Refereeing niggle in U14 to U16 age groups

[RemainingInTheGame]

Have watched Rugby NSW refereeing conflict in U19s (link below) but keen to see what ideas and suggestions the brains trust here has.

I find these age groups so much harder to manage from a niggle / push and shove perspective and even after following the advice in the video as much as I could, I still had to resort to escalation and yellow card in my match yesterday.

 

[SimonSmith]

I think the youngest age group I refereed was U15. That said, when I was just starting, my weekend routine in Hampshire was adults on the Saturday, and then Youth on a Sunday - usually Winchester, Petersfield or Basingstoke.

My general observations are:

• Sometimes, you just aren't dealing with fundamentally rational actors. Emotion and testosterone can take over.
• A good captain makes all the difference; if you get one, you'll have a decent ride. If you don't, could get bumpy.
• Not refereeing 'down' was a great help. I applied the same standards to the Youth that I did to the adults, with the corollary that I treated them, at the outset, like adults. Some teams respond well to that. Referees who gave them far too much leeway ("Oh, they're kids and can't do any better") used to end up with a lot of trouble on their hands.
• Getting a good grip on the dynamics at play early on helped. Is one team massively better than the other? And how are they both reacting to this? Who are the players who really need an eye on them?

Management is, I think, management. The only thing that changes is the audience. If YCs are appropriate, get 'em out. Players won't learn otherwise.

 

[Dickie E]

I've reffed a fair bit at this age group, schools & clubs.
3 key elements:
1. Make sure from pre-match onwards that they're used to your voice and have confidence in you. Explain things clearly & often. Be as much a coach as a referee
2. Assess the captain early. If he/she is the clear leader, use him/her. Otherwise don't bother
2. Apply loads of empathy. Often a minute of 2 of downtime works wonders. expect tears. Don't be a jobsworth. Use cards only as a last resort. Rarely, if ever, march them 10

 

[Dickie E]

And of course the team coach may be your best friend or your worst enemy. If he/she is exhorting the players to smash the opposition, is verbally challenging every one of your decisions, etc then that will rub off on the players as acceptable behaviour.

 

[Mipper]

Rarely, if ever, march them 10

why do you say this?

I have also reffed a lot at U16 and U18, and do not find the 10m to be an issue. I do find it is worth taking time out after the 10m though.

 

[Dickie E]

why do you say this?

I have also reffed a lot at U16 and U18, and do not find the 10m to be an issue. I do find it is worth taking time out after the 10m though.

In my experience, children don't respond well to this type of punitive action. Marching them 10 is usually for not being 10 at a penalty. Why weren't they 10? Lack of knowledge, frustration, etc. Deal with the cause, not the effect

 

[crossref]

In my experience, children don't respond well to this type of punitive action. Marching them 10 is usually for not being 10 at a penalty. Why weren't they 10? Lack of knowledge, frustration, etc. Deal with the cause, not the effect

in the context of this thread, it's 10m for dissent we're talking about, I think ?

But for that also, I'd agree that 10m for dissent needs to be used judiciously - both for adults and children.
In some occasions it's a beautiful tool - the dissenter's team mates turn on him and shut him up, and he feels bad.
but on other occasions it merely inflames a tense situation, everything heats up .. and someone says something else.. and then what do you do?.

experience tells us which scenario we are in, and whether or not 10m is wise. Err on the side of caution I'd say.

 

[Marc Wakeham]

If you are not going to penalise dissent by going 10 how are you going to deal with it? I think if you are advocating not taking the "book" action you need to indicate your alternative.

 

[crossref]

If you are not going to penalise dissent by going 10 how are you going to deal with it? I think if you are advocating not taking the "book" action you need to indicate your alternative.

well, Marc, as you well know we have a wide range of tools for dealing with dissent, ranging from judiciously ignoring it.... right through to a RC.

marching 10m is one of those tools ... and it's perfectly valid ... but if it's your first point of call, that could be a lot of metres over a game !

 

[Marc Wakeham]

You've mentioned: ignoring, a word, penalise (which is 10 mtrs) A second penalty at the same mark is, with all due respect no sanction at all. The cards are in addition to the sanction). With age groups "a word" is risky as there is a danger that the wrong message is sent out. Ignoring it "judiciously" or otherewise is asking for trouble.
ATP.

Ask in the PMB
tell the captains disent is a NO.
Pealise and yes escalate up with cards. If they don't want to listen, they can play a man down.

 

[Dickie E]

This is what a junior player hears when you do the "march 10" thing. Instead of preventing niggle, its more likely to promote it, as a player vents their frustration on the opposition.

The point is the old ATP big stick "its my way or the highway" approach may not always be the best. If it isn't, time to try something else. As the OP has asked for.

 

[RemainingInTheGame]

This weekend (actually arvo after that initial post) in one match (U14) I had a player who had a bit of red mist come onto him after a high tackle was placed on him, with a big swinging kick swipe at his opponent. Luckily it missed, but push and shove followed.

I separated them, asked for captains.

High tackler was warned.

I was unsure of what to do with mis-kicker (note, he had been warned for tackling high after his second high tackle in the prior half).

I didn’t want to card him, he was after all high tackled! And I also didn’t want to reverse the penalty as he did miss. But I did want to do something to avoid any escalation.

I told the captain and miss-kicker that I wanted him to take a spell on the bench to calm him down.

It was a hard one for the crowd to work out, and I had to quickly tell coach what was happening as the captain was good, but still only 13!

Worked well for game, he came back on after about 5min and no further issues.

After the game I spoke to him and his father, both were very appreciative of the approach, and agreed that a sub was good for him.

Not sure I’d recommend it as anapproach, but I think it probably highlights that with this age group dealing with niggle is probably more art than science, that a flexible approach is probably good, and to adjust the approach to the kids and situation.

Alternatively, another view maybe that the coaches are the ones who should be dealing with niggle, and the miss-kicker taken off and read the riot act after my initial warning!

 

[Dickie E]

Sounds like excellent management to me. Well done. Was the opposition coach aware of the situation too?

 

[buff]

We have a cooling off period in our high school league. The referee can have a player removed for a few minutes to allow a player to calm down or have his coach calm him down. There is no sanction, and the player can be replaced. A coach can also ask the referee to pull off one of his own players if he notices the player is getting a little hot under the collar. Normally replacements/substitutions are only allowed for injury or at quarter time (we play 4X15 minutes in U15 and U17 fifteens). It works well.

 

[didds]

sounds good to me, especially at that age group... at U13 the players are typcially 12 years old, and only just adadpting to the cognitive changes in their life (eg appreciating there is world outside themselves etc).
As a general aside though I'm very uncomfortable with the idea that "he missed" => a more lenient approach. Missing a kick, or punch, is more luck/lack of delivery/the recipients own evasive efforts, and theres nothing to say that the next time it happens it wont connect - allied to which Im VERY uncomfortable with the idea that a recipients evasive efforts are what "saves" the perpetrator from higher sanctions.

Others; MMV of course.

 

[Dickie E]

sounds good to me, especially at that age group... at U13 the players are typcially 12 years old, and only just adadpting to the cognitive changes in their life (eg appreciating there is world outside themselves etc).
As a general aside though I'm very uncomfortable with the idea that "he missed" => a more lenient approach. Missing a kick, or punch, is more luck/lack of delivery/the recipients own evasive efforts, and theres nothing to say that the next time it happens it wont connect - allied to which Im VERY uncomfortable with the idea that a recipients evasive efforts are what "saves" the perpetrator from higher sanctions.

Others; MMV of course.

Fair point but I'm not sure what value there is sending a 12 year old to a post-red card disciplinary hearing to find out he's been rubbed out for 8 weeks

 

[didds]

would you RC him, with subsequent post-red card disciplinary hearing to find out he's been rubbed out for 8 week, if the kick landed?

All Im saying is treat a miss as the same as a hit. The failure to hit may be nothing to do with him, but the recipients own evasive efforts. Somebody else may not be so lucky/evasive

as i also said, YMMV ...

 

[Dickie E]

Have watched Rugby NSW refereeing conflict in U19s (link below) but keen to see what ideas and suggestions the brains trust here has.

RITG, as much as I enjoy watching Shane Barr grapple with the intricacies of PowerPoint & zoom, I didn't watch the whole thing. What were the main points in the presentation?

 

[smeagol]

Fair point but I'm not sure what value there is sending a 12 year old to a post-red card disciplinary hearing to find out he's been rubbed out for 8 weeks

I'm perfectly fine with a 12yo learning the hard way not to take matters into their own hands outside of the laws.

In post-match socials, I've chatted up players who I saw had the red mist, and reminded them that this is rugby - if you want to get back at someone, there are ways to do it that do not earn the referee's ire.

 

[crossref]

would you RC him, with subsequent post-red card disciplinary hearing to find out he's been rubbed out for 8 week, if the kick landed?

All Im saying is treat a miss as the same as a hit. The failure to hit may be nothing to do with him, but the recipients own evasive efforts. Somebody else may not be so lucky/evasive

as i also said, YMMV ...

It's not the referee job to worry about disciplinary sanctions (for all you know it's the 5th RC this season and 8 weeks is justified) the disciplinary process will (internal to the club for kids) will worry about this.
As a ref just judge it on this game .. is a RC right for this game