Help - daughter seeking dissertation! Changes to mini/midi?

[MiniRef]

My daughter is soon to eneter her 3rd year at Uni, doing a Sports Coaching qualification. She is seeking a topic for her dissertation.
I understand that the RFU is piloting a new coaching scheme for minis & midis, which will radically alter the coaching of rugby. She was wondering if there may be an opportunity to construct a dissertation on its introduction /etc.

Does anybody have any infoirmation or links they can supply to me please? What's happening? Where are the pilot areas, etc (we're in Bristol).

Many thanks.

 

[TheBFG]

if i remember correctly, some boffins at Exeter came up with it and the nearest county trying it out was Hampshire :chin:

 

[Phil E]

Min Ref

It's all online here: Shaping The Game

Trials have been going on all season in Hampshire, Warwickshire and Durham.

It is widely expected to be rolled out to all other counties next season.

 

[Simon Thomas]

if i remember correctly, some boffins at Exeter came up with it and the nearest county trying it out was Hampshire :chin:

Indeed we are - but that is all I know about it, as I avoid anything to do with mini/midi rugby.

If your daughter wants a contact in Hampshire I can help her with that through the CB.

 

[PaulDG]

Min Ref

It's all online here: Shaping The Game

From the modified U9 "rules" from that link:

If the ball goes to ground, players should be encouraged to pick it up. If they dive to recover the ball they must either get up or play the ball (pass) immediately & be allowed to do so by their opponents.

In other words they do have to "let him up".

That's going to cause some amusement when those kids (and their parents) move up the age groups.

 

[OB..]

From the modified U9 "rules" from that link:

If the ball goes to ground, players should be encouraged to pick it up. If they dive to recover the ball they must either get up or play the ball (pass) immediately & be allowed to do so by their opponents.

In other words they do have to "let him up".

That's going to cause some amusement when those kids (and their parents) move up the age groups.

If the bit in bold only applies to passing the ball from the ground, it will cause very few problems.

 

[Davet]

OB - if that's true then there is a comma missing.

If the ball goes to ground, players should be encouraged to pick it up. If they dive to recover the ball they must either get up, or play the ball (pass) immediately & be allowed to do so by their opponents.

 

[OB..]

OB - if that's true then there is a comma missing.

If the ball goes to ground, players should be encouraged to pick it up. If they dive to recover the ball they must either get up, or play the ball (pass) immediately & be allowed to do so by their opponents.

It would help, but its is too much to demand from your "12 year olds". The meaning depends on the relative priorities or "&" and "or". It is ambiguous.

(IIRC in Statutes, commas do not count for anything. The wording is expected to be sufficient without recourse to punctuation other than full stops.)

 

[Dixie]

(IIRC in Statutes, commas do not count for anything. The wording is expected to be sufficient without recourse to punctuation other than full stops.)

And the parlous state of our statute book is compelling evidence of how difficult that is to achieve.

 

[crossref]

i think the reverse - it is meant specifically to let him up.
letting a player pass the ball doesn't make sense. what would it mean? not standing in between him and his team mate?

 

[Davet]

Crossref - if it related only to the getting up bit then it would read

If the ball goes to ground, players should be encouraged to pick it up. If they dive to recover the ball they must either get up & be allowed to do so by their opponents, or play the ball (pass) immediately.

The current wording can either mean that they must be allowed to do both things, or it may mean that they must be allowed to do the last thing only.

It cannot mean only the first thing.

And by preventing his pass reaching one of his team-mates you have not prevented the pass from taking place, merely prevented it from succeeding.

 

[didds]

HI MiniRef, somehow I missed this thread totally before. Its probably too late now ie your daughter has completed her dissertation! but I would have said that if she contacted Gary Townsend at the RFU she could get it all from the horses' mouth. I hope she found the info she needed and I apologise for not replying far sooner.

Just looking at the above, my interpretation of this all - and we can leave debates on the validity of STG to other threads where the debate rages on - is that U9 is basically Tag with contact tackled rather than pulling tags. There is in effect no contest for the ball (so yes, its a bit like rugby league in this concept). There is no ruck at U9 with these rules so the reasons for "let him up" *cough* do not exist. If Bert has the ball, Bert has the ball - period. Bert's opponents cannot take it off him, on the floor or not. End of.

At U10 mini rucks and mauls occur, and I would expect that now contest for the ball - as per LotG - would exist, and the limited numbers permitted at a breakdown within the rules aside, this souwld include the usual post-tackle options for the ball carrier, and players on their feet.


So its not really a case of "got to let him up" as we "know" it, but merely an indication that the ball carrier has the "right" to pass the ball. I read the "diving" scenario to be a loose ball on the floor as there would be no reason for a player to dive on a ball presented post-tackle (and I would concur that is something we do not want to promote!).

This is at U9 - so wouldn't be affecting/true of any "12 year olds"

didds