5ooz8y)
Is this another case of the English studiously toeing a line that others are perfectly content to ignore?
|
-------------------------
Whistleblower |
|
|
imhilton
- Imhilton@aol.com
|
Wed, 07 May 08 16:07 GMT
|
Sorry to deviate off the main thread, but whilst the CRG chairman is reading this. Can I state a personal view.
Sorry to spit my dummy out, I am no longer in mini/midi but in youth. Please explain to me how we can encourage pulling down a maul at youth rugby. I hope the RFU is aware of the safety issues and the resulting injuries at this level.
Pathetic... if it is allowed within any youth sections.
|
|
|
Chairman_CRG
|
Wed, 07 May 08 14:43 GMT
|
Paul,
How disappointing that you overlooked the posting we made in THIS THREAD on the Friday 2nd May the day after the iRB press release the previous evening. The wording of the Referees Dept message to Societies was agreed with the CRG and you will note the dates are subjects to three conditions.
One of which is the Youth & CRG variations within England will be reviewed once the detailed wording of the iRB Experimental Laws are published.
Following this if the RFU wishes to be granted exemption from any of the ELVs for young players it has to undertake a formal process as the iRB as the World Governing Body does not grant its Unions discretionery powers to pick and chose which Laws of the Game it will or will not play to.
At present we cannot make promises or commit ourselves the length of this process as the end result will be part of the Game Regulations thus must stand up in Law.
|
|
|
pauldg
|
Wed, 07 May 08 12:21 GMT
|
The RFU has published the following:
"The RFU appreciates participants of the Game are seeking guidance and/or training materials from them urgently. They need to provide all participants with high quality information and material once :
a) the wording of the ELVs as it will appear in the Law Book has been received from the iRB
b) they have obtained clarification regarding the impact on the Youth Game
c) had an opportunity to facilitate further discussion between selected referees and coaches on the implications of the ELVs.
The proposed process is :
28th/29th June - National Panel Officials conference takes place. National League coaches and RFU development staff will be invited to further consider the refereeing, coaching and playing implications of the ELVs
w/c 30th June - guidance and appropriate training materials will be provided to Referee Societies, clubs, universities and schools.
July/August - through the CB Coaching Committees, RFU Coach and Referee Development staff are organising CB training workshops at which the implications for refereeing, coaching and playing will be discussed."
(Thanks to Simon Thomas of Hampshire Referee's Society.)
This message edited on Wed, 07 May 08 by pauldg
|
-------------------------
--
PaulDG |
|
|
[
FIRST
|
PREVIOUS
|
NEXT
|
LAST
]
|
|
|
