PDA

View Full Version : Studs in the front of boots



Robert Burns
27-01-04, 10:01
Almst every game I have refereed this season I have come accross at least one player, who on the stud check has one of his/her front studs missing.

They seem totally shocked when I tell them they have to sort it or they are not playing.

I get all the "Last weeks ref didn't bother" and "It's only one stud"

Why do people not seem to know about this law, it is VERY clear in what it says.

4.4 (i) A player must not wear a single stud at the toe of the boot.


answers??

pricci
27-01-04, 10:01
Almst every game I have refereed this season I have come accross at least one player, who on the stud check has one of his/her front studs missing.

They seem totally shocked when I tell them they have to sort it or they are not playing.

I get all the "Last weeks ref didn't bother" and "It's only one stud"

Why do people not seem to know about this law, it is VERY clear in what it says.

4.4 (i) A plyer must not wear a single stud at the toe of the boot.


answers??
Robert

I think you have taken the Law a little too literally.

Provided they are the modern type rugby boot, one stud is OK in the modern day side by side formation.

It is my understanding that this law relates to boots that literally do have the one stud, centrally positioned at the toe of the boot. They used to be quite common some years ago.

Robert Burns
27-01-04, 10:01
Should it not state that then?

as a young fellow like me has never heard of that type of boot, so took that law to mean a normal double studded toe boot.

???????

didds
27-01-04, 10:01
Almst every game I have refereed this season I have come accross at least one player, who on the stud check has one of his/her front studs missing.
....
Why do people not seem to know about this law, it is VERY clear in what it says.

4.4 (i) A plyer must not wear a single stud at the toe of the boot.
answers??


I think its YOUR interpretation of the law Robert, not their's.

_I_ feel (and I suspect they do) that the law means you can't have a stud arrangement on the front of the boot like this


X <---------- single stud
X X


X X


I do not feel it means that a stud arrangement like this

X X <----- potentially missing stud.


X X


but missing the indicated stud is illegal per se.


happy to be proved wrong by a missive from HQ, but I've never found anyone that considered the second example as illegal per se (until now anyway Robert! :-).

didds

pricci
27-01-04, 11:01
I think its YOUR interpretation of the law Robert, not their's.

_I_ feel (and I suspect they do) that the law means you can't have a stud arrangement on the front of the boot like this


X <---------- single stud
X X


X X


I do not feel it means that a stud arrangement like this

X X <----- potentially missing stud.


X X


but missing the indicated stud is illegal per se.


happy to be proved wrong by a missive from HQ, but I've never found anyone that considered the second example as illegal per se (until now anyway Robert! :-).

didds
Good call didds (the diagram). Exactly what I meant.

What we are forgetting here is that the player that does not bother to replace a missing stud (particularly at the front of the boot) is a bit silly anyway, and if he is a pack player, then a total wally as he/she is likely to be totally ineffective in a scrum situation.

With ground being as it is, you need all the studs you can get to get good purchase and stay on your feet.

Robert Burns
27-01-04, 12:01
Thanks guys, I've learn't something today, I always thought it was strange but gathered it must have something to do with rucking over and raking the ball out as I've never seen a single front studded boot.

Robert Burns
27-01-04, 13:01
looking at it again, if a player has a stud missing at the front, they are still then wearing a single stud at the toe of the boot, are they not?

Davet
27-01-04, 13:01
Why do people not seem to know about this law, it is VERY clear in what it says.

4.4 (i) A player must not wear a single stud at the toe of the boot.


answers??

Be aware that the law you quote no longer exists.

4.3 STUDS
(a) Studs of players’ boots must conform with the IRB Specifications
(Regulation 12).
(b) Moulded rubber multi-studded soles are acceptable provided they have
no sharp edges or ridges.

Regulation 12 makes no mention of single studs.

Indeed as far as I am aware referees are not required to verify that studs conform to Regulation 12. Our sole role is to check for sharp edges, burring etc that may cause injury.

The clubs are responsible for ensuring their players equipment conforms to R12.

The law, and Reg 12 may be found at

http://www.irb.com/laws_regs/laws/index.cfm

Robert Burns
27-01-04, 14:01
look up law 4.4 (i)

Davet
27-01-04, 15:01
look up law 4.4 (i)

Rob, OK - I concede that one.

But this is surely confirmation of what Regulation 12 says, which is that the Construction/Design of the boot should not incorporate a single stud at the toe.

I think if the design of the boot is that a stud is allowed for, but happens to be missing then that is Ok as per the regulation.

Red Munster
28-01-04, 11:01
What about blades? They seem quite dangerous to me. They're quite sharp. I know some players wear them, but I am totally against them, especially for forwards.

Davet
28-01-04, 12:01
What about blades? They seem quite dangerous to me. They're quite sharp. I know some players wear them, but I am totally against them, especially for forwards.

I don't like them, but a number of blades had already been declared legal - the Adidas Predator for example.

Since Regulation 12 was introduced in Law I dont think any ref can make an objection to blades, simply as blades. The regulation is very complex and you can't stand on a muddy pitch and assess whether a boot conforms or not - you would need a laboratory and a white coat.

What you CAN do though is check to see if they are sharp - if they have a sharp edge, or are burred etc then you can stop them being used.

Robert Burns
28-01-04, 22:01
I don't like them, but a number of blades had already been declared legal - the Adidas Predator for example.

Since Regulation 12 was introduced in Law I dont think any ref can make an objection to blades, simply as blades. The regulation is very complex and you can't stand on a muddy pitch and assess whether a boot conforms or not - you would need a laboratory and a white coat.

What you CAN do though is check to see if they are sharp - if they have a sharp edge, or are burred etc then you can stop them being used.
This is what a fellow ref from the ZP has told me.

It's upto the ref on the day to decide and interpret the law as they see fit. and what harm can there be in forcing a player to move a stud from somewhere else to make sure he has both front studs present.

A no right or wrong question it seems

Red Munster
02-02-04, 11:02
I don't like them, but a number of blades had already been declared legal - the Adidas Predator for example.

Since Regulation 12 was introduced in Law I dont think any ref can make an objection to blades, simply as blades. The regulation is very complex and you can't stand on a muddy pitch and assess whether a boot conforms or not - you would need a laboratory and a white coat.

What you CAN do though is check to see if they are sharp - if they have a sharp edge, or are burred etc then you can stop them being used.

I don't see any reference to blades in the law book. There is no reference either in Regulation 12 - Extract (downloaded from IRB site).

The only semi-reference to blades in Regulation 12 - Extract is under 3 STUDS, paragraph 4: 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(figure 1 is the pic of the standard stud).

Law 4.3 STUDS (b) Moulded or rubber multi-studded soles are acceptable provided they have no sharp edges or ridges.

I'm amazed that the Adidas predator style blades are allowed based on these laws. Where can I see the full text of Regulation 12?

I think this is very important as a referee if some kid gets scraped and scarred. It is the referee that is to blame as he is responsible for what is worn on the pitch. If the laws/regulations don't stipulate clearly that blades are acceptable, then we don't have a leg to stand on and we can all get sued until the cows come home.

Davet
02-02-04, 16:02
I think this is very important as a referee if some kid gets scraped and scarred. It is the referee that is to blame as he is responsible for what is worn on the pitch. If the laws/regulations don't stipulate clearly that blades are acceptable, then we don't have a leg to stand on and we can all get sued until the cows come home.

Instructions to referees issued by the RFU are that:-


Advice on Studs & Blades
From Bob Rogers, Chairman Governance Committee & Ken Bracewell, RFU Referee Manager

BOOTS (including ‘Blades’) - LAW 4

LAW 4 deals with players’ clothing - which includes footwear.

LAW 4(3) deals with studs as follows:
(a) Studs of players’ boots must conform with the IRB Specification set out in IRB Regulation 12.
(b) Moulded rubber multi-studded soles are acceptable provided they have no sharp edges or ridges.

LAW 4(4) deals with BANNED ITEMS OF CLOTHING and this includes:
(b) A player must not wear any item that is sharp or abrasive.
(h) A player must not wear any item that is normally permitted by Law, but in the referee’s opinion that is liable to cause injury to a player.
(i) A player must not wear a single stud at the toe of the boot.

LAW 4(5) deals with INSPECTION OF PLAYERS’ CLOTHING and this includes:
The referee or the touch judges appointed by or under the authority of the match organiser inspect the players’ clothing and studs for conformity to this Law.
The referee has power to decide at any time, before or during the match, that part of a player’s clothing is dangerous or illegal. If the referee decides that clothing is dangerous or illegal the referee must order the player to remove it. The player must not take part in the match until the items of clothing are removed.

COMMENT
All studs worn must comply with Law 4.
The IRB has contacted all known manufacturers of boots (irrespective of whether or not they are specifically made for rugby use) and this includes manufacturers of ‘blades’. These manufacturers are required by the IRB to self certify that their studs comply with Law 4.
‘Blades’ include Adidas Exchangeable Traxion Studs.
Referees and touch judges will inspect boots only to check that they are safe to play in. They will check that there are no sharp edges or burring etc.
Referees and touch judges will not be looking for kite marks or similar approval markings or manufacturers details.

ADVICE
Players must always:
Check that their studs are safe to play in
Reject any boots that have sharp edges or burring etc.
Ask their retailer for confirmation that the manufacturer complies with IRB Specifications
The final responsibility is with the players to ensure that they play in safe boots.

Note that these instruction specifically say that referees are only checking that boots are safe in terms of no sharp edges burring etc., and the we are NOT looking for kite marks etc. Note also that the final responsibility for ensuring that boots are safe rests with the PLAYERS

Red Munster
04-02-04, 10:02
Thanks for that Davet. I don't know if the Munster Association of Referees has a similar policy on blades. I will find out. Last nite at our meeting I mentioned it to a senior ref and he said that blades are allowed, but just make sure they're not sharp.