News from the South Seas where the previously unbeaten (well "previous" to the start of 2008) New Zealand sevens team has lost again. Twice. This time to Australia (not exactly a major power in the world of women's rugby). That's four defeats this year (balanced only by wins over Fiji, Samoa and Niue Island).
While its rather hard to draw many conclusions about 15s rugby based on Sevens, as decline in form goes this is pretty steep, and there is little else to go on - since the World Cup the Kiwis have played only two full internationals last October, both comfortable home wins over Australia (a nation not even in the top six in world rugby).
England, on the other hand, have played 18 internationals since that day in Edmonton, winning 17 and drawing one against Spain when they entered an understrength development team in the 2007 FIRA tournament (a tournament they still went on to win). The other internationals have featured invariably comfortable wins over every other team in the top six, except Canada who England will meet in month's time.
The retreat into antipodean isolation by New Zealand in between World Cups is nothing new, and England have thought themselves superior in the past - only to get a rude shock. But never before have England been so on top at all levels against all comers in all forms of the game. Not only are the full team and sevens teams unbeaten since September 2006, but the "A" team are 100% against other national XVs, as are the U20s who recently won the first age group Nations Cup in Canada at a canter. The only reverse of any sort has been the defeat of the TDG U18 team to the Canadians in the spring, a game that the RFUW do not consider an international.
So are England now ahead of the Kiwis? The (frankly criminal) lack of money in women's rugby is likely to restrict any direct match-ups between the teams, outside of maybe an England tour down-under, so who can say - but New Zealand will have run up some pretty comprehensive wins over Australia in October if they want to make us believe that they are still number one.
Wednesday, July 30, 2008
Monday, July 28, 2008
Rugby and the Olympics? Think oil and water...
The world's greatest sporting spectacle begins in less than two weeks time. The Olympic Games will see a significant proportion of the world's population, at least those with access to TV, spending two weeks caring passionately about the outcome of sports they would not normally cross the street to watch, even if they knew they existed at all. Sport where home athletes do well can see explosions in popularity as children in particular take their new heroes to their hearts, and seek to emulate them.
And Rugby Union, a sport with an Olympic history a quarter of a century long and a sport whose ideals (on paper at least) match those of the Olympic movement closer than practically any other, will again not be at the party. In fact its not been there since 1924, and won't be there in 2012 either (despite there being two "vacancies" following the ejection of baseball and softball from the 2012 games).
Those of us involved in the game are repeatedly told that its only a matter of time. The success of Sevens at the Commonwealth Games means that the IOC (who run the Olympics) are desperate to get rugby back into the Games. Rugby's failure to get into 2012 was an aberration, based on protest votes connected with softball's rejection/a botched vote/the need for some minor tweaks here and there (delete as applicable). Its inevitable. Watch this space.
Well, while researching various aspects of the women's game and the barriers that are in the way of its expansion, one thing I have found as is that this is a complete fiction. As things stand there is practically no chance that rugby will get into the Olympics in my lifetime or, I dare say, yours. At least not without quite radical change.
The IOC voted on sports to replace softball and baseball in 2005. From the reaction of rugby's authorities you'd think the game missed out by a hair's breadth - the technicality of not getting a two thirds vote. Unfortunately when you look into it you find that rugby did not finish top at all. It wasn't even in the top two. In fact rugby finished behind karate and squash in the overall voting process, and roller skating gained more votes than rugby in the first round of voting!
Why? Well there are lots of reasons and a fascinating report published at the weekend goes into them in some detail, but the Big One is clearly the position of the women's game.
The impression often given by the press is that the IOC is a cynical, money grabbing, corrupt fiefdom run by an unelected group of self-seeking nobodies who use the games to finance a continual globe-trotting junket. Well, that makes grat hadlines and there may have been elements of truth in that in a very few cases, but in fact the IOC remains a remarkably and overwhelmingly very idealistic organisation, and one of its major preoccupations is equality. The promotion of women in sport is central to the Olympic movement, and has been for maybe 50 years now - or more. Though some existing sports in the Olympics remain male only (boxing, for instance), they are few - and decreasing (football now has men's and women's events) and no sport joining the Olympic Games since... well, the war? ... has been male only, or even predominantly so.
And rugby was pitching for Rugby Sevens to join the party, based on the success of a male-only tournament in Manchester, a couple of male-only world cups, and a popular worldwide but also male-only sevens "tour". Frankly given that its amazing that rugby got onto the ballot, let alone managed to squeeze past roller skating amongst the minnows and also-rans in the second round...
Perhaps as a result of this we now have a few, frankly, cosmetic attempts to up the position of women's rugby. Surprise, surprise shortly after 2005 it was announced there will be a women's event at the Rugby Sevens world cup next year (not the main 15s world cup, you note - an event due to take place in less than two years but which the IRB have still not bothered to announce a venue for). Even then "at" is an interesting word. There are no details yet but when you look into it you find that the commitment is that the women's event will be "in the same city", not necessarily at the main stadium. This could mean miles away - Dubai isn't a small place.
And if you doubt that and think I exaggerate then ask yourself where the recent Women's Home Nations Sevens took place in Edinburgh when that was supposed to be played as a "companion" to Scotland's round in the IRB Sevens Tour? In the main stadium? No - on some training pitches outside. And if you think that this was due to there being no time for the games to be played at Murryfield itself then that is also not true - from what one hears many of the women's games were being played when there were actually gaps in the main schedule. So if you were looking forward to watching live TV coverage of the women's Sevens world cup then I suggest you come up with a back-up plan - you'll probably need it.
Moreover the commitment of individual IRB members to even this "advancement" of the women's game is not exactly outstanding. Of the eight "founder members" who - to all intents and purpose - run the world game two declined to even enter their women's teams in the world cup qualifiers! Can you imagine that happening in men's rugby?
The Scots in particular pulled out of the European qualifying tournament at the last minute for the most pathetic - and blatantly sexist - of reasons. Basically the SRU chose to fund a men's tour of Argentina in preference to the women's sevens team visiting Germany for the qualifiers because "the Scotland Men’s team is one of the primary commercial assets of the SRU and investment is therefore substantially higher".
Translated from PR Speak into English this means that as women can - by definition - never contribute to the SRU's "primary commercial asset" they will never be other than second class citizens in Scottish rugby and last in line when the money is handed out. To say this is incompatible with Olympic ideals is to underplay it - to very idea that commercial concerns should come ahead of even a pretence at equality is the complete reverse of the IOC's basic beliefs. In fact when you look at it in detail its even worse than that - the visit to Argentina was a non-competitive series of friendlies the result of which I'd challenge any other than the most dedicated follower to even remember, while the women's Sevens was the first stage in a world championship!!
But at least Scotland went through the process of making a decision - Ireland never entered in the first place. Perhaps the cost was too high? After all the Brazilian and Czech and Isreali and Niue Island RFUs (all of whom did enter the event) are sooooo much better funded than the SRU and IRU!
And not its not just participants, its officials too. Over 25 years ago the IOC set a target for themselves and the Olympic sports saying that by 2005 sports should have set a target for 20% of positions on governing bodies being held by women. So, let's take a look at the progress towards this target made by the IRB executive...
Hmmmmm..... I can see the IOC being very impressed by that!
There is more - much more - that punctures the balloon suggesting that rugby is a world sport to rival only football, but as these are not all women's rugby related I refer you to the report on Total Flanker and the full report itself. All I will do is conclude this with the observation that those involved in women's rugby are invariably too easily pleased with the scrapings that the game allow to fall from the table. The IOC - and governmental bodies like Sport England - provide the women's game with bucket-loads of ammunition to aim at those in authority. Even the IRB have policy statements that national unions are supposed to follow, while the RFU has made similar commitments that CB's wilfully ignore.
Let's make these words into actions. And yes it'll upset the suits currently in power, and yes they will complain, and yes they'll threaten all kinds of dire things, and yes you'll be crossed off a few Christmas card lists - but unless the game fights its own corner then it will remain where it is.
Those that run rugby - at all levels - have demonstrated that they will give the girls' and women's game as little as they can get away with. To quote George Bernard Shaw (but, I have to admit, via a track on Scooter's latest album)...
"Take care to get what you like or you will be forced to like what you get."
And Rugby Union, a sport with an Olympic history a quarter of a century long and a sport whose ideals (on paper at least) match those of the Olympic movement closer than practically any other, will again not be at the party. In fact its not been there since 1924, and won't be there in 2012 either (despite there being two "vacancies" following the ejection of baseball and softball from the 2012 games).
Those of us involved in the game are repeatedly told that its only a matter of time. The success of Sevens at the Commonwealth Games means that the IOC (who run the Olympics) are desperate to get rugby back into the Games. Rugby's failure to get into 2012 was an aberration, based on protest votes connected with softball's rejection/a botched vote/the need for some minor tweaks here and there (delete as applicable). Its inevitable. Watch this space.
Well, while researching various aspects of the women's game and the barriers that are in the way of its expansion, one thing I have found as is that this is a complete fiction. As things stand there is practically no chance that rugby will get into the Olympics in my lifetime or, I dare say, yours. At least not without quite radical change.
The IOC voted on sports to replace softball and baseball in 2005. From the reaction of rugby's authorities you'd think the game missed out by a hair's breadth - the technicality of not getting a two thirds vote. Unfortunately when you look into it you find that rugby did not finish top at all. It wasn't even in the top two. In fact rugby finished behind karate and squash in the overall voting process, and roller skating gained more votes than rugby in the first round of voting!
Why? Well there are lots of reasons and a fascinating report published at the weekend goes into them in some detail, but the Big One is clearly the position of the women's game.
The impression often given by the press is that the IOC is a cynical, money grabbing, corrupt fiefdom run by an unelected group of self-seeking nobodies who use the games to finance a continual globe-trotting junket. Well, that makes grat hadlines and there may have been elements of truth in that in a very few cases, but in fact the IOC remains a remarkably and overwhelmingly very idealistic organisation, and one of its major preoccupations is equality. The promotion of women in sport is central to the Olympic movement, and has been for maybe 50 years now - or more. Though some existing sports in the Olympics remain male only (boxing, for instance), they are few - and decreasing (football now has men's and women's events) and no sport joining the Olympic Games since... well, the war? ... has been male only, or even predominantly so.
And rugby was pitching for Rugby Sevens to join the party, based on the success of a male-only tournament in Manchester, a couple of male-only world cups, and a popular worldwide but also male-only sevens "tour". Frankly given that its amazing that rugby got onto the ballot, let alone managed to squeeze past roller skating amongst the minnows and also-rans in the second round...
Perhaps as a result of this we now have a few, frankly, cosmetic attempts to up the position of women's rugby. Surprise, surprise shortly after 2005 it was announced there will be a women's event at the Rugby Sevens world cup next year (not the main 15s world cup, you note - an event due to take place in less than two years but which the IRB have still not bothered to announce a venue for). Even then "at" is an interesting word. There are no details yet but when you look into it you find that the commitment is that the women's event will be "in the same city", not necessarily at the main stadium. This could mean miles away - Dubai isn't a small place.
And if you doubt that and think I exaggerate then ask yourself where the recent Women's Home Nations Sevens took place in Edinburgh when that was supposed to be played as a "companion" to Scotland's round in the IRB Sevens Tour? In the main stadium? No - on some training pitches outside. And if you think that this was due to there being no time for the games to be played at Murryfield itself then that is also not true - from what one hears many of the women's games were being played when there were actually gaps in the main schedule. So if you were looking forward to watching live TV coverage of the women's Sevens world cup then I suggest you come up with a back-up plan - you'll probably need it.
Moreover the commitment of individual IRB members to even this "advancement" of the women's game is not exactly outstanding. Of the eight "founder members" who - to all intents and purpose - run the world game two declined to even enter their women's teams in the world cup qualifiers! Can you imagine that happening in men's rugby?
The Scots in particular pulled out of the European qualifying tournament at the last minute for the most pathetic - and blatantly sexist - of reasons. Basically the SRU chose to fund a men's tour of Argentina in preference to the women's sevens team visiting Germany for the qualifiers because "the Scotland Men’s team is one of the primary commercial assets of the SRU and investment is therefore substantially higher".
Translated from PR Speak into English this means that as women can - by definition - never contribute to the SRU's "primary commercial asset" they will never be other than second class citizens in Scottish rugby and last in line when the money is handed out. To say this is incompatible with Olympic ideals is to underplay it - to very idea that commercial concerns should come ahead of even a pretence at equality is the complete reverse of the IOC's basic beliefs. In fact when you look at it in detail its even worse than that - the visit to Argentina was a non-competitive series of friendlies the result of which I'd challenge any other than the most dedicated follower to even remember, while the women's Sevens was the first stage in a world championship!!
But at least Scotland went through the process of making a decision - Ireland never entered in the first place. Perhaps the cost was too high? After all the Brazilian and Czech and Isreali and Niue Island RFUs (all of whom did enter the event) are sooooo much better funded than the SRU and IRU!
And not its not just participants, its officials too. Over 25 years ago the IOC set a target for themselves and the Olympic sports saying that by 2005 sports should have set a target for 20% of positions on governing bodies being held by women. So, let's take a look at the progress towards this target made by the IRB executive...
Hmmmmm..... I can see the IOC being very impressed by that!There is more - much more - that punctures the balloon suggesting that rugby is a world sport to rival only football, but as these are not all women's rugby related I refer you to the report on Total Flanker and the full report itself. All I will do is conclude this with the observation that those involved in women's rugby are invariably too easily pleased with the scrapings that the game allow to fall from the table. The IOC - and governmental bodies like Sport England - provide the women's game with bucket-loads of ammunition to aim at those in authority. Even the IRB have policy statements that national unions are supposed to follow, while the RFU has made similar commitments that CB's wilfully ignore.
Let's make these words into actions. And yes it'll upset the suits currently in power, and yes they will complain, and yes they'll threaten all kinds of dire things, and yes you'll be crossed off a few Christmas card lists - but unless the game fights its own corner then it will remain where it is.
Those that run rugby - at all levels - have demonstrated that they will give the girls' and women's game as little as they can get away with. To quote George Bernard Shaw (but, I have to admit, via a track on Scooter's latest album)...
"Take care to get what you like or you will be forced to like what you get."
Friday, July 25, 2008
Thursday, July 24, 2008
Keeping in touch with club news
This is rather a techie post, but I can't believe that I am the only person who uses RSS newsfeeds to keep an eye on whats going on around the net.
For those not in the know most news sites and blogs have newsfeeds - RSS, Atom or whatever. This one does (you can set one up using the "subscribe to newsfeed" link in the right-hand column). With a feedreader (iGoogle being my favourite) you can have the headlines from all your favourite news sources on one page, and be able to see at a glance when something new has been published instead of having to remember to visit dozens of sites individually.
Anyway... one important website that does not have any form of newsfeed (despite being a blog-type site) is the main Letchworth Rugby Club website. Unless you visit the site every day you risk missing something.
Well, not any more. The latest headlines from the main club news page, plus the calendar and Dave Sharp's chairman's blog, now appear on the left (any other pages that we should be watching?). It uses a service called Page2RSS which allows you to create a newsfeed from almost any webpage. Its not perfect, but its better than no link at all - and this way it means you will never miss a club AGM again!
If you want to add the feeds to your own reader, try these links:
News page
Club diary
Dave Sharp's blog
For those not in the know most news sites and blogs have newsfeeds - RSS, Atom or whatever. This one does (you can set one up using the "subscribe to newsfeed" link in the right-hand column). With a feedreader (iGoogle being my favourite) you can have the headlines from all your favourite news sources on one page, and be able to see at a glance when something new has been published instead of having to remember to visit dozens of sites individually.
Anyway... one important website that does not have any form of newsfeed (despite being a blog-type site) is the main Letchworth Rugby Club website. Unless you visit the site every day you risk missing something.
Well, not any more. The latest headlines from the main club news page, plus the calendar and Dave Sharp's chairman's blog, now appear on the left (any other pages that we should be watching?). It uses a service called Page2RSS which allows you to create a newsfeed from almost any webpage. Its not perfect, but its better than no link at all - and this way it means you will never miss a club AGM again!
If you want to add the feeds to your own reader, try these links:
News page
Club diary
Dave Sharp's blog
Wednesday, July 23, 2008
Action on discrimination against girls and women in sport... maybe...
Big headlines (well, big for women's sport) yesterday about a new "Commission on the Future of Women’s Sport", to be chaired by Dame Tanni Grey-Thomson and including Dame Kelly Holmes, Heather Rabbatts (deputy chair of Millwall football club), and Ed Smith (journalist and former cricketer).
Building on a series of reports from the Women’s Sport and Fitness Foundation’s (WSFF) highlighting the low number of women and girls who play sport, and the almost invisible media profile of women's sport, it all sounds good stuff. The Commission had a ministerial launch and received coverage in most national newspapers, and on BBC News, generating more coverage for women's sport in a single day that it normally gets in a month or more.
The aim of the Commission will be to find ways to overcome the barriers in the way of girls and women playing sport. Press releases and stories were fulsome yesterday in their listings of under-representation of women in sport and commitments from Grey-Thompson to find ways to overcome them.
But (you knew that was coming, didn't you) when you look a bit deeper into this you find... nothing. This is an independent commission (well, its a WSFF commission in fact), which means it is reporting to no-one and it is not insignificant that neither Sport England nor the DCMS (home of the minister who was at the launch) give the Commission's launch any mention at all on their own websites. At this point alarm bells begin to ring because if neither of these bodies are on board at the start (and if they were you bet their press offices would say so) then neither will have any commitment to implement any of the Commission's eventual findings.
To demonstrate why that is important you need only look at the dozens of reports WSFF have produced recent years. Superbly researched, convincingly argued, and largely ignored outside an audience of the already converted. Little has changed as a result of the WSFF's work, in rugby or elsewhere. On the other hand a single line in a Sport England paper last month - "NGBs failing to make specific provision for women’s sport will see funding switched to those that do" - appears to have had a galvanising effect on the merger talks between RFU and RFUW, which had been going no-where slowly for some years. No doubt they'd deny this and say that its all a co-incidence, but looking at the timing of the Sport England statement and the breakthrough of the RFU/RFUW "Integration" policy, its a pretty remarkable one.
WSFF do some great work - their recent 11 reasons why sports should work with women and girls should be required reading by any sports club, never mind county association or governing body. The only teeny snag with the WSFF and the Commission is that until ministers and Sport England officials do more than simply turn up at press launches the people who need to read and act on these reports most are those least likely to do anything about them. There are times when compelling argument works, and times when a big stick speaks louder. An example of that might be the on-going story of rugby and the Olympic Games - more on that later.
Building on a series of reports from the Women’s Sport and Fitness Foundation’s (WSFF) highlighting the low number of women and girls who play sport, and the almost invisible media profile of women's sport, it all sounds good stuff. The Commission had a ministerial launch and received coverage in most national newspapers, and on BBC News, generating more coverage for women's sport in a single day that it normally gets in a month or more.
The aim of the Commission will be to find ways to overcome the barriers in the way of girls and women playing sport. Press releases and stories were fulsome yesterday in their listings of under-representation of women in sport and commitments from Grey-Thompson to find ways to overcome them.
But (you knew that was coming, didn't you) when you look a bit deeper into this you find... nothing. This is an independent commission (well, its a WSFF commission in fact), which means it is reporting to no-one and it is not insignificant that neither Sport England nor the DCMS (home of the minister who was at the launch) give the Commission's launch any mention at all on their own websites. At this point alarm bells begin to ring because if neither of these bodies are on board at the start (and if they were you bet their press offices would say so) then neither will have any commitment to implement any of the Commission's eventual findings.
To demonstrate why that is important you need only look at the dozens of reports WSFF have produced recent years. Superbly researched, convincingly argued, and largely ignored outside an audience of the already converted. Little has changed as a result of the WSFF's work, in rugby or elsewhere. On the other hand a single line in a Sport England paper last month - "NGBs failing to make specific provision for women’s sport will see funding switched to those that do" - appears to have had a galvanising effect on the merger talks between RFU and RFUW, which had been going no-where slowly for some years. No doubt they'd deny this and say that its all a co-incidence, but looking at the timing of the Sport England statement and the breakthrough of the RFU/RFUW "Integration" policy, its a pretty remarkable one.
WSFF do some great work - their recent 11 reasons why sports should work with women and girls should be required reading by any sports club, never mind county association or governing body. The only teeny snag with the WSFF and the Commission is that until ministers and Sport England officials do more than simply turn up at press launches the people who need to read and act on these reports most are those least likely to do anything about them. There are times when compelling argument works, and times when a big stick speaks louder. An example of that might be the on-going story of rugby and the Olympic Games - more on that later.
Monday, July 21, 2008
National 10s is dead... Long Live the National 10s!
The RFUW have now pretty much confirmed that they will not be running the National 10s next season - but that does not mean there will no National 10s because, while you've all been writing into RFUW, we've been working on an back-up plan - and pretty exciting it is too!
Remember the article about Gloucester Girls Rugby? Well, we've been talking and GGR, Gloucester RFC and Premier Rugby Ltd are very interested indeed in running a national finals for the 10s next spring. At this early stage dates and venues have yet to be fixed, but a likely date would be in March after the inter-regional festivals. The finals might be held at Hartpury College - or even at Kingsholm, home of Gloucester RFC. There is also a good chance of some sponsorship. It might be stretching a fantasy a bit, but can you imagine it if - say - the final was played before a Guinness Premiership game - girls' rugby in front of 10,000 fans..? That would be something!
Regional tournaments would also need to be set up, but once the National Final is in place that should be easier. Armed with that the details of that carrot (and it could be a big one!) we'll be contacting clubs across the country telling them about what is being planned and encouraging them to take part. At least one of the venues from last season has already said they'd be interested in doing it again, and there could well be more tournaments than last year - maybe spread across several weekends - which would (in theory) allow clubs to enter more than one (which would be fun).
This is made more possible because the RFUW have thrown the tournament at least one lifeline as well - whether due to your pressure or not who can say - but...
"The RFUW through their local WRDM's will be looking at donating some money for clubs to run a local 7's or 10's tournament in their region. If your club is interested in hosting a tournament drop your WRDM a line as this could be good to promote your section. The 10s were obviously a success in/around your area and we are giving you the chance to repeat that success at an appropriate time with the help and support of your WRDM."
And before you ask, in theory we would be interested in running an event - the only riders to that would be finding a date... and making sure that anything we ran did not clash with other tournaments in nearby regions or counties.
Anyway.. exciting times ahead!
Remember the article about Gloucester Girls Rugby? Well, we've been talking and GGR, Gloucester RFC and Premier Rugby Ltd are very interested indeed in running a national finals for the 10s next spring. At this early stage dates and venues have yet to be fixed, but a likely date would be in March after the inter-regional festivals. The finals might be held at Hartpury College - or even at Kingsholm, home of Gloucester RFC. There is also a good chance of some sponsorship. It might be stretching a fantasy a bit, but can you imagine it if - say - the final was played before a Guinness Premiership game - girls' rugby in front of 10,000 fans..? That would be something!
Regional tournaments would also need to be set up, but once the National Final is in place that should be easier. Armed with that the details of that carrot (and it could be a big one!) we'll be contacting clubs across the country telling them about what is being planned and encouraging them to take part. At least one of the venues from last season has already said they'd be interested in doing it again, and there could well be more tournaments than last year - maybe spread across several weekends - which would (in theory) allow clubs to enter more than one (which would be fun).
This is made more possible because the RFUW have thrown the tournament at least one lifeline as well - whether due to your pressure or not who can say - but...
"The RFUW through their local WRDM's will be looking at donating some money for clubs to run a local 7's or 10's tournament in their region. If your club is interested in hosting a tournament drop your WRDM a line as this could be good to promote your section. The 10s were obviously a success in/around your area and we are giving you the chance to repeat that success at an appropriate time with the help and support of your WRDM."
And before you ask, in theory we would be interested in running an event - the only riders to that would be finding a date... and making sure that anything we ran did not clash with other tournaments in nearby regions or counties.
Anyway.. exciting times ahead!
Saturday, July 19, 2008
Worthing festival - and other 7s/10s news
There will be at least one major tens festival in May next year - the Worthing 10s (which we missed out on this year due to the National 10s and the RFUW's date mix-up) will be held on Sunday 3rd May, the bank holiday weekend and in between the final two rounds of the National Cup.
May will also include the Dorking 7s (10th May), Herts 7s (17th May - venue to be confirmed, but in theory it should be Hertford's turn), and the National 7s (the RFUW calendar says Sunday 24th May but I strongly suspect it'll be Saturday 23rd) - so it'll be the usual exciting end to the season.
As for the National 10s... well, I hear that the complaints have had some effect in as much as senior officials at RFUW have been heard to say that they are "surprised at the response" (which shows how much they have a finger on the pulse of the junior game). In the next week or so we should hear once and for all whether this "surprise" will have been turned into action, or whether HQ will have put on their tin hats and dug themselves in behind the defence of their (unpublished) "statistics". In the meanwhile keep the barrage of letters and emails going - its your game after all!
May will also include the Dorking 7s (10th May), Herts 7s (17th May - venue to be confirmed, but in theory it should be Hertford's turn), and the National 7s (the RFUW calendar says Sunday 24th May but I strongly suspect it'll be Saturday 23rd) - so it'll be the usual exciting end to the season.
As for the National 10s... well, I hear that the complaints have had some effect in as much as senior officials at RFUW have been heard to say that they are "surprised at the response" (which shows how much they have a finger on the pulse of the junior game). In the next week or so we should hear once and for all whether this "surprise" will have been turned into action, or whether HQ will have put on their tin hats and dug themselves in behind the defence of their (unpublished) "statistics". In the meanwhile keep the barrage of letters and emails going - its your game after all!
Friday, July 18, 2008
HPA results
Bad news from Brunel where it appears that (according to the Herts blog) neither Hayley nor Sasha have been selected to go on to the next stage of the TDG selection process. Apparently, from what we hear from those watching, Hayley seemed to have had a very good trial, but standards are clearly higher this year than ever before.
Indeed Hayley and Sasha are not alone in their disappointment. Incredibly (comparing it with previous seasons) of the eight Hertfordshire U18s at the HPA only one made it through, and the one that did - Claire Shutler - was selected from the regional U15 squad. None of those put forward from the U18 squad were selected.
So this means that the only girls from last season's Hertfordshire's U18s at this summer's trials will be the three girls who were in last season's TDG - probably the smallest group the county team has sent since the TDG process began?
Indeed Hayley and Sasha are not alone in their disappointment. Incredibly (comparing it with previous seasons) of the eight Hertfordshire U18s at the HPA only one made it through, and the one that did - Claire Shutler - was selected from the regional U15 squad. None of those put forward from the U18 squad were selected.
So this means that the only girls from last season's Hertfordshire's U18s at this summer's trials will be the three girls who were in last season's TDG - probably the smallest group the county team has sent since the TDG process began?
The IRB ELV video: your summer homework!
Further to yesterday's post on the IRB's guide to the ELVs... here it now is! I guess I should have thought that someone else would already have converted it
Its just over 17 minutes long, but bear with it as its pretty important so please find time to watch it. Think of it as your summer homework. I know Simon from Saracens says there are better examples around, and no doubt there are, but this is the official guide and does have a useful voice-over commentary. It is, in short, the way the IRB say that the ELVs should work.
I must say that the maul stuff (though not strictly relevant) does look pretty dangerous - especially as presumably IRB have chosen the "cleanest" examples. The video does explain why the change is proposed, but as solutions go... well, I'm just pleased that its not going to be introduced in junior rugby!
Its also worth reporting that the ELVs debate is getting quite nasty (this New Zealand article ,and in particular the responses to it, are pretty typical). Its not inconceivable that there could be a real trial of strength between the RFU and other northern unions, and the IRB and the southern hemisphere (not sure where USA and Canada stand - a question that is far more relevant to the women's game).
In what is seen by many as a shot across the RFU's bows, the IRB announced this week that the the worldwide "trial" will be reviewed "within the first quarter of 2009". Quite where we will stand if the IRB push ahead and the RFU and its allies insist on keeping their variations could be interesting (and quite damaging to the game). After all, its a racing certainty that Australia, New Zealand and South Africa will vote in their favour, so the north and south squaring off against each other in 2009 must be a possibility.
One thing the video doesn't include is much about one major bone of contention between the RFU and the IRB - that of the replacement of many penalties (and scrums) with free kicks. There are other videos that cover this - including this lecture by a New Zealand referee called Paddy O'Brien (part 1 and part 2). Rather a lot of talking from the follicly challenged Kiwi, but the video examples are different to the IRB ones and maybe clearer at times.
Its just over 17 minutes long, but bear with it as its pretty important so please find time to watch it. Think of it as your summer homework. I know Simon from Saracens says there are better examples around, and no doubt there are, but this is the official guide and does have a useful voice-over commentary. It is, in short, the way the IRB say that the ELVs should work.
I must say that the maul stuff (though not strictly relevant) does look pretty dangerous - especially as presumably IRB have chosen the "cleanest" examples. The video does explain why the change is proposed, but as solutions go... well, I'm just pleased that its not going to be introduced in junior rugby!
Its also worth reporting that the ELVs debate is getting quite nasty (this New Zealand article ,and in particular the responses to it, are pretty typical). Its not inconceivable that there could be a real trial of strength between the RFU and other northern unions, and the IRB and the southern hemisphere (not sure where USA and Canada stand - a question that is far more relevant to the women's game).
In what is seen by many as a shot across the RFU's bows, the IRB announced this week that the the worldwide "trial" will be reviewed "within the first quarter of 2009". Quite where we will stand if the IRB push ahead and the RFU and its allies insist on keeping their variations could be interesting (and quite damaging to the game). After all, its a racing certainty that Australia, New Zealand and South Africa will vote in their favour, so the north and south squaring off against each other in 2009 must be a possibility.
One thing the video doesn't include is much about one major bone of contention between the RFU and the IRB - that of the replacement of many penalties (and scrums) with free kicks. There are other videos that cover this - including this lecture by a New Zealand referee called Paddy O'Brien (part 1 and part 2). Rather a lot of talking from the follicly challenged Kiwi, but the video examples are different to the IRB ones and maybe clearer at times.
Thursday, July 17, 2008
ELVs: the movie
The RFU have circulated a new IRB video on the new laws coming in for next season. All clubs will have received copies (including RFUW registered teams, so I have been sent a copy as well).
Its about 20 minutes long and I think is required viewing for everyone before the season starts. The only snag is that as a DVD its not easy to put on the blog without some a breach of
copyright and - more importantly - some decent ripping software and related expertise. If anyone can offer that then please get back to me asap. Obviously it would have been slightly easier if IRB had had the idea of bunging the thing on YouTube - but, hey, the IRB executive (see right) is not exactly the YouTube generation (and all male too I note...).
So perhaps when we have our first training session a viewing might be possible - and in the meanwhile if anyone wants to borrow the DVD before then get in touch.
Looking at it I reckon that - given the maul changes will not apply - the big area where the ELVs will have an effect is in the line-out. The fact that numbers put into the lineout by each team will no longer need to be the same opens up all sorts of tactical possibilities. As the defending team do you put extra players in to try to steal (but therefore have fewer in the defensive line)?
The quick throw becomes much easier to perform as well. Its not something we have used, or ever seen, in our games but maybe we should be looking at it in future?
Other than that things like the 5m line at scrums won't make much difference as most of the time you don't get up to the back foot anyway...
Its about 20 minutes long and I think is required viewing for everyone before the season starts. The only snag is that as a DVD its not easy to put on the blog without some a breach of
copyright and - more importantly - some decent ripping software and related expertise. If anyone can offer that then please get back to me asap. Obviously it would have been slightly easier if IRB had had the idea of bunging the thing on YouTube - but, hey, the IRB executive (see right) is not exactly the YouTube generation (and all male too I note...).So perhaps when we have our first training session a viewing might be possible - and in the meanwhile if anyone wants to borrow the DVD before then get in touch.
Looking at it I reckon that - given the maul changes will not apply - the big area where the ELVs will have an effect is in the line-out. The fact that numbers put into the lineout by each team will no longer need to be the same opens up all sorts of tactical possibilities. As the defending team do you put extra players in to try to steal (but therefore have fewer in the defensive line)?
The quick throw becomes much easier to perform as well. Its not something we have used, or ever seen, in our games but maybe we should be looking at it in future?
Other than that things like the 5m line at scrums won't make much difference as most of the time you don't get up to the back foot anyway...
Going to Middlesex Sevens?
Then book here.
Why? It won't cost you any more, but the club will get money back from any tickets sold via the above link.
Middlesex Sevens is on 16th August at Twickenham and will feature teams from all the Guinness Premiership clubs, plus Leeds, Ospreys and Dragon from Wales, and the British Army (who are seriously good at this game). 22 matches in all, including both a cup and a plate competition - a great day out with hours of continual action from the leading male players in the country (but no England women's exhibition game this time, unfortunately). All for £25 for adults and £10 for children.
Why? It won't cost you any more, but the club will get money back from any tickets sold via the above link.
Middlesex Sevens is on 16th August at Twickenham and will feature teams from all the Guinness Premiership clubs, plus Leeds, Ospreys and Dragon from Wales, and the British Army (who are seriously good at this game). 22 matches in all, including both a cup and a plate competition - a great day out with hours of continual action from the leading male players in the country (but no England women's exhibition game this time, unfortunately). All for £25 for adults and £10 for children.
Wednesday, July 16, 2008
Rhythms - in pictures!
Saturday...
Laura shows off some of the steps she's picked up from the folk dancers
Georgie entertains the crowd with an impromptu duet
As Natalie's team talk enters its second hour, Charlie and Katie find it difficult to stay awake
The old glue-on-the-ball trick - gets 'em every time
Sunday...
The guilty expression says it all - but what was Nikki up to?
Jess, Laura and Charley unveil a new line in rugby footwear
Laura shows off some of the steps she's picked up from the folk dancersGeorgie entertains the crowd with an impromptu duetAs Natalie's team talk enters its second hour, Charlie and Katie find it difficult to stay awake
The old glue-on-the-ball trick - gets 'em every timeSunday...The guilty expression says it all - but what was Nikki up to?Jess, Laura and Charley unveil a new line in rugby footwearAs Katie wears the No. 9 shirt for the last time...
....a new star rises.
....a new star rises.Letchworth Schools Tag: more details (and pictures!)
Thanks to Mike for passing on some more facts to go with the short note I posted earlier.To begin with, strictly speaking this was a Letchworth RFC event, but the contribution of the girls' section was out of all proportion to the rest of the club (as a glance at the pictures will show) so its very much OUR success. Certainly without the efforts of Mike, Heather, Simon, and all of you who turned up it would never have happened.
Five Letchworth primary schools took part - Lannock, Lordship Farm, Grange, St. Thomas More, and Radburn - a fact that is impressive in itself as some of these schools do not regularly take part in these sort of events, so we were tapping into a "new" seam of interest from the very start.
Twenty-eight teams took part in four separate competitions - year 4 girls, year 5 girls, year 4 boys and year 5 boys - which mean that over 380 players were present making it possibly the largest event Letchworth have hosted since the Herts Sevens in 2006. In addition we had four main sponsors - NHDC, Herts CC Youth Opportunities fund, MBDA UK, and Eden Bridge Toyota - which again is pretty impressive.
Sixty matches took place spread over six pitches, with games running from 9.30 in the morning t0 2.45 in the afternoon. Every player went away with at least a certificate, while age-group winners received shield plus medals for all the squad.
An overall winning school was also determined by combining the results from each group - and they received the champions shield donated by MBDA UK. Awards presented by the Chair of NHDC and Heather (on behalf of MBDA).
And the results were:
- Year 4 Boys: Winners - Grange 'Black' (runners up = Grange 'Black 4/5' )
- Year 4 Girls: Winners - Grange 'Orange' (runners up = Lannock)
- Year 5 Boys: Winners - Lordship Farm 'Orange' (runners up = St. Thomas More 'Red')
- Year 5 Girls: Winners - Lordship Farm 'Blue' (runners up = Lordship Farm 'Red' )
A slideshow of pictures from the presentations can be seen here
Tuesday, July 15, 2008
Coming soon in North Herts
Thanks especially to Mike, we are one of the most active members of the Sports North Herts. Yesterday evening was filled by one of their quarterly meetings, and a few things that came up - though not directly rugby related - sounded interesting.
In no particular order...
In no particular order...
- North Herts currently gives grants for "elite" sports people (see earlier article), but does not have any "hardship" fund - ie. to assist potentially talented sports people who, perhaps, might need some help with equipment or travel to trials etc., but SNH are now going to look at setting up such a fund.
- An inter-club rugby forum bringing together all local clubs to discuss matters of common interest is planned for September. As this means that officials from both Letchworth and Hitchin will be in the same room together the UK Peace Keeping Force has been put on stand-by... However, more seriously, it will give us the chance to ask other clubs, face-to-face, what they do with their girls after the age of 12.
- On 24th August there will be "mini-Olympics" events across North Herts, including the Sports Centre. Quite what this will involve, and whether there will be room for us to get involved in some way, is as yet unclear. Rugby isn't an Olympic sport, obviously, but its not impossible that they might not have some sorts of athletic events that we might take part in as a team, for instance.
- Over-45 Games. The other end of the line from Youth Games. Apparently a pilot event at Hatfield went very well a few months ago and so a North Herts Over-45 Games is now being considered for next year. You may want to start putting your parents through a training programme now - especially as the Hatfield event included tag rugby.
Girls' school rugby: let's make it more difficult
Okay folks - its rant time again. So stand well back...
School rugby for girls (other than tag) is not exactly a major sport, especially in secondary schools. The reasons are many - not least the conservatism of PE staff - but the major factor in the games' favour has always been the flexibility of age groupings that basically meant that as long as you could get some girls together it didn't really matter which years they were from as long as the age gap from youngest to oldest was not bigger than three years.
Well, all that wonderful flexibility has just gone out of the window as RFUW have announced that from next season schools will have to play to the same age bands as clubs. This means that girls in Year 7 can only play amongst themselves, or have to play with the boys (like that is going to happen!) - so your chance of grabbing new girls into the game while they are fresh and open to new ideas, and before the cynicism and routine sets in (ie. around Week 2), is now largely blown away. Okay, things recover a bit in Years 8 upwards but even so its another barrier for U12 girls wanting to play rugby (as if there were not enough already).
And that is just at secondary schools. For anyone in a three tier system - ie. East Herts or Mid Beds - its even worse. Unless you have a really big middle school (which cover years 5-8) you may as well give up altogether as your Year 8 girls cannot work with Year 7s, who in turn cannot work with Year 6s...
I know its a good idea for everyone to play to the same rules wherever they are (though boys' rugby famously doesn't!), and people will shout "insurance" and stuff, but come on... Exactly how many injuries have there been under the flexible three year age band system that will now be prevented by rigid three year bands? Do I hear none? So if its not a safety issue what is it - administrative convenience, perhaps?
For heavens sake everyone - given the state of our game its all about participation. Its about getting girls to play. Its about time that that was pushed to the forefront of the minds of all decision makers instead of talent spotting and England pathways and the 101 other considerations that are irrelevant to 80% of girls who want to play (or would do if they had the chance). If ONE more girl takes up the game as a result of this change I will be amazed. On the other hand if girls are lost to the game as a result of the change I will not be the least bit surprised - indeed I go so far as to say that its a racing certainty.
School rugby for girls (other than tag) is not exactly a major sport, especially in secondary schools. The reasons are many - not least the conservatism of PE staff - but the major factor in the games' favour has always been the flexibility of age groupings that basically meant that as long as you could get some girls together it didn't really matter which years they were from as long as the age gap from youngest to oldest was not bigger than three years.
Well, all that wonderful flexibility has just gone out of the window as RFUW have announced that from next season schools will have to play to the same age bands as clubs. This means that girls in Year 7 can only play amongst themselves, or have to play with the boys (like that is going to happen!) - so your chance of grabbing new girls into the game while they are fresh and open to new ideas, and before the cynicism and routine sets in (ie. around Week 2), is now largely blown away. Okay, things recover a bit in Years 8 upwards but even so its another barrier for U12 girls wanting to play rugby (as if there were not enough already).
And that is just at secondary schools. For anyone in a three tier system - ie. East Herts or Mid Beds - its even worse. Unless you have a really big middle school (which cover years 5-8) you may as well give up altogether as your Year 8 girls cannot work with Year 7s, who in turn cannot work with Year 6s...
I know its a good idea for everyone to play to the same rules wherever they are (though boys' rugby famously doesn't!), and people will shout "insurance" and stuff, but come on... Exactly how many injuries have there been under the flexible three year age band system that will now be prevented by rigid three year bands? Do I hear none? So if its not a safety issue what is it - administrative convenience, perhaps?
For heavens sake everyone - given the state of our game its all about participation. Its about getting girls to play. Its about time that that was pushed to the forefront of the minds of all decision makers instead of talent spotting and England pathways and the 101 other considerations that are irrelevant to 80% of girls who want to play (or would do if they had the chance). If ONE more girl takes up the game as a result of this change I will be amazed. On the other hand if girls are lost to the game as a result of the change I will not be the least bit surprised - indeed I go so far as to say that its a racing certainty.
Letchworth Schools Tag Festival
A brilliantly successful tag festival took place at the club yesterday, with a disproportionate amount of the organisation and running of the event coming from the girls section (Mike, Simon, Wonky and others). Unfortunately I missed it all due to an outbreak of German Measles amongst staff in a school in Bedford (food tech... French... social studies... I know where I would rather have been!), but I gather that some 400 children played in a tournament that lasted throughout the day and that Lordship won prety much everything.
One great thing I heard from the NHDC people there (thanks to the council without whom it would not have been possible) was that the vast majority of children there were "not the usual suspects" - ie. the children who turn up to every sports event - so maybe we might attract a few players from it all.... here's hoping!
If anyone who was there has any more information or insights (or pictures) please pass them on. Such a great success deserves all the coverage it can get, so let's tell the world what brilliant tournament organisers Letchworth RFC are (and especially the girls' section)!
One great thing I heard from the NHDC people there (thanks to the council without whom it would not have been possible) was that the vast majority of children there were "not the usual suspects" - ie. the children who turn up to every sports event - so maybe we might attract a few players from it all.... here's hoping!
If anyone who was there has any more information or insights (or pictures) please pass them on. Such a great success deserves all the coverage it can get, so let's tell the world what brilliant tournament organisers Letchworth RFC are (and especially the girls' section)!
North Herts grants
If you applied for a grant to cover costs as a county or regional player then you should have heard from North Herts District Council by now - or Sport North Herts as the body that runs this scheme is now known.
Apparently they have £5,000 per year to distribute to talented sports people in the district, with awards made every six months. The latest awards were decided at the end of June, with grants going to 23 of the 30 people who applied. Most of those who were rejected failed because they did not live in North Herts (the basic criteria!) while the rest "failed to provide sufficient evidence" (ie. you need to prove you played at the level you claim - a letter from your county or regional manager would do).
Awards in the past have been based on expenses, but now they are a simple flat rate dependent on the level reached (and also the amount of money available). This time the funding given ranged from £200 for those playing at national level, to £125 for regional representatives, and about £100 for those who played for the county - not huge sums, but enough to make an impact on costs (ie. paying for training fees and kit, for example).
Looking at the number of grants - and even the number of applicants - and thinking about how many people play sport in North Herts - either virtually half of all the grants went to our girls... or quite a few of you did not apply. If the latter is true, why not? After all, if a £100+ cheque is not sufficient incentive for you to put pen to paper then maybe we should put the club membership fees up next season!
The next round of grants will be decided in November - so if you get though county trails in September make sure you apply! The pot will be a bit smaller as the SNH have only £1.8k left, but that is still money that could be in your back pocket (or your parents' petrol tank) so remember to apply - Sport North Herts c/o NHDC. Incidentally, grants are also available to coaches - and come to that adult sports people.
If you live outside North Herts' boundaries then both East Herts and Stevenage have similar schemes - indeed the former at least has often been more generous than North Herts in the past! On the other hand Mid Beds don't give anyone a penny...
Apparently they have £5,000 per year to distribute to talented sports people in the district, with awards made every six months. The latest awards were decided at the end of June, with grants going to 23 of the 30 people who applied. Most of those who were rejected failed because they did not live in North Herts (the basic criteria!) while the rest "failed to provide sufficient evidence" (ie. you need to prove you played at the level you claim - a letter from your county or regional manager would do).
Awards in the past have been based on expenses, but now they are a simple flat rate dependent on the level reached (and also the amount of money available). This time the funding given ranged from £200 for those playing at national level, to £125 for regional representatives, and about £100 for those who played for the county - not huge sums, but enough to make an impact on costs (ie. paying for training fees and kit, for example).
Looking at the number of grants - and even the number of applicants - and thinking about how many people play sport in North Herts - either virtually half of all the grants went to our girls... or quite a few of you did not apply. If the latter is true, why not? After all, if a £100+ cheque is not sufficient incentive for you to put pen to paper then maybe we should put the club membership fees up next season!
The next round of grants will be decided in November - so if you get though county trails in September make sure you apply! The pot will be a bit smaller as the SNH have only £1.8k left, but that is still money that could be in your back pocket (or your parents' petrol tank) so remember to apply - Sport North Herts c/o NHDC. Incidentally, grants are also available to coaches - and come to that adult sports people.
If you live outside North Herts' boundaries then both East Herts and Stevenage have similar schemes - indeed the former at least has often been more generous than North Herts in the past! On the other hand Mid Beds don't give anyone a penny...
Monday, July 14, 2008
The forgotten world championship
Women's rugby is not high profile at the best of times, but a tournament starting today gives media invisibility a whole new meaning. And interestingly enough its not the RFUW - or the RFU's - fault as they are not concerned with selecting these particular international teams.
This weekend will see the third World Student Rugby Championship, in Cordoba. This sevens tournament takes place every two years and the current holders of the women's title - and they are going for a hat-trick - are... not England, but Canada (who - incidentally - are the only participants whose rugby authorities are giving the tournament any coverage at all).
In fact England aren't even there - its a Great Britain team, selected by BUCS (British Universities and Colleges Sport - an organisation that many of you may become familiar with in a few years' time). And they will be up against not only Canada, but also France, Spain, Italy, and Bulgaria. Okay, not a great cross section of the rugby world, but other nations were invited by declined to attend. You can only beat the teams that turn up.
The tournament starts on Thursday, and GB must be in with a good chance - though who is playing for the team is a complete mystery! But despite it all this is a tournament worth watching - after all maybe come 2010 or 2012 or 2014 one the players in the squad might be one of you?
This weekend will see the third World Student Rugby Championship, in Cordoba. This sevens tournament takes place every two years and the current holders of the women's title - and they are going for a hat-trick - are... not England, but Canada (who - incidentally - are the only participants whose rugby authorities are giving the tournament any coverage at all).
In fact England aren't even there - its a Great Britain team, selected by BUCS (British Universities and Colleges Sport - an organisation that many of you may become familiar with in a few years' time). And they will be up against not only Canada, but also France, Spain, Italy, and Bulgaria. Okay, not a great cross section of the rugby world, but other nations were invited by declined to attend. You can only beat the teams that turn up.
The tournament starts on Thursday, and GB must be in with a good chance - though who is playing for the team is a complete mystery! But despite it all this is a tournament worth watching - after all maybe come 2010 or 2012 or 2014 one the players in the squad might be one of you?
Sunday, July 13, 2008
Just talk into this...
There was I thinking that I'd just be doing some transport and handing out leaflets...
Hopefully Mike will be publishing his photographic account of the weekend's displays at Rhythms of the World in Hitchin (North Herts' answer to Glastonbury). Clashes with other sporting acitivities prevented me from being there yesterday, but today the family's cricket and swimming were over in time for me to get over to Hitchin for the second day.
So first well done to everyone who came along - it was a good display, justifiably attracting a significantly larger crowd than the earlier folk dancing. A slightly larger arena would have been nice, but the two sides of the fence accessible to the public seemed full throughout - which was pretty good. We need to grab every chance we can to do this kind of thing - a hundred or more people will now know that there is a successful girls rugby team at Letchworth, which is one step nearer attracting more players.
Probably the only downside today (I cannot talk about yesterday) was the commentry - "John, could you go over and see the organiser" I was told. Having made my way round a mike was thrust in my direction - "take this, talk into there" - resulting in 30 minutes of improptu jabbering. Its amazing what rubbish you hear yourself saying in a desparate bid to say something - "Girls' rugby is a sport for everyone... Well, just girls obviously" - and that is just the one I remember! At least I didn't get anyone's name wrong... I think?
Anyway - the great thing about the weekend was that by and large the rain held off (a few drops on Saturday, nothing today), large quantities of leaflets were handed out, everyone enjoyed themselves, we all got into Rhythms for nothing ("artists this way..."!), and maybe - just maybe - one of those watching might come along and have a go next season.
Next year all we need to do is put it to music so we get on the main stage!
Hopefully Mike will be publishing his photographic account of the weekend's displays at Rhythms of the World in Hitchin (North Herts' answer to Glastonbury). Clashes with other sporting acitivities prevented me from being there yesterday, but today the family's cricket and swimming were over in time for me to get over to Hitchin for the second day.
So first well done to everyone who came along - it was a good display, justifiably attracting a significantly larger crowd than the earlier folk dancing. A slightly larger arena would have been nice, but the two sides of the fence accessible to the public seemed full throughout - which was pretty good. We need to grab every chance we can to do this kind of thing - a hundred or more people will now know that there is a successful girls rugby team at Letchworth, which is one step nearer attracting more players.
Probably the only downside today (I cannot talk about yesterday) was the commentry - "John, could you go over and see the organiser" I was told. Having made my way round a mike was thrust in my direction - "take this, talk into there" - resulting in 30 minutes of improptu jabbering. Its amazing what rubbish you hear yourself saying in a desparate bid to say something - "Girls' rugby is a sport for everyone... Well, just girls obviously" - and that is just the one I remember! At least I didn't get anyone's name wrong... I think?
Anyway - the great thing about the weekend was that by and large the rain held off (a few drops on Saturday, nothing today), large quantities of leaflets were handed out, everyone enjoyed themselves, we all got into Rhythms for nothing ("artists this way..."!), and maybe - just maybe - one of those watching might come along and have a go next season.
Next year all we need to do is put it to music so we get on the main stage!
Saturday, July 12, 2008
Should the season have begun already?
Looking at the clock there are still over 56 days to go before our season begins, but looking around at other clubs sites you may get the impression that the 2008/9 (or at least serious training for it) has already begun. Should we be doing the same here?
At Letchworth we have always had a clear break between seasons - an "early start" for us would be mid-August! And its pretty much the same across the club - weekly touch rugby aside - none of the teams, certainly none of the junior teams, will start training until well into next month.
So why do other clubs do this? Does this early training make any difference - are we at a disadvantage but not training in the summer? Its difficult to prove things one way or another - there are so many other variables, especially the ages and individual abilities of players - but going by last season the difference seems to be marginal. At the start of the season teams that have trained in the summer do tend to hit the ground running, but by season's end, when the major tournaments come round, the difference seems to be slight.
There is, however, one exception - and here it is quite relevant to this weekend. As mentioned earlier this week, Hayley and Sasha will be competing for places in the TDG this weekend and, while I do not know about Sasha who may have done some training at school, I am pretty sure that Hayley will barely have picked up a ball in recent weeks.
Obviously the HPA/TDG process is designed to identify raw talent, and so recent training (or the lack of it) should not make much difference. However all of the girls at Brunel on Sunday, and at the next session in a couple of weeks time, will be very talented - there will be little to choose between them. A few weeks extra training could make all the difference, especially as the process excludes consideration of reputations and past performances. Maybe, at the margins, it has made the difference in the past?
Its more than just Hayley and Sasha - it could also make a difference to the playing opportunities of others. County selection is very early in the season, but performances in these early September trails influence regional selection later on - because if you miss out on county then, however much you may later develop, you will also miss out on region too. Could summer training account for how under the old system we had girls who made it into regional squads but were not selected for county teams? Some of you have other "explanations" for such notable features of previous selections, but I suspect summer training may be a significant one.
So should we be training through the summer as well? Personally I still think not. I think the RFU is right to have a well-defined off-season, from June to August with its implication that players should take a break from the game. This is an amateur sport - a past-time not a life-time. There is the touch league if people want to keep fit and aren't doing anything else - maybe we might look at taking a more active part in that in future seasons - but I'm not sure we should follow other clubs down the route of formal summer training.
What do you think?
At Letchworth we have always had a clear break between seasons - an "early start" for us would be mid-August! And its pretty much the same across the club - weekly touch rugby aside - none of the teams, certainly none of the junior teams, will start training until well into next month.
So why do other clubs do this? Does this early training make any difference - are we at a disadvantage but not training in the summer? Its difficult to prove things one way or another - there are so many other variables, especially the ages and individual abilities of players - but going by last season the difference seems to be marginal. At the start of the season teams that have trained in the summer do tend to hit the ground running, but by season's end, when the major tournaments come round, the difference seems to be slight.
There is, however, one exception - and here it is quite relevant to this weekend. As mentioned earlier this week, Hayley and Sasha will be competing for places in the TDG this weekend and, while I do not know about Sasha who may have done some training at school, I am pretty sure that Hayley will barely have picked up a ball in recent weeks.
Obviously the HPA/TDG process is designed to identify raw talent, and so recent training (or the lack of it) should not make much difference. However all of the girls at Brunel on Sunday, and at the next session in a couple of weeks time, will be very talented - there will be little to choose between them. A few weeks extra training could make all the difference, especially as the process excludes consideration of reputations and past performances. Maybe, at the margins, it has made the difference in the past?
Its more than just Hayley and Sasha - it could also make a difference to the playing opportunities of others. County selection is very early in the season, but performances in these early September trails influence regional selection later on - because if you miss out on county then, however much you may later develop, you will also miss out on region too. Could summer training account for how under the old system we had girls who made it into regional squads but were not selected for county teams? Some of you have other "explanations" for such notable features of previous selections, but I suspect summer training may be a significant one.
So should we be training through the summer as well? Personally I still think not. I think the RFU is right to have a well-defined off-season, from June to August with its implication that players should take a break from the game. This is an amateur sport - a past-time not a life-time. There is the touch league if people want to keep fit and aren't doing anything else - maybe we might look at taking a more active part in that in future seasons - but I'm not sure we should follow other clubs down the route of formal summer training.
What do you think?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
