Who should have the overriding call ?

[Browner]

Despite the head coach disagreeing, a parent insisted his admittedly 'tiny' son play down into U12's when he should have been a U13 [he was assessed as mid ability for the u13's].

The next season the parent wanted the son to return to his correct U14 age grade [believed to be for social reasons] However it was assessed by the U14s head coach that it was 'unsafe' for him to do so. Not only was the lad smaller than most of the U12's he'd left, but he'd also missed out on a whole season of tackling u13's! The parent was now expecting his small son to face players well beyond his size/experience some of whom had had significant growth spurts between u13 & u14.

The parents didn't agree with the U14's Head coaches decision. The U13's coaches also listed the player in the bottom quartile of their group.

The CB refused to sanction the player playing down into U13s [for a second consecutive season] without his parents agreement.


The lad hasn't played for his club all season, because of the position of the CB & the parents.

Surely the best placed [& only] qualified person [the RFU L2 head coach of the U14's ] should be the overriding decision maker in such a situation?

Any alternative views anyone ?


[as an aside - the head coach was put under significant VERBAL pressure from club hierarcy to include the lad ........ he agreed he would PROVIDED the RFU & the CLUB Directors gave him a written instruction & removed his Child Welfare Responsibilities for the child .......... unsurprisingly nothing arrived !
but a Clubmark / Seal of Approval Club would never commit such pressure into writing would they !!!!!!!!!!!! ]

[didds]

it IS a parent's call - but with the caveat that the U14 coach can refuse the request for the obvious reasons.

So the lad not playing all year is the "fault" of his parents and nobody else.

Q: if it is because of social reasons couldn't he play would he not carry bottles, run touch etc and be a part of the squad that way?
(Yes, it is not playing which would still be better).

didds

[crossref]

I wonder what the boy really wants

Anyway to answer the question

- the head of junior rugby should take the lead/responsibility
- he should chair a meeting with the coach and the parents and try to broker a decision they all agree to
- he would need himself, the coach and the club's child safeguarding officer.
- if they could find someone to act as a faciliatator to the meeting that might be really helpful (many clubs I suspect could find such a person amongst their old blazers, someone respected by all, and not to be part of the decision but to help facilitate one)
- they must talk to the boy himself I wonder what the boy really wants ?
- the decision should be minuted so that the coach has that process and joint club/parent decision to refer to (not unreasonable)

If that meeting can't come to an agreement, I think the boy will have to find another club

[Dixie]

Despite the head coach disagreeing, a parent insisted his admittedly 'tiny' son play down into U12's when he should have been a U13 [he was assessed as mid ability for the u13's].

Implication: age group coach did not think the player was too small for his proper age group.

The next season the parent wanted the son to return to his correct U14 age grade. However it was assessed by the U14s head coach that it was 'unsafe' for him to do so. Not only was the lad smaller than most of the U12's he'd left,

Implication: head coach seems to have had a change of heart about the player being too small for his "proper" age group - or else he's playing tit-for-tat with the irritating parent

but he'd also missed out on a whole season of tackling u13's! The parent was now expecting his small son to face players well beyond his size/experience some of whom had had significant growth spurts between u13 & u14.

Would the Head Coach refuse also to countenance admitting a player new to the game, if that player was the same size? If the family gave up with this lot and moved to the next club up the road, which team would the lad play for? My money would be on the U14's.

Surely the best placed [& only] qualified person [the RFU L2 head coach of the U14's ] should be the overriding decision maker in such a situation?

I think this is a misunderstanding. A L.2 coaching qualification doesn't give you much insight into the area of child safety, but it will help you to plan a good training session.

[Davet]

Go Dixie...

[Browner]

Implication: head coach seems to have had a change of heart about the player being too small for his "proper" age group - or else he's playing tit-for-tat with the irritating parent ...No, my understanding was the leapfrogging of u12-u14 caused the safety issue.

Would the Head Coach refuse also to countenance admitting a player new to the game, if that player was the same size? If he has integrity and it's based purely on player safety, then likely yes

If the family gave up with this lot and moved to the next club up the road, which team would the lad play for? My money would be on the U14's you can't ever be responsible for someone else's player safety assessment.

I think this is a misunderstanding. A L.2 coaching qualification doesn't give you much insight into the area of child safety, but it will help you to plan a good training session Agree, but who is better qualified to make a 'rugby playing call' - no-one else is going to supervise the lad on a sunday other than the coach?

No-one says he can't play for the club, both U14s coach & u13's coach think he's best suited to U12's ! ....but RFU don't permit that so U13's is the best alternative Age Grade.

I'm not sure talking to the lad will help - he can't self-certify his safety.

Interesting replies though , thanks all [especially as it's a ref's not coaches forum]

[crossref]

Well for instance if someone actually talked to him

you might find the boy doesn't really want to play rugby at the moment, being tiny and everything ,

which is why he isn't off playing at another club already.

But he is finding it hard to say that given how important this is (has become) to his parents

You might find this is a fight about nothing
It's a possibility that's all I am saying

[Account Deleted]

For me the parents can "insist" he is in the U14s (squad) or they will take him from the club.

Once in that squad...

The Coaching staff decide on who to pick or not based on team and player needs. As the player is not good enough (for whatever reason) he does not get picked by the coaches until he shows, in training, that he is safe and worth a place, according to the clubs selection policy. It would be hoped that the club would have a fixture or two against "less demanding" opposition to let him get some game time.

The coaches have a duty of care to the child, his teammates and to the club not to risk player safety. The final call must lie with the coaches.

[Taff]

... I'm not sure talking to the lad will help - he can't self-certify his safety.

Well for instance if someone actually talked to him you might find the boy doesn't really want to play rugby at the moment, being tiny and everything, which is why he isn't off playing at another club already. But he is finding it hard to say that given how important this is (has become) to his parents. You might find this is a fight about nothing. It's a possibility that's all I am saying

Does the boy have any real say in where he plays? My initial feeling is "No" but he's already been moved due to his circumstances. Funnily enough (as Crossref suggests) I get the impression this is more about what the parents want than what the kid wants. He could of course be the next Shane Williams (everyone reckoned he was too small and would get hurt) but the chances are he isn't, and he could well find the whole size issue so intimidating and painful that he packs in rugby altogether.

[Phil E]

There was me still thinking this was a game for all sizes and shapes; silly me