Clothing 'SKINS'

[Brian Ravenhill]

Is the wearing of 'Skins' compression garments allowed during a game?
On Saturday the opposition went ballistic that the replacement winger went on wearing Skins leggings.

 

[Phil E]

We have already had a thread on this and you are now in danger of sending Stuffy Thomas up onto his soapbox :biggrin:

It is not prohibited in law, but could be a fashion faux pas and he deserves all the stick he gets.

 

[TheBFG]

Thought we agreed they weren't allowed??

i know under law "the kit" is Shirt, shorts, socks and boots with the other bits of padding/under clothing that has been brought in under IRB rullings.

I have done some checking of the SKINS website and they are very careful not to mention that the wareing of their products during games is allowed, yes for training and re-hab but not for playing in.:nono:

my advice to op captian is that if they think the oppos shouldn't be wareing them, then i ask them to take them off (Kids not included in this though, there have been some bl00dy cold sundays recently!)

 

[Phil E]

Thought we agreed they weren't allowed??

i know under law "the kit" is Shirt, shorts, socks and boots with the other bits of padding/under clothing that has been brought in under IRB rullings.

I have done some checking of the SKINS website and they are very careful not to mention that the wareing of their products during games is allowed, yes for training and re-hab but not for playing in.:nono:

my advice to op captian is that if they think the oppos shouldn't be wareing them, then i ask them to take them off (Kids not included in this though, there have been some bl00dy cold sundays recently!)

Why would you be allowed skins shorts and shirts, but not leggings?

Shirts and shorts are worn at all levels.

 

[Phil E]

Found previous thread

Leggings

 

[TheBFG]

was the discussion around, giving an unfair advantage of players slipping out of tackles? I maybe wrong but it kicked around for a few weeks, which was when i checked their site!

It was also discussed issues around studs getting caught?:chin:

 

[gillburt]

We used to cover out legs and socks in so much vaseline we looked like cross-channel swimmers before each game.

Made for a fun filled opening ten minutes of each game as we kept the ball in the pack...shloop!

Why is that any different from taking to the pitch looking like Bernie Clifton?

 

[Dixie]

I think legal, but only as underwear. Anyone who watched Steptoe & Son will know that for a large part of man's existence, "underwear" has had long legs.

 

[TheBFG]

Gilbert, you're right, no difference, but it does come off after a while!

On my pitch, they're not allowed!:nono: :wink:

 

[Simon Thomas]

I attended a level 5 league match recently where Kiwi #10 wore under leggings (poor love was cold - bless). Oppo complained it made him more difficult to tackle and one player said in National 1 last year a Panel Ref insisted similar leggings were not worn.

Me and my observer supported Group Ref who allowed them. I emailed RFU on Wednesday and two RefDevManagers confirmed no RFU directive has been made to prevent them being worn.

Soapbox time : wink: ) - total woosies, better suited to round-ball game, no sense of standards etc. Any referee even thinking about wearing them should be shot at dawn !

 

[Lee Lifeson-Peart]

Soapbox time : wink: ) - total woosies, better suited to round-ball game, no sense of standards etc. Any referee even thinking about wearing them should be shot at dawn !

You forgot mutter mutter standards harumph! :biggrin:

 

[fitfatbloke]

Hi I have a real problem with these tights /leggings.
They don't allow legs to become sticky through sweating and they are hard to hold onto, once tackled but not downed.

I found this on an American Clubs website-

The FFR [Fédération Française de Rugby] recently asked for clarification from the iRB [International Rugby Board] on what the words, shorts, shirt, socks and underwear, meant in the laws of rugby. The iRB issued a clarification that informed the world that both shorts and underwear would stop above the knee. That means the long-leg underarmour gear that some players wish to wear is illegal. All players must have bare knees.

We have a tournament this weekend (youth), could we ask for them to be removed?

Advise please.

 

[upnunder]

Hi I have a real problem with these tights /leggings.
They don't allow legs to become sticky through sweating and they are hard to hold onto, once tackled but not downed.

I found this on an American Clubs website-

The FFR [Fédération Française de Rugby] recently asked for clarification from the iRB [International Rugby Board] on what the words, shorts, shirt, socks and underwear, meant in the laws of rugby. The iRB issued a clarification that informed the world that both shorts and underwear would stop above the knee. That means the long-leg underarmour gear that some players wish to wear is illegal. All players must have bare knees.

We have a tournament this weekend (youth), could we ask for them to be removed?

Advise please.

What about the players that wear neoprene knee supports? if they wear some kind of undershorts, and have their socks pulled up, their legs would be covered completely.

 

[PaulDG]

We have a tournament this weekend (youth), could we ask for them to be removed?

Advise please.

Without specific direction from the RFU, I really wouldn't go there.

Asking children to remove what could be seen as protective clothing without any support from the Laws of the Game could be a very easy way to get on the wrong side of a lawsuit or some idiotic child protection action.

 

[Dixie]

Asking children to remove what could be seen as protective clothing without any support from the Laws of the Game could be a very easy way to get on the wrong side of a lawsuit or some idiotic child protection action.

And asking muslim girls to do the same could be very destructive.

I see it as instructive that your internet search could only find an American account of a French request for clarification - and not many Americans speak enough French to double check the FFR website. I've never seen it in frequent trawls through the iRB website, though that is not to say it is not there. The RFU has issued no statement on this subject that I'm aware of, and when we've discussed it on here there has been no raised eyebrow from NZ, Aus, Wales or Scotland (I don't think Donal was carrying the Irish flag for us at the time) suggesting that the RFU has been remiss in its laxitude.

I'd say relax: there's no real issue to address, plenty of downside, no significant upside: don't expose yourself or your club to the grief that would go with the decision. In adopting that view, you'd be in full accord with the Old Farts at Twickers!

Welcome to the forum, by the way. Nice to have a fitfatbloke on here, rather than the more usual type.:wink:

 

[beckett50]

Actually, you'll find it on the iRB website

Link is:http://www.irb.com/mm/document/lawsregs/0/law4playersclothing_5835.pdf

Also interesting to note that Skins leggings don't appear on the approved list of clothing either (apart from the headgear)

 

[Dixie]

Interesting ruling. I'd say that pretty well outlaws "longs", though anyone getting worked up about it would also notice that in conjunction with Law 4, it also outlaws one or more undershirts, including skins-type compression tops. I can't get worked up about covered knees.

 

[Phil E]

Interesting ruling. I'd say that pretty well outlaws "longs", though anyone getting worked up about it would also notice that in conjunction with Law 4, it also outlaws one or more undershirts, including skins-type compression tops. I can't get worked up about covered knees.

The first ruling is about commercial advertsing and is not aimed at our level.

The second ruling defines the listed clothing (shirt, shorts, underwear), but does not say you cannot wear additional items (it doesn't mention boots or socks).

I would agree that it appears to ban "long underwear", but would disagree that it bans undershirts. It doesn't even mention them. It doesn't say you can, it doesn't say you can't.

 

[Staybound]

In a similar vein........

I did an U13s match on Sunday. Just after the briefing / kit check one of the coaches came to me with a young lad in tow and showed me a pair of goggles that the boy wears for sport. They were rubberised and somewhere between swimming and ski goggles in size. The lad was a winger (and a decent one as it turned out). I was told the player couldn't really play without them although I confess I didn't ask why.

In my view they weren't going to cause any undue problems - particularly given that the player was buffing his nails out on the boundary most of the time. I could have stopped him wearing them which would have probably stopped the lad playing.

Will I go to Hell do you think?:swet:

 

[Dixie]

The RFU has had ample opportunity to accept these goggles, and has consistently refused to do so. I've seen a pair presented to me at adult level, and they had a hard plastic element to them, which I considered dangerous on the day.

Many players play in contact lenses. Many U.13's wear contact lenses. We should not play fast and loose with player safety just in case the lad who doesn't wish to (or can't) wear lenses might give up the game. So might the lad who is blinded by a pience of hard plastic coming loose in a maul.