Welcome to C.I.Y.M.S R.F.C
MINI
RUGBY

I hear the Under  12s may struggle to get a team out because the IRFU rules forbid their classmates playing with them. Surely this is unfair. Can we not challenge this before we lose players to the sport? What do others think?

Could not agree more. We at CIYMS Mini Rugby Section have followed everything we have ben asked to do by the Ulster Branch up to this point but it has now gone too far. Quite clearly they are being lea or should I say bullied by their counterparts in Dublin to tow the line.

Due to the imposition of the age group structures from down South we were in one swoop cut from a happy bunch of 34 players in P6 to only 12 at U12 with 10 of the 1998 birthdays in grammar schools (Sullivan,Campbell and RBAI) and so not allowed to play for us and the other 3 defecting to football at Ashfield Boys.

We managed to get 1 extra boy from St Andrews Memorial who had never touched a rugby ball in his life to join us which is great and brought our numbers up to 13.

Our Mission Statement on this website is P(Play) E(Enjoy) D(Develop) and as I always stressed in my role as head of coaching and development there is no W in here for winning. We have run 3 even teams of Rhinos, Sharks and Bears for 4 years from P3 to P6 when we only played our A squad on 3 occasions winning our own festival at CIYMS (beating Cooke in the final) , the excellent Cooke tournament (beating Cooke in the semi-final this time and then Lisburn) in the final and sahring the Ballymena tournamnent by drawing with the hosts in the final.

So while still developing all 34 of our players we were hands down the best P6 side in Ulster last year and we will now never know how close this squad will have got to the superb CIYMS side of 3 years ago.

We appealed to the Ulster Branch to allow 4 U11 players to "play up" on occsions as we have already had to cancel fixtures when  we get more than 4 cry offs and we got the standard word for word reusal that Ballymane and Holywood got.

Three years ago at Ravenhill in the NI Mini Rugby Finals Strandtown won it by scoring 36 tries for and not conceding any and 6 of the starting line up of 8 were CIYMS boys, the next year Sullivan Prep won the trophy with again 6 of the starting line up coming from CIYMS and last year when Strandtown won it again CIYMS had 4 of the starting line up but only because it clashed with a school trip to Holland which 2 regular starters were on so this would have been 3 yaers in a row with 6 of the staring 8 from CIYMS. Strandtown will win the finals again this year and a very good hooker from Malone called Alex Ashton will prevent CIYMS having all 8 of the starting line up - we will have 7 of them.

Unfortunately the only time these boys will play together now will be at school and the very talented U12's run the risk of folding thanks to the blinkered shirt sightedness of  "the yes men" in the Ulster Youth Committee but they will not fold because they mean too much to me and my coaches and we are doing everything we can to try to get up by 3 players to the 16 we need to eneter any blitz or even our own festival !

My Dad (Des O'Donnell) took mini rugby for 35 years at Inchmarlo and Instonians and is close to tears when he sees what is happening to our U12 squad at CIYMs and to other mini rugby teams in the province. We will appeal of course but we are geniune mini rugby coaches who love the game (I am coaching for a mere 7 years compared to my Dad whose Inchmarlo sides have still won the Mini Rugby Finals at Ravenhill more than all the other schools put together) and we are up against spineless bureaucrats who keep the threat of taking way funding and insurance from the clubs if you do not "toe the line". How in the hell is this meant to advance mini rugby ? The football and hockey coache in Ulster must be laughing their heads off !

Finally I suggest that any of you have a quiet private word with 2 good friends of mine who share my love of this great sport namely Brian McLaughlin and Mike Reid and see their views on this and the other idiotic measure to take competition out of mini rugby. 

"THE LUNATICS TRULY ARE IN CHARGE OF THE ASYLUM !"

Finally any mini clubs out there who have similar frustrations e.g my main club Instonians (let me here you Roots ! or should I give you your proper name - John Whitten) and instead of hearing Ballymena, Holywood and CIYMS in a stuffy Committee room to reflect the panel we couldbe heard out on teh pitch as the only place big enough to host us !

I was going to say the whole thing is incredulous but considering its the Ulster Branch its not !! The idea of creating another age group when numbers in minis is actually declining was nonsense they have in reality created an extra age group from half a year ie older p7's no self respecting first form(OK year8 still cant get used to it !) rugby player able to play 15 a side rugby at school is going to play mini rugby at a club this only leaves a few clubs who could manage proper u12 rugby oh sorry did I I forget that these first formers now can play up !! silly me, so problem still exists oh no sorry the Ulster branch have a solution play reduced numbers of course thats a great solution, NOT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!. This in plain and simple terms means we will have U11's playing 10 man stage three rugby and progressing to 7/8/9 a side stage two rugby at U12's did i say progress!! no step backwards I think. its at this important U12 stage we should really be preparing and coaching the players to progress to playing 15 a side rugby at school/ maxi level, it makes a nonsense of progressive coaching methods I cant think of any other sporting body who would endorse this kind of thing, apart of course from the Ulster branch

The future I forsee only  a few clubs maintaining U12 rugby and this will then be the downfall of smaller minis sections and even potentially a large mini section at CI as what parent wants there child to start in one club and finnish in another

Can somone please tell me how this is good for the sport  we all love ?????????????????????

This will be a problem for most if not all clubs in Ulster when tournament time comes around.

Will most/all clubs be able to cobble together the requisite number for a squad?

Lack of far sighted decision making here it seems.

The short-sighted approach being adopted by our governing body is now becoming somewhat farcical, I sat in on our min-section meeting last night and was concerned to hear how the basic building block of our Provincial club set-up is being transformed into Kids Klub.

Don’t get me wrong, my ethos as a coach and youth convenor was one of inclusivity, fun and enjoyment, but it also was one of building skills, a team/club identity, self-confidence and helping, I hoped, to develop a young person into someone who felt they could go on and enjoy many years as an active participant in a sport which we (the ‘oul fellas’) have all benefitted from.

The basis of this was to attract as many numbers as we could possibly could, and let the natural attrition rates run as kids moved to other sports, activities or schools; the effect, as far as I can see, of Age Grade change has only served to produce lower numbers, and this is becoming obvious as other clubs start to speak out.

It’s all very well for the Branch to say that U11 cannot play at U12 level, but what are they themselves doing to assist, do they have a coherent outreach programme in place to recruit, are they actively supporting clubs to achieve their own development plans (a requirement, don’t forget, from the same body if clubs are to gain their bronze, silver and gold awards), are they proactively using their merchantable brand through the professional set-up to increase numbers of kids becoming involved in the sport? Draw your own conclusions.

At Holywood we support a joint approach and appeal to the situation, which may be too late for this season, but will impact on next if we allow the status quo to continue unchallenged.

(Interesting to note on your ‘sign-up’ page that the date of birth starts with January 1st, do I have to be in any particular age-group to post? Would the Branch allow me to move up to the Under 55 group if I asked nicely?!)

I'm relatively new to mini-rugby but these changes seem to have caused chaos. It's certainly not evident to me that the new rules are adding anything positive, and the implications seem potentially disastrous. Go, Keith, go - we're right behind you!

michael at 02:27PM on Nov 18, 2009

I was going to say the whole thing is incredulous but considering its the Ulster Branch its not !! The idea of creating another age group when numbers in minis is actually declining was nonsense they have in reality created an extra age group from half a year ie older p7's no self respecting first form(OK year8 still cant get used to it !) rugby player able to play 15 a side rugby at school is going to play mini rugby at a club this only leaves a few clubs who could manage proper u12 rugby oh sorry did I I forget that these first formers now can play up !! silly me, so problem still exists oh no sorry the Ulster branch have a solution play reduced numbers of course thats a great solution, NOT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!. This in plain and simple terms means we will have U11's playing 10 man stage three rugby and progressing to 7/8/9 a side stage two rugby at U12's did i say progress!! no step backwards I think. its at this important U12 stage we should really be preparing and coaching the players to progress to playing 15 a side rugby at school/ maxi level, it makes a nonsense of progressive coaching methods I cant think of any other sporting body who would endorse this kind of thing, apart of course from the Ulster branch

 

The future I forsee only  a few clubs maintaining U12 rugby and this will then be the downfall of smaller minis sections and even potentially a large mini section at CI as what parent wants there child to start in one club and finnish in another

 

Can somone please tell me how this is good for the sport  we all love ?????????????????????

 

 

As usual I agree 100% with what Michael is saying and for those of you at CIYMS who have got to know Michael and I over the past 7 years as CI Minis coaches it is NOT just because our own sons have sufferred from this badly planned and thought out chnage in age group structure for Minis ...... MICHAEL AND I WOULD THINK EXACTLY THE SAME WAY IF OUR OWNS SONS WERE NOT IN P7.

Holywood at 05:04AM on Nov 19, 2009

The short-sighted approach being adopted by our governing body is now becoming somewhat farcical, I sat in on our min-section meeting last night and was concerned to hear how the basic building block of our Provincial club set-up is being transformed into Kids Klub.

 

Don’t get me wrong, my ethos as a coach and youth convenor was one of inclusivity, fun and enjoyment, but it also was one of building skills, a team/club identity, self-confidence and helping, I hoped, to develop a young person into someone who felt they could go on and enjoy many years as an active participant in a sport which we (the ‘oul fellas’) have all benefitted from.

 

The basis of this was to attract as many numbers as we could possibly could, and let the natural attrition rates run as kids moved to other sports, activities or schools; the effect, as far as I can see, of Age Grade change has only served to produce lower numbers, and this is becoming obvious as other clubs start to speak out.

 

It’s all very well for the Branch to say that U11 cannot play at U12 level, but what are they themselves doing to assist, do they have a coherent outreach programme in place to recruit, are they actively supporting clubs to achieve their own development plans (a requirement, don’t forget, from the same body if clubs are to gain their bronze, silver and gold awards), are they proactively using their merchantable brand through the professional set-up to increase numbers of kids becoming involved in the sport? Draw your own conclusions.

 

At Holywood we support a joint approach and appeal to the situation, which may be too late for this season, but will impact on next if we allow the status quo to continue unchallenged.

 

(Interesting to note on your ‘sign-up’ page that the date of birth starts with January 1st, do I have to be in any particular age-group to post? Would the Branch allow me to move up to the Under 55 group if I asked nicely?!)

Delighted to see a Holywood post to this website and agree wholehearedly with it but ever the optimist I am not prepared to go down without a fight so hopefully we are not "too late for this season".

Also just to be clear CIYMS will be appealing jointly with Holywood and Ballymena but we are letting Ballymena lead it as I feel too passionately about this and so am much better suited to slotting in behing Scott Muir from Ballymena whose emails too date have been much more diplomatic shall we say. If my passion and emotion took over and I was leading this appeal on behalf of CIYMS with others suppoting us then the appeal is likely to be viewed as too aggressive and personal so CIYMS with me representing them in an "assistant coach role" to the "head coach" that is Ballymena through Scott Muir is the best option.

For the record we have secured the support of Bangor for any appeal or peitition as they suggest as although they are not affected this year they realise the may be in future years.  So thanks to Ross Gillander and his Minis Committee down at Uprichard Park and I think we should try to get Bangor invloved with us.

Lurgan through Paul Wilson fully support what we are doing and wish us luck but they have decided just to get on with it now as the U-turn from the branch to let U12's play up was their main beef and they feel that with that now in place they will now get on with it this season so they support us 100% but from a watching brief.

I will call my mates at Instonains over the weekend and try to get them to sign up as the last time I spoke to John Whitten in the summer he told me that they could not get an U12 team out as he only had 8 or 9 players and it was 10-a-side in Stage 3 so could we lend them a few players. Of course I said fine - little did I know that we would only have 13 ourselves !  For the Instonian v CI U12 fixture this year I can not afford for even 1 of my 13 to be off sick or at cub camp or away for the weekend because as we know I am not allowed to borrow 1 U11 player as a one-ff even if he was 16 days older he would be an U12 - COMPLETE MADNESS !

I will call John and Paul Moore and Brian Barrett (Tanky) over the weekend and see if they will join us. Instonians is my main club with CIYMS my "adopted club" and in the words of a song "the 1st cut is the deepest" so I will be rightly pissed off if we can not rely on the support of "the Master Race" (we genuinely hate that nickname as much as the other clubs too and it is particularly embarassing as we languish in the bottom League of the AIL).

To summarise great to hear a Holywood voice on this forum and we look forward to the joint appeal, assuming of course the stuffed suits in the branch allow a joint appeal !

John Trinder at 03:25PM on Nov 19, 2009

I'm relatively new to mini-rugby but these changes seem to have caused chaos. It's certainly not evident to me that the new rules are adding anything positive, and the implications seem potentially disastrous. Go, Keith, go - we're right behind you!

Thank you for your support John and fingers crossed with the weather for our double header this weekend. Hope the 1st AQE was OK for Tom and wish him luck in the last 2.

We are delighted with his progress this season, to come in as our 13th player to join 12 boys we have coached for over 4 years since they were in P3 was not easy considering he had never played before and had to go straight into Stage 3 rugby.

We think that he is doing great and hope he is enjoying it.

Many volunteers will be at Gibson park again this weekend taking the mini rugby coaching course......  They will hear about Long Term Player Development and they will here about a  Player Centred approach......... mmmmmmm.?????

The hypocrisy of it all is staggering.  There are only  4 things that matter .... 1 -  Are the kids safe ?  2 -Do they enjoy it ?    3 - Do they develop ( skills and character ) ?   4 - Do we attract more kids to the game ?

1 - There will always be a potential 364 day mismatch in an "Under X "  age grouping so it many ways it doesn't matter where you draw the  line .....  but how an age group structure that goes U13 - U15 with the possible physical mismatches that can happen at that stage is good baffles me completely.  Then we have a the "playing up"  scenario. Let's be honest it shouldn't be needed and we are only talking about it because the age groupings for mini rugby  DO NOT WORK IN ULSTER. 

2 - The age group tinkering adds nothing to enjoyment. It never could.  Indeed as we have seen when numbers fall and friends are split it can only be detrimental.

3 - If we can't play 10 a side games that can't possibly help them to develop towards 15 a side rugby.  The issue of skills developement as opposed to " winning games "  is a seperate issue and nothing to do with age grouping.

4 - Rugby is a  sport that at the highest level is fast becoming nothing short of BRUTAL.  Anything that makes it more difficult to attract and retain young players is madness.   

I'll be blunt........ I don't give a fiddlers what the IRB say and what they might do with age groups in France, Australia, Tonga or Limerick  !!  I don't care if we are different.  I want my son, his mates and other local kids to have fun and maybe, just maybe decide they want to keep playing rugby...... at a level they enjoy.   

GO BACK TO ACADEMIC YEAR AGE GROUPS AND STOP THIS POINTLESS TINKERING.    Let the parents  and volunteers get on with mini rugby and let the Union and Branch get on with trying to save the game from financial meltdown !!       

Conks at 05:51AM on Nov 20, 2009

Many volunteers will be at Gibson park again this weekend taking the mini rugby coaching course......  They will hear about Long Term Player Development and they will here about a  Player Centred approach......... mmmmmmm.?????

 

The hypocrisy of it all is staggering.  There are only  4 things that matter .... 1 -  Are the kids safe ?  2 -Do they enjoy it ?    3 - Do they develop ( skills and character ) ?   4 - Do we attract more kids to the game ?

 

1 - There will always be a potential 364 day mismatch in an "Under X "  age grouping so it many ways it doesn't matter where you draw the  line .....  but how an age group structure that goes U13 - U15 with the possible physical mismatches that can happen at that stage is good baffles me completely.  Then we have a the "playing up"  scenario. Let's be honest it shouldn't be needed and we are only talking about it because the age groupings for mini rugby  DO NOT WORK IN ULSTER. 

 

2 - The age group tinkering adds nothing to enjoyment. It never could.  Indeed as we have seen when numbers fall and friends are split it can only be detrimental.

 

3 - If we can't play 10 a side games that can't possibly help them to develop towards 15 a side rugby.  The issue of skills developement as opposed to " winning games "  is a seperate issue and nothing to do with age grouping.

 

4 - Rugby is a  sport that at the highest level is fast becoming nothing short of BRUTAL.  Anything that makes it more difficult to attract and retain young players is madness.   

 

I'll be blunt........ I don't give a fiddlers what the IRB say and what they might do with age groups in France, Australia, Tonga or Limerick  !!  I don't care if we are different.  I want my son, his mates and other local kids to have fun and maybe, just maybe decide they want to keep playing rugby...... at a level they enjoy.   

 

GO BACK TO ACADEMIC YEAR AGE GROUPS AND STOP THIS POINTLESS TINKERING.    Let the parents  and volunteers get on with mini rugby and let the Union and Branch get on with trying to save the game from financial meltdown !!       

Could not agree more.

All good points and well made.

I wonder will we get a 2nd U-turn in time for us to save our U12's this year ?

Good luck to the U12's being allowed to play up to the U13's in clubs in Ulster but in allowing this it is actually a much bigger step up i.e 10-a side to 15-a side whereas our request for U11 to U12 should be so much easier as it is teh same game i.e 10-a side Stage 3.

There is therefore no logic at all for refusing to help the U12's survive at the expense of the U13's in clubs. Most of the older age group have a choice to play rugby at scholly as Year 8's (or 1st formers as we know them) while our U12's are all P7 and have therefore no rugby to play on Saturday mornings.

Really struggling to find the logic here for the Ulster Branch's refusal to let us play up 4 U11's on occasions to the U12's - unless there is a conspiracy theory here and the Welsh Guy who is the Ulster Branch Youth Committee Secretary  is still smarting from our Grand Slam win in Cardiff last season and has been planted in to start the seady decline of youth rugby in Ireland starting with Ulster and their budding U12's !

I just finished reading the posts.  What the IRFU hascreated through the changes in the policy is a playing environment created forall players, which encourages them to play the game and expose them to the positivevalues that rugby can bring .  At the end of the day, the date they play underis irrelevant and so to is whether their friends go down as well  - lets be honest, kids will always makefriends,  so being separated may helpthem to make new friends (My boys have different group of friends at rugby, gaaand tennis!). 

What exactly does no –competition means.  My understanding is that it relates to depoweringthis mentality of willing at all costs, which results in coaches putting the mostphysically built player out on the pitch. If you read the literature from the IRFU, the philosophy is the Irishplayers will be smarter, have a higher game intelligence and be more evasive.  Therefore, these skills need to be taught ata young age.  I would challenge anyonewho has contributed to this blog to honestly say that toning down thecompetition in mini’s and allowing a little bit of development back into thegame this age wont benefit the game long term? I strongly believe that the policy by the IRFU is a good one .

Happy to accept the challenge. Needless change to rules accepted to acquiesce to IRFU.  Ground swell of opinion from

clubs blatantly ignored . Players being lost to the game - irrefutable fact .  Pretence that competition is unhealthy. Progress? Not in my book.

dogmont at 06:55PM on Nov 20, 2009

 

I just finished reading the posts.  What the IRFU hascreated through the changes in the policy is a playing environment created forall players, which encourages them to play the game and expose them to the positivevalues that rugby can bring .  At the end of the day, the date they play underis irrelevant and so to is whether their friends go down as well  - lets be honest, kids will always makefriends,  so being separated may helpthem to make new friends (My boys have different group of friends at rugby, gaaand tennis!). 

 

What exactly does no –competition means.  My understanding is that it relates to depoweringthis mentality of willing at all costs, which results in coaches putting the mostphysically built player out on the pitch. If you read the literature from the IRFU, the philosophy is the Irishplayers will be smarter, have a higher game intelligence and be more evasive.  Therefore, these skills need to be taught ata young age.  I would challenge anyonewho has contributed to this blog to honestly say that toning down thecompetition in mini’s and allowing a little bit of development back into thegame this age wont benefit the game long term? I strongly believe that the policy by the IRFU is a good one .

 

Delighted to hear an alternative view on the forum, after all it would be a tad boring if we all agreed with each other and this is what the forum is all about everyone being entitled to their own opinion no matter how flawed thier logic may appear. So on behalf of CIYMS Minis welcome to the forum Dogmount and please keep posting even if you receive an avalanche of posts against you which I suspect you might. Healthy debate on key issues aftfecting the game we all love Mini Rugby is what this forum is all about.

I too will take up your challenge.

First of all I would put a caveat to you initial statement which maybe sould read "What the IRFU has created is a playing environment for all players UNLESS YOU ARE UNLUCKY ENOUGH TO BE A 1998 BIRTHDAY IN P7".

Unless Dogmount's sons play for Harlequins with their massive numbers (we are restricted at CIYMS to 30 players per age group due to only having 2 pitches for 6 age groups) then his kids must not be in P7 with a 1998 birthday. For such kids the IRFU policy should read "TOUGH LUCK KIDS YOU HAVE ENJOYED 4 YEARS OF GREAT FUN AND IN THE PROCESS ARE DEVELOPING INTO RUGBY PLAYERS FOR THE FUTURE BY ADVANCING THROUGH STAGE 1,2 AND 3 MINI RUGBY READY FOR THE OPTION OF JOINING RUGBY PLAYING GRAMMAR SCHOOLS AND THE PROGRESSION ON TO 15-A SIDE RUGBY BUT WE ACTUALLYDO NOT CARE ABOUT YOU ANYMORE SO PLEASE FEEL FREE TO GO AND TAKE UP ANOTHER SPORT".

It is interesting that the IRFU have caved in on the "playing up" of U12's to U13's (unfortunately too late for our own U13's at CiYMS who had folded due  to lack of numbers before this U-turn by the IRFU) as this involves the kids stepping up from 10-a side Stage 3 rugby to 15-a side rugby and yet they refuse to allow U11's to play up to U12's when there is no such step up i..e. both age groups play Stage 3 10-a side rugby. Completely flawed logic.

We have had to cancel matches in the U12's due to lack of numbers while our U11's have a surplus of players so restricting their playing time here when they could be getting game time with the U12's and helping us to fulfill a fixture. The fact that these kids are in the same class at school (and are allowed to play in the same P7 team there) and are in some circumstances  matter of weeks too young to be in U12 makes it even more frustrating.

In case you do not know the criteria for "playing up " which you have to pass is described as exceptional circumstances  which in short say if your numbers are so reduced by the new age group structiures that you can not conduct a propoer coaching session or fulfill a fixture. Despite clearly meeting this criteria we were refused the right to "play up" 4 of our U11 players on occasions ( 2 of which had January 1999 bithdays but not 1998 birthdays) and are currently appealing this decision. As other clubs have received identical wording refusals we are currently asking the Ulster Branch can we have a joint appeal which would save time and would include Ballymena, Holywood, Bangor, Instonians and CIYMS.

Alec's Mate is correct the IRFU new age group policy has caused a substantial loss of players to mini rugby. Here at CIYMS we had 6 coaches and 60 players in  2003 which rose to 35 coaches and 180 players last year in 2008 but whereas our coaches this year in 2009 have risen to 37 in total (33 of them qualified mini rugby coaches) our players are down to 150. With "house full" signs still up in U8 to U11 and big waiting lists the shortfall is in U7 where we have 19 and techically 11 spaces to fill but we do this as we build up our coaching team here  and in the U12 where we have 13 players (one of them a new start) where we had 34 players in P6 last year.

If you were lucky enough to have a conversation with both the Chief Executive and Coach of Ulster on the subject of the new age group structures and the removal of competition from mini rugby you would get an interesting and hopefully you would not be put off by the colourful language you may hear from the Ulster coach .

Regarding no-competition and your comment about coaches "putting their most physically built players out on the pitch" this is all about enforcement of the codes of conduct which you will find on this website and specifically tournament or festival rules and regulations will discouarge the use of a player as a tank from the pass off which can result in a penatly.

Your "winning at all costs" comment depends on the clubs and you will not see the letter W for winning in our mission statement which again you will find on this website. Our mission statement is Play ( participate not spectate), Enjoy (Mini Rugby is meant to be fun) and Develop (all the players).

I am on my 2nd time up the ladder ( having coached my eldest boy's age group for 2 years before dropping back down to P3 with ny younger boy) and we have used 3 even mixed ability teams since P3 called Rhinos,Sharks and Bears right up until last year in P6 where we had 34 players (4 above the suggested maximum per age group). We only played our a team on 3 occasions each season which was against Cooke who are a strong side and in out own festiival and the Cooke tournament. By winning both last year in P6 we proved that you can develop all the players with an all inclusive approach while still allowing your more talented players to compete. Our team is nicknamed "the diddy men" by the coaches due to their small size and they would fall into the "higher game intelligence and more evasive"  category you mention.

As already stated we have 33 qualified mini rugby coaches out of a total of 37 coaches and held the highest attendance record of any club at the excellent mini rugby worshops run by Darryl Callaghan and his development team at the Ulster Branch last year.

To summarise I would say DO NOT USE A SLEDGEHAMMER TO CRACK A NUT , instead the clubs need to ensure that the codes of condcut are adhered to for players,coaches, parents and supporters. Competition is controlled is healthy for kids and they need to learn to win and lose with equal dignity. Most kids are naturally competitive whether in sport or other walks of life so take it away from mini rugby and YOU WILL LOSE KIDS TO FOOTBALL, HOCKEY,  OR OTHER SPORTS. Also I am not quite sure why the IRFU saw the need enforce the new age group structures and no-competition policy as they are clearly not in line with their LTPD programme and if my memory serves me right Ireland actually won the Grand Slam last year. 

SO DOGMOUNT CONSIDER YOUR CHALLENGE WELL AND TRULY TAKEN UP, AS MY KIDS WOULD SAY "BRING IT ON !"

dogmont at 06:55PM on Nov 20, 2009

 

I just finished reading the posts.  What the IRFU hascreated through the changes in the policy is a playing environment created forall players, which encourages them to play the game and expose them to the positivevalues that rugby can bring .  At the end of the day, the date they play underis irrelevant and so to is whether their friends go down as well  - lets be honest, kids will always makefriends,  so being separated may helpthem to make new friends (My boys have different group of friends at rugby, gaaand tennis!). 

 

What exactly does no –competition means.  My understanding is that it relates to depoweringthis mentality of willing at all costs, which results in coaches putting the mostphysically built player out on the pitch. If you read the literature from the IRFU, the philosophy is the Irishplayers will be smarter, have a higher game intelligence and be more evasive.  Therefore, these skills need to be taught ata young age.  I would challenge anyonewho has contributed to this blog to honestly say that toning down thecompetition in mini’s and allowing a little bit of development back into thegame this age wont benefit the game long term? I strongly believe that the policy by the IRFU is a good one .

 

How can a policy which has in effect resulted in the decimation of an age group be a good one?

The UB of the IRFU has shown no flexilbility here whatsoever.:(

For me the most disappointing thing is when I tried to have a conversation on the subject last season with one of the branch people there was absolutely no acknowledgement that I had a valid viewpoint. "Sorry Mate its in, and thats it" . No recognition of the obvious groundswell against it. No evidence that anyone was listening or concerned at the prospect of what has now happened being a valid issue. And no evidence of anyone having the guts to tell IRFU they'd got it wrong.

I sincerely hope the appeal process we are embarking on will finally enable some reasoned and fair minded debate and enlightened thinking ......

dogmont at 06:55PM on Nov 20, 2009

 

I just finished reading the posts.  What the IRFU hascreated through the changes in the policy is a playing environment created forall players, which encourages them to play the game and expose them to the positivevalues that rugby can bring .  At the end of the day, the date they play underis irrelevant and so to is whether their friends go down as well  - lets be honest, kids will always makefriends,  so being separated may helpthem to make new friends (My boys have different group of friends at rugby, gaaand tennis!). 

 

What exactly does no –competition means.  My understanding is that it relates to depoweringthis mentality of willing at all costs, which results in coaches putting the mostphysically built player out on the pitch. If you read the literature from the IRFU, the philosophy is the Irishplayers will be smarter, have a higher game intelligence and be more evasive.  Therefore, these skills need to be taught ata young age.  I would challenge anyonewho has contributed to this blog to honestly say that toning down thecompetition in mini’s and allowing a little bit of development back into thegame this age wont benefit the game long term? I strongly believe that the policy by the IRFU is a good one .

 

1. I am afraid that the age group that the kids play in is relevant if , as a result of the diktat handed down , that age group is unlikely to survive as a viable group. Surely someone in the IRFU , and more particularly in the Ulster Branch foresaw that these age group changes would be very difficult to adapt to at U12 level in Northern Ireland (or do they actually care and  are we giving  them too much credit?)It smacks of arrogance to me that clubs in Ulster and particularly NI were expected to accept this as a fait accompli. Frankly it does nothing for player development if many U12 teams have to either play stage 2 rugby or fold which will happen no doubt.

2. There is a difference between a "winning at all costs mentality " and playing competitive rugby. We believe that we coach the boys/girls with a view to developing the attributes detailed in your second paragraph. Scrapping competitive rugby for the boys/girls (ie tournaments) is not relevant at all to developing these skills. 

The out working of point number one evident today in a match against another club  when we had

1. U11s playing stage 3 rugby as envisaged by the IRFU

2. 6 U11 subs kicking a ball around waiting to get on

3. U12s playing stage 2 rugby of 8 a side with no kicking .

Don't try to convince me or any one else involved in mini rugby that this is in any way good for their development .  It is farcical in my view.

Normally being one to keep my own counsel and not being steeped in the nuances of rugby politics I have so far declined to post any comment - not least because the arguments articulated by many on here, and particularly the convenor, have been persuasive enough. HOWEVER, the situation experienced this afternoon where 10 exceptionally enthusiastic and skillful under 12s were forced to play stage 2 rugby whilst only a proportion of 25-30 odd equally enthusiastic and skillful under 11s were able to play stage 3 rugby was farcical.

I have watched with admiration over the past 4 years as my son (under 12) has progressed and grown as a mini rugby player, in an environment where healthy competition has been embraced, where a breadth of skills have been coached and where game intelligence has been nurtured. The evidence of this has been there from the start of this season and most of last season, when fluid passing rugby has prevailed against often much larger opposition.

Arbitrary rule changes that remove competition and decimate the playing potential of the very age group in which most has currently been invested in coaching terms is madness. Sport is competitive, as is life, and sport is a powerful medium by which life skills can be cultivated. Learning to compete honourably, honestly and without malice is a great skill and one that I have seen develop in this group of under 12s. For this age group to now effectively have the rug pulled from under them constitutes a dereliction of duty by the rugby authorities. A modicum of common sense and moral courage is all that is required to remedy this situation and allow under 11s to play up UNDER EXCEPTIONAL CIRCUMSTANCES.  Enough said

Dear Rugby Convert you make some valid points.  However..... the only issue I have is the use of Upper Case " under exceptional circumstances " ....... The problem is this same situation in U12's exists in many clubs and will do year after year  .......  it is not exceptional, it was entirely forseeable and predictable.   Of course rugby would benefit if clubs could attract more players from " Non rugby "  schools   ......  So if the age change arguement is actually meant to force clubs to widen the net then why don't they simply say that........  and then increase the resousrces for development officers going into schools to help recruit young players into clubs ......... What was that ? ....... Did someone just say that development officer roles are being cut becuase of financial constraints ?   Surely that would be counterproductive ?   Heaven help us !!!!!