SMH
Phil Gould | July 6, 2008
I've been watching a lot of junior rugby league over the past two years and have come to the conclusion that we need to rethink the way we structure our junior league competitions.
I'm fast developing the opinion that young kids - say from five to nine - don't need to be playing rugby league matches against other clubs.
And youngsters from, say, 10 to 12 don't need to play full contact, tackle football. I'll elaborate in a moment.
Maybe I'm off the pace but I get the feeling we're not maximising the enjoyment and participation factor for every kid who plays in a junior footy team each weekend. As a code we can get smarter about introducing kids to physical contact ball sports by offering a curriculum that teaches children all the skills currently offered by league, rugby, football and AFL.
I'll tell you what I see - you tell me if this sounds like your child's weekly rugby league experience. I see the kid - say between five and nine - who turns up every Saturday all excited because he loves the footy on the television and his schoolmates are playing, so he wants to be part of the action.
His parents fork out for registration, boots, shorts, socks, shoulder pads, headgear, mouth guard and water bottle - not to mention the cost of time and petrol getting him to training a couple of nights a week and to the football grounds in neighbouring suburbs through the hectic Saturday morning junior sports traffic.
The youngster plays his 30- or 40-minute game and, if he's lucky, maybe gets to touch the ball a couple of times. He can't catch the better kids in the opposition team and he can't tackle the bigger ones. When it's his turn to have a run with the ball, by the time he gets it off the first receiver the better kids in the opposition race up and tackle him before he gets to run anywhere.
I see junior games where one team wins 60-, 70-, sometimes 90-0.
They score a try. The weaker team kicks off. Four tackles later the strong team scores again. This process is interrupted only by the half-time whistle.
Even if the weaker team manages to tackle the opposition for five tackles and forces them to kick, they generally drop the kick and possession is immediately given back to the stronger team to continue the rout. What good is that? For most kids of tender ages, six-tackle football is too many tackles to have to defend.
I even see the parents of the winning team running up and down, screaming at their kids, yelling and cheering as though this ridiculous domination is a good thing. Maybe for their egos it is - but surely it's not for the good of the kids.
The young kids who referee these games take no sympathy on the weaker sides, nor offer any coaching or assistance to the participants. Surely there has to be a better way.
I'm thinking the whole concept of junior football needs an overhaul; or at least the rules they currently play under require modification. Of course, that's easy for me to say - but if you got enough smart people together they could come up with a curriculum for junior league clubs and coaches to follow that would be of greater benefit and enjoyment to the kids and their parents.
Your junior rugby league club would become more of a rugby league academy, where youngsters go along to learn the game and practise the skills in an organised and low-pressure environment. No mums and dads yelling at the kids or the referees. No antagonism with opposition supporters.
Your kid could go along and run in races, enjoy passing drills, kick the ball, kick a goal, score a try, tackle the bags, and more. Each session could conclude with a small game of three-on-three action or something of the like. I'm just brainstorming here. Smarter people than me could come up with plenty of enjoyable ideas for the youngsters.
A couple of times a year you could have the gala day where kids from opposition teams have a game against each other - but until they reach the age of 10 I don't think regular competition is the be-all and-end-all it has been for all these years.
Children between the ages of five and nine require only active participation in well-conducted clinics and simulated rugby league skill games at their home ground each weekend (less travel hassle for mums and dads too, I would suggest).
Between 10 and 12, I really love the OzTag brand of football which calls for kids to wear Velcro tags on the sides of their shorts. Defenders only have to remove one of these tags for a tackle, or tag, to be effected. This game offers all the skills of rugby league without the concern of physical contact from making tackles. This takes away the problem of big kids dominating little kids - a growing problem in our junior sport, given the increasing numbers of Polynesian youngsters playing our game. No good side-stepping the issue - let's deal with it.
From 13 years we start to play full contact league and the kids start to discover if they seriously like the physical nature of our game or not. Maybe you have a different view on this that you would like to share. I'm open to all suggestions.
Phil Gould | July 6, 2008
I've been watching a lot of junior rugby league over the past two years and have come to the conclusion that we need to rethink the way we structure our junior league competitions.
I'm fast developing the opinion that young kids - say from five to nine - don't need to be playing rugby league matches against other clubs.
And youngsters from, say, 10 to 12 don't need to play full contact, tackle football. I'll elaborate in a moment.
Maybe I'm off the pace but I get the feeling we're not maximising the enjoyment and participation factor for every kid who plays in a junior footy team each weekend. As a code we can get smarter about introducing kids to physical contact ball sports by offering a curriculum that teaches children all the skills currently offered by league, rugby, football and AFL.
I'll tell you what I see - you tell me if this sounds like your child's weekly rugby league experience. I see the kid - say between five and nine - who turns up every Saturday all excited because he loves the footy on the television and his schoolmates are playing, so he wants to be part of the action.
His parents fork out for registration, boots, shorts, socks, shoulder pads, headgear, mouth guard and water bottle - not to mention the cost of time and petrol getting him to training a couple of nights a week and to the football grounds in neighbouring suburbs through the hectic Saturday morning junior sports traffic.
The youngster plays his 30- or 40-minute game and, if he's lucky, maybe gets to touch the ball a couple of times. He can't catch the better kids in the opposition team and he can't tackle the bigger ones. When it's his turn to have a run with the ball, by the time he gets it off the first receiver the better kids in the opposition race up and tackle him before he gets to run anywhere.
I see junior games where one team wins 60-, 70-, sometimes 90-0.
They score a try. The weaker team kicks off. Four tackles later the strong team scores again. This process is interrupted only by the half-time whistle.
Even if the weaker team manages to tackle the opposition for five tackles and forces them to kick, they generally drop the kick and possession is immediately given back to the stronger team to continue the rout. What good is that? For most kids of tender ages, six-tackle football is too many tackles to have to defend.
I even see the parents of the winning team running up and down, screaming at their kids, yelling and cheering as though this ridiculous domination is a good thing. Maybe for their egos it is - but surely it's not for the good of the kids.
The young kids who referee these games take no sympathy on the weaker sides, nor offer any coaching or assistance to the participants. Surely there has to be a better way.
I'm thinking the whole concept of junior football needs an overhaul; or at least the rules they currently play under require modification. Of course, that's easy for me to say - but if you got enough smart people together they could come up with a curriculum for junior league clubs and coaches to follow that would be of greater benefit and enjoyment to the kids and their parents.
Your junior rugby league club would become more of a rugby league academy, where youngsters go along to learn the game and practise the skills in an organised and low-pressure environment. No mums and dads yelling at the kids or the referees. No antagonism with opposition supporters.
Your kid could go along and run in races, enjoy passing drills, kick the ball, kick a goal, score a try, tackle the bags, and more. Each session could conclude with a small game of three-on-three action or something of the like. I'm just brainstorming here. Smarter people than me could come up with plenty of enjoyable ideas for the youngsters.
A couple of times a year you could have the gala day where kids from opposition teams have a game against each other - but until they reach the age of 10 I don't think regular competition is the be-all and-end-all it has been for all these years.
Children between the ages of five and nine require only active participation in well-conducted clinics and simulated rugby league skill games at their home ground each weekend (less travel hassle for mums and dads too, I would suggest).
Between 10 and 12, I really love the OzTag brand of football which calls for kids to wear Velcro tags on the sides of their shorts. Defenders only have to remove one of these tags for a tackle, or tag, to be effected. This game offers all the skills of rugby league without the concern of physical contact from making tackles. This takes away the problem of big kids dominating little kids - a growing problem in our junior sport, given the increasing numbers of Polynesian youngsters playing our game. No good side-stepping the issue - let's deal with it.
From 13 years we start to play full contact league and the kids start to discover if they seriously like the physical nature of our game or not. Maybe you have a different view on this that you would like to share. I'm open to all suggestions.
