IRFU: international conference on playing numbers

The Lost Sheep

Today and tomorrow in Malahide there is a Four Nations Conference taking place which will discuss 'Player Participation and Engagement of the 16-24-year-old Age Group'. Each of the Irish, English, Welsh and Scottish unions are in attendance.

IRFU and ERSI 2013 report revealed between the ages of 11 and 13 there is almost a 50% drop in player numbers when entering secondary school and with the move from secondary school 18% of players drop out of the sport within 3 to 4 years.
http://www.irishrugby.ie/news/31785.php#.U3KYYbhOXMx

What do people here think should be done to improve the numbers staying in the sport?

Hagz

I believe I already added my 2 cents a while back. I think it would help some if clubs were allowed just one day to speak to the 6th years in local rugby playing schools to encourage them to keep playing. Let them know that they're wanted and needed.

errlloyd

Plenty of the big rugby playing schools already have feeder clubs though right (that go both ways).

I think one of the problems is that it's harder to play casual rugby at the age of 18, for a lot of people it's a big physical commitment. Colleges don't do a great job of recruiting casual players.

Hagz

errlloyd wrote: »

Plenty of the big rugby playing schools already have feeder clubs though right (that go both ways).

Yeh but I don't think they communicate with the students. Nor do the school coaches recommend club rugby to the students. At least that's my experience.

Ultimately it's an uphill battle to get school players to continue on. It's easy when the pitches are right next to the classrooms, not so easy when the club grounds are a fair bit away from the lecture halls.

CatFromHue

I'm not sure if I'm reading that right but an 18% drop out of players within 3-4 years after they leave school looks pretty good to me.

So 82% of players from school are still playing at 21/22 is very good I think. I'm actually surprised it's that high to be honest.

errlloyd

CatFromHue wrote: »

I'm not sure if I'm reading that right but an 18% drop out of players within 3-4 years after they leave school looks pretty good to me.

So 82% of players from school are still playing at 21/22 is very good I think. I'm actually surprised it's that high to be honest.

Compared to ladies hockey for example, which is about 80% the other way!

The Lost Sheep

Hagz wrote: »

I believe I already added my 2 cents a while back. I think it would help some if clubs were allowed just one day to speak to the 6th years in local rugby playing schools to encourage them to keep playing. Let them know that they're wanted and needed.

one day isn't enough. There should be more links, competitions where players who primarily play in schools competitions can play with a club each season like what happens in Limerick where there is "open" and "closed" cup competitions at under 16/17/18 levels. These competitions should be expanded to areas countrywide and just played in each region.
To many 17/18 year olds in 6th year on leaving school will not have ever played rugby for a club or will not have played for one since they were 12/13. Clubs going in to speak for just one day isn't enough

errlloyd wrote: »

Plenty of the big rugby playing schools already have feeder clubs though right (that go both ways).

I think one of the problems is that it's harder to play casual rugby at the age of 18, for a lot of people it's a big physical commitment. Colleges don't do a great job of recruiting casual players.

It isn't really that bit harder to play casual rugby especially in areas where there is clubs with 4/5 teams. more difficult in areas where clubs may only have 2 maybe 3 teams and clubs with just 2 adult sides have no team that is social rugby. Schools should be able to get players playing with clubs to help build links all through school years.

CatFromHue wrote: »

I'm not sure if I'm reading that right but an 18% drop out of players within 3-4 years after they leave school looks pretty good to me.

So 82% of players from school are still playing at 21/22 is very good I think. I'm actually surprised it's that high to be honest.

Im very surprised at that figure because its not the case with any of the years below/above mine(im 23) and would be same with most years in most schools locally to me(some very much rugby schools others play rugby but most students only really play youths rugby)

ArmchairQB

Age grades such as under 20/21's should be the same across all four provinces. The consequence of having such grades should alsdo be explored.

Provinces having 12.00 KO for Pennant teams on a Sunday discourages players eg Leinster

Only the exceptional guys coming out of school go straight to AIL most lads benefit from a 2 year cyle at 20/21 level when they mature that bit more mentally and physically and feel like they belong after being with their own age group for two years as usually it will be a different group than they were used to in school. Sunday Rugby for example in senior clubs for J1's and 20's in senior clubs is difficult especially if you are building a club and want all supportingthe senior team on a Saturday and out socialising after but more suitable dates and times would encourage more people to play and remain playing

The Lost Sheep

ArmchairQB wrote: »

Age grades such as under 20/21's should be the same across all four provinces. The consequence of having such grades should alsdo be explored.

Provinces having 12.00 KO for Pennant teams on a Sunday discourages players eg Leinster

Only the exceptional guys coming out of school go straight to AIL most lads benefit from a 2 year cyle at 20/21 level when they mature that bit more mentally and physically and feel like they belong after being with their own age group for two years as usually it will be a different group than they were used to in school. Sunday Rugby for example in senior clubs for J1's and 20's in senior clubs is difficult especially if you are building a club and want all supporting the senior team on a Saturday and out socialising after but more suitable dates and times would encourage more people to play and remain playing

Ideally 20s/21s should be the same but Munster/Connacht who don't have same levels of playing numbers will want to have 20s at younger age to get players through to adult teams earlier. This isn't as much of an issue for teams in Leinster(primarily Dublin) who have much deeper playing resources.
There is much more in Munster/Connacht clubs at 1A/B levels who come out of underage/school ranks who go straight to AIL.
What would be more suitable dates and times to encourage more to keep playing?

blackdog1

Alot of kids stop playing because alot of schools don't have rugby on the curriculum. Also standard of coaching is terrible, this is the main reason kids don't learn to pass properly untill their 20s after they finally meet a good coach at ail level and by that time its too late. I think someone said to me alot of our best centres played 10 at some stage and its no coincidence because most of the young centrescan only run and tackle. This is why we are recruiting so many foreign centres. On the college dropouts, alot of teams stack their squads and quality players end up playing 2nd or 3rds rugby and just get fed up.

The Lost Sheep

blackdog1 wrote: »

Alot of kids stop playing because alot of schools don't have rugby on the curriculum. Also standard of coaching is terrible, this is the main reason kids don't learn to pass properly untill their 20s after they finally meet a good coach at ail level and by that time its too late. I think someone said to me alot of our best centres played 10 at some stage and its no coincidence because most of the young centrescan only run and tackle. This is why we are recruiting so many foreign centres. On the college dropouts, alot of teams stack their squads and quality players end up playing 2nd or 3rds rugby and just get fed up.

Well we need to get more resources devoted to getting youths rugby up and running very well everywhere. Change focus on teens primarily playing in schools. Clubs is better as easier to get teens playing into 20s and adult rugby if already playing regularly in a club setting.
Standard of coaching isn't terrible though what level are you talking about when you say coaching standards are terrible?
Some teams do stack players but players who will only have played in school through teens will generally all look to a small number of top clubs and more needs to be done to get players into smaller senior clubs and getting them playing 1sts/2nds in smaller senior clubs than playing 20s in top senior clubs

TheBustedFlush

blackdog1 wrote: »

Alot of kids stop playing because alot of schools don't have rugby on the curriculum. Also standard of coaching is terrible, this is the main reason kids don't learn to pass properly untill their 20s after they finally meet a good coach at ail level and by that time its too late. I think someone said to me alot of our best centres played 10 at some stage and its no coincidence because most of the young centrescan only run and tackle. This is why we are recruiting so many foreign centres. On the college dropouts, alot of teams stack their squads and quality players end up playing 2nd or 3rds rugby and just get fed up.

Good assessment. Passing skills are often abysmal.

blackdog1

The Lost Sheep wrote: »

Well we need to get more resources devoted to getting youths rugby up and running very well everywhere. Change focus on teens primarily playing in schools. Clubs is better as easier to get teens playing into 20s and adult rugby if already playing regularly in a club setting.
Standard of coaching isn't terrible though what level are you talking about when you say coaching standards are terrible?
Some teams do stack players but players who will only have played in school through teens will generally all look to a small number of top clubs and more needs to be done to get players into smaller senior clubs and getting them playing 1sts/2nds in smaller senior clubs than playing 20s in top senior clubs

Coaching is terrible, defence coaching, passing and decision making in the ruck area are abysmal. Seen some ail coaches tear their hair our at so called star school players.. its why its taking so long for players to develop. Tod only came good 2 yrs ago...paddy butler anyone??.

The Lost Sheep

blackdog1 wrote: »

Coaching is terrible, defence coaching, passing and decision making in the ruck area are abysmal. Seen some ail coaches tear their hair our at so called star school players.. its why its taking so long for players to develop. Tod only came good 2 yrs ago...paddy butler anyone??.

Coaching isnt terrible and you are being so general its hard to say anything on your criticisms. And while some schools coaches are not great most are v good and same at all levels. TOD was always a very good player. He "came good" before 2 years ago and Paddy Butler is a good player not sure why so negative around him and all else.

TheBustedFlush

The Lost Sheep wrote: »

Coaching isnt terrible and you are being so general its hard to say anything on your criticisms. And while some schools coaches are not great most are v good and same at all levels. TOD was always a very good player. He "came good" before 2 years ago and Paddy Butler is a good player not sure why so negative around him and all else.

Is the point in part that skill levels are in general okay, and every now and then, an exception comes along that makes everyone think that they're actually much better than they really are?

spillit67

Surprised the ERSI put their name behind that. Anyone with knowledge of underage rugby will know those figures cannot be right.

Superbus

Don't know if there's anything to be done for that 50% 11-13 y/o drop-off. Often rugby can be a compulsory after-school activity in primary school, and becomes voluntary in 1st Year. So that 50% drop is just a natural reflection of those children who had no real ability and gained no enjoyment from playing the game, and were just involved because they had to be. Think it's fair enough they drop out.


I may speak from personal experience in this matter.

The Lost Sheep

Superbus wrote: »

Don't know if there's anything to be done for that 50% 11-13 y/o drop-off. Often rugby can be a compulsory after-school activity in primary school, and becomes voluntary in 1st Year. So that 50% drop is just a natural reflection of those children who had no real ability and gained no enjoyment from playing the game, and were just involved because they had to be. Think it's fair enough they drop out.


I may speak from personal experience in this matter.

There is very very few primary schools in the country where rugby is compulsory after school activity.
No a 50% drop is not a natural reflection in children with no ability and if that number had no enjoyment from the sport then we as coaches etc in sport are not doing anything right in the sport at all and need to totally change how the sport is run.

spillit67

Superbus wrote: »

Don't know if there's anything to be done for that 50% 11-13 y/o drop-off. Often rugby can be a compulsory after-school activity in primary school, and becomes voluntary in 1st Year. So that 50% drop is just a natural reflection of those children who had no real ability and gained no enjoyment from playing the game, and were just involved because they had to be. Think it's fair enough they drop out.


I may speak from personal experience in this matter.

What primary schools play rugby properly?

I an familiar with the junior school scene in Dublin and the only schools around are all juniors of the rugby schools- Willow, St Michaels, St Mary's, CBC, Terenure, CUS. I know some primary schools have some rugby set ups but it really isn't that many. The strength is at minis at clubs at that age. I would question the numbers counted as rugby players at 11-12. There are also a huge number of kids who arrive at rugby secondary schools at 13. The findings here do not tally at all from my experiences. Heck the report even says that the 11-12 figures are wrong, the whole thing looks like a nonsense.

As for 18% from 18-22, it is a far bigger drop than that. Do a survey of any SCT 3 years out of school and if there are 50% still playing I'd be shocked. It gets even worse when you consider 2nds, 3rds and social players at schools at u18. Casual rugby is hard to keep up at u20s for many and they don't return.

RoyalCelt

The Lost Sheep wrote: »

There is very very few primary schools in the country where rugby is compulsory after school activity.
No a 50% drop is not a natural reflection in children with no ability and if that number had no enjoyment from the sport then we as coaches etc in sport are not doing anything right in the sport at all and need to totally change how the sport is run.

The problem with Irish primary schools is, they prefer to play basketball , soccer and GAA. There isn't really room for Rugby unless you remove their current sports and goodluck trying to do that. My primary school plays Gaelic and Basketball. They really couldn't do anymore competition sports.

Rugby does just fine getting the players in at secondary level and club level. You would want to look at holding onto players rather than gaining more young lads and losing most of them.