PDA

View Full Version : [Kit] Studs



chbg
23-11-15, 10:11
Who still checks stud pattern?

http://www.irishtimes.com/sport/rugby/rugby-analysis-dangerous-soccer-studs-creeping-into-game-1.2209671

http://www.andymcgeady.com/studs-cleats-rugby-legal-2015/

Regulation 12 (revised 11 Sep 15) (http://www.worldrugby.org/wr-resources/WorldRugbyDIR/Handbook/English/index.html#/210/) - a cure for insomnia?

TheBFG
23-11-15, 11:11
yeah, but I'd say he's changed his studs for "rugby ones" after all he is a forward.

But agree, I'm still seeing our favs the Nike running spikes and if you watch the rugby over the weekend there's more than a few "pros" wearing them. I brought this up with a Prem AR, i'll chase him up on what they're being told at the top level???

On average I'd say I'm asking 4 players a month to change their boots/studs and everytime, they say "but I've been wearing them since.....(insert anything up to 2 seasons)" :shrug:

crossref
23-11-15, 12:11
I always said that this focus on the front stud being offset was a complete red herring, and not intended to be an actual requirement.
The pertinent feature in the original diagram was - I always thought - the three rows, 1+2+2 configuration.

But whatever.

This wording had changed

Stud/cleat length shall be no greater than 21 mm (see Law 4).
Studs/cleats complying with the design and dimensions shown in
Figure 1 should give satisfactory performance.
The shape and dimensions of other stud/cleat designs should be
such that they present a no greater risk of injury to another player
than the stud/cleat shown in figure 1. Tests A and B can be used to
assess comparative performance.
The plan view cross-sectional contact area of the stud/cleat shown in
Figure 1 at a plane 2 mm below the tip is 78 mm2
. Other studs/cleats
having the same or greater contact area might be expected to give
satisfactory performance dependent on minimum stud/cleat width in
any direction.
All edges of the studs/cleats should be finished smooth and rounded
to a radius of not less than 1mm.

I really wish the IRB didn't say

The shape and dimensions of other stud/cleat designs should be
such that they present a no greater risk of injury to another player
than the stud/cleat shown in figure 1

that seems to make almost any stud potential legal and it makes it much harder out on the pitch to object to any particular stud shape, but I do like


The plan view cross-sectional contact area of the stud/cleat shown in
Figure 1 at a plane 2 mm below the tip is 78 mm2
. Other studs/cleats
having the same or greater contact area might be expected to give
satisfactory performance dependent on minimum stud/cleat width in
any direction.
which seems to imply that the 78mm2 area IS a requirement, even if the minimum dimensions isn't.
IE - no pointy studs.


I think it's muddle, and suspect that it will take a serious injury somewhere before WR sorts it out properly

Paule23
23-11-15, 16:11
There's a really great photo at the end of the andymcgready article showing some boots in use which should have been deemed illegal due to the rather pointy tip to the studs.

Is anyone seeing more and more of the type of boot?

Also, the rules ban studs that are a metal/plastic mix, can anyone let me know why? What is the specific danger form a mixed material stud?

crossref
23-11-15, 16:11
Also, the rules ban studs that are a metal/plastic mix, can anyone let me know why? What is the specific danger form a mixed material stud?

I wonder that.

perhaps it's because the two materials wear down at different rates, creating ridges where there was once a nice flush join. But I am only guessing.

TheBFG
23-11-15, 16:11
is this because the metal tip can become dislodged leaving a sharp edge?

TheBFG
23-11-15, 16:11
Is anyone seeing more and more of the type of boot?


As I think the article points out (no pun intended) it's the Nike boots that have these pointed studs, I stopped a boy from wearing them a few weeks ago, he said, "it's OK I have some others in my kit i'll change them", "great let me see them when you've done it", he brought them back to me 10 mins later, they'd gone from 9mm long to 16mm long, still 5mm at the point though! :shrug: "see ya!"

ctrainor
23-11-15, 18:11
I think the whole area of what is and isn't allowed is a nightmare.
The reality is nobody really knows what is and isn't acceptable or where to look for guidance.

if you look in the law book, which most people should be able to access it says this
(a)
Studs of players’ boots must conform with World Rugby Specifications (Regulation 12).
(b)
Moulded rubber multi-studded soles are acceptable provided they have no sharp edges or ridges.
Regulation 12 among other things says this

Materials Materials used in the studs/cleats should be such that they do not
give rise to hazards as a result of mechanisms such as abrasion or
impacts in wear; or through any other form of damage or
deterioration. Materials used in replaceable studs/cleats should be
capable of repeated fixing and removal without creating a hazard.
Nylon has been found previously not to be a suitable material due to
its propensity to burring.
Shape and
Dimensions
Stud/cleat length shall be no greater than 21 mm (see Law 4).
Studs/cleats complying with the design and dimensions shown in
Figure 1 should give satisfactory performance.
The shape and dimensions of other stud/cleat designs should be
such that they present a no greater risk of injury to another player
than the stud/cleat shown in figure 1. Tests A and B can be used to
assess comparative performance.
The plan view cross-sectional contact area of the stud/cleat shown in
Figure 1 at a plane 2 mm below the tip is 78 mm2
. Other studs/cleats
having the same or greater contact area might be expected to give
satisfactory performance dependent on minimum stud/cleat width in
any direction.
All edges of the studs/cleats should be finished smooth and rounded
to a radius of not less than 1mm.
Construction
and design
The edge profile of the sole unit itself should be rounded with no
sharp edges.
The studs/cleats should have no external projections on its surface
except where text or a logo is desired. In such cases, the
embossment details shall be no more than 0.3 mm proud of the
surrounding material of the stud.
The studs/cleats and their attachment should be capable of
withstanding mechanical demands of service, including impacts and
abrasive wear, without becoming damaged and creating a potential
hazard. Performance can be assessed by means of tests C, D and E.
In the case of studs/cleats incorporating a spigot or similar, it is
recommended that:
(a) when the attachment spigot is of a different material from the
stud/cleat, a clearly visible warning should become evident when the
stud/cleat has worn down to a length that gives a minimum of 2 mm
cover to the end of the spigot.
(b) Any flutes or other recesses for the fixing tool, should not extend
nearer to the tip of the stud/cleat than the clearly visible warning
mark.
Replaceable studs/cleats should be designed in such a way that they
can be fitted by a method that does not damage the stud/cleat and
thereby introduce a cutting hazard or any other hazard.

A BIG PILE OF BULLSH*T BASICALLY WHICH NOBODY READS.

I added these photos earlier in the year to highlight what My son's football boots did to a mate in a friendly kickabout.
If you felt these studs in a pre-game check there would be no sharp edges yet they did the damage in the photo.
They are clearly below the 10mm minimum, but unless you had a ruler or stud gauge with you and in my case had my reading glasses on (that wouldn't look good before a game) how could you actually tell.

I every ref should be issued with a stud gauge and that would solve one of the problems.
the cleats/blades debate i have no idea.

OB..
23-11-15, 19:11
I every ref should be issued with a stud gauge and that would solve one of the problems.I was issued with one many years ago. Maybe I should try and find it (if it is still valid).

FlipFlop
24-11-15, 10:11
Now try applying that in a land where rugby boots are virtually impossible to get hold of, where rugby is a minority sport (and very minor at that).

If I stopped players playing with most studs you guys would, there would be no games every weekend, and rugby would die over here.

crossref
24-11-15, 10:11
Now try applying that in a land where rugby boots are virtually impossible to get hold of, where rugby is a minority sport (and very minor at that).

If I stopped players playing with most studs you guys would, there would be no games every weekend, and rugby would die over here.

but on the other hand a series of nasty stud injuries won't do the sport any good either.
it's tricky.

Phil E
24-11-15, 15:11
Also, the rules ban studs that are a metal/plastic mix

Can you show me that rule?

The USA kit guidelines mention this as well, but I can't find anything in Regulation 12 that's says studs made of metal and plastic are banned.

Taff
24-11-15, 15:11
Now try applying that in a land where rugby boots are virtually impossible to get hold of, where rugby is a minority sport (and very minor at that).But you don't need to get specialist rugby boots. Football boots (available worldwide) will do - just change the studs to studs that comply with Regulation 12. They're easily available online and cheap as chips - in fact they're cheaper than chips. http://www.rugbystore.co.uk/boots/studs-and-laces/studs-alloy-rugby-union


Can you show me that rule? The USA kit guidelines mention this as well, but I can't find anything in Regulation 12 that's says studs made of metal and plastic are banned.
Just a guess here Phil, but most of the metal and plastic studs I've seen are just too narrow to comply with Regulation 12. So IMO the way they are constructed isn't the problem - but the studs made from metal and plastic fail as they are less than the minimum 10mm diameter stipulated for rugby. It's just a thought, and I could be wrong.

FlipFlop
24-11-15, 17:11
But you don't need to get specialist rugby boots. Football boots (available worldwide) will do - just change the studs to studs that comply with Regulation 12. They're easily available online and cheap as chips - in fact they're cheaper than chips. http://www.rugbystore.co.uk/boots/studs-and-laces/studs-alloy-rugby-union


Not in the stores over here. And internet shopping comes with large duties and taxes. Most Football boots do not come with changeable studs these days either - again most in the shops here do not.

TheBFG
24-11-15, 17:11
Not in the stores over here. And internet shopping comes with large duties and taxes. Most Football boots do not come with changeable studs these days either - again most in the shops here do not.

You'll have to make a trip to "sports direct" while you're over here, you could make a killing :wink:

crossref
24-11-15, 17:11
this whole topic is very unsatisfactory. Do we think rugby in Switzerland is actually dangerous, or not ?
if it is dangerous how can it be allowed ?
if it isn't really dangerous, I mean not really, then are the regs just pointless.

TheBFG
24-11-15, 17:11
would numbers of players come into that discussion though?

Phil E
24-11-15, 18:11
I think Switzerland are pretty neutral on the issue :chin:

TheBFG
24-11-15, 18:11
I think Switzerland are pretty neutral on the issue :chin:

Knew we could rely on you for some sensible input :clap:

crossref
24-11-15, 18:11
would numbers of players come into that discussion though?

as far as I know they have thirty, just like the rest of us :)

L'irlandais
29-11-15, 16:11
but on the other hand a series of nasty stud injuries won't do the sport any good either.
it's tricky.speaking of nasty stud injuries, here is one graphic image (http://www.joe.ie/sport/pic-donncha-ocallaghans-new-teammate-suffered-a-horrific-face-injury-last-night/521637) from this week-end to back up the point.
Saracens 48 - 18 Worcester Warriors

Taff
29-11-15, 22:11
speaking of nasty stud injuries, here is one graphic image (http://www.joe.ie/sport/pic-donncha-ocallaghans-new-teammate-suffered-a-horrific-face-injury-last-night/521637) from this week-end to back up the point.
Bloody hell. If there was ever a photo to back up why we should do stud checks - there it is.

Nigib
29-11-15, 22:11
speaking of nasty stud injuries, here is one graphic image (http://www.joe.ie/sport/pic-donncha-ocallaghans-new-teammate-suffered-a-horrific-face-injury-last-night/521637) from this week-end to back up the point.
Saracens 48 - 18 Worcester Warriors

What did the stud look like that did that damage?

L'irlandais
07-12-15, 13:12
You would have to ask Saracens flanker Maro Itoje that.
In his defense it was an unintentional clash, unlucky though it was for the South African.

40 stitches later it didn't look nearly so bad.
(34kB rule won't let me upload the "after" pic. (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/rugbyunion/article-3338409/Worcester-Warriors-prop-Nick-Schonert-posts-graphic-picture-gruesome-facial-injury-Saracens-defeat-Twickenham.html) )

Taff
07-12-15, 14:12
In the first picture posted on Twitter following the match, Schonert tweets the instigator - Saracens flanker Maro Itoje, saying: 'Check them studs mate!!'
I'm curious whether the studs were checked straight after the game, and what the result was. Eg if the studs were illegal, then it would suggest that somebody has ballsed up.

Presumably they were checked before the game started. Please tell me they were.