Sign In Sign-Up

Welcome!

Close

Would you like to make this site your homepage? It's fast and easy...

Yes, Please make this my home page!

No Thanks

  Don't show this to me again.

Close

1. The number of junior teams has increased by almost 9% to 2864 teams and the number of mini teams has grown by almost 4% to 5188 teams..
2. In contrast we have seen the number of senior teams decline by 16% to 4867 teams, on this basis it could be said that, as a minimum, the adult game has lost some 15,000 participants over the last 5 seasons.

Reference should be made to Appendix A which provides further detail of the proposals summarised below and the initiatives referred to.

1. Consideration should be given by those Chairmen to the summary of possible criteria included in the appendix to this document, e.g. Conditional funding for clubs should include provision for the supply of referees who are:

• Need examples of short and simple but effective Development Plans that have already proved to be successful in promoting change.
• Need examples of priorities, strategies and fundamental principles included in the Plans.

• Club Development Plan. They need to have addressed and that answered ‘Where are we now?’ & ‘Where do we want to get to?’
• State the strategic aim’s, objectives and actions needed to achieve them.
• These should include: efficient club management and administrative structures, volunteer recruitment and retention, player recruitment, development and retention, coach recruitment and education, and incorporating these with greater links with the local community.
• They need to show how these plans were managed.

• Club Mini & Youth Section Development Plan. Very similar to the above but with a greater emphasis on recruitment of players and their parents into the Club.

• New volunteers are needed for CB’s and Clubs and this begins with the Clubs.
• The Club needs to draw in people from the local community.
• What is the Clubs policy?

• Where the clubs have developed a coaching structure that links the whole Club from U7 to 1^st XV.
• Where Clubs have been able to recruit coaches to cover all teams.

• Where the Club has linked with a group of local Clubs in order to create regular playing opportunities.
• How have they achieved this?

• Clubs who over the last three years, have succeeded in improving their links with their local communities and have significantly increased numbers of their Mini, Youth and senior playing and non Playing members.

• The question that needs to be answered is ‘How did they achieve this?’

39. The following points were raised at the RFU Council meeting on 3^rd March.

• Lack of terrestrial television is a significant factor in the loss of players
• National database is crucial to enable players to be effectively tracked
• ‘Valuing the volunteer’ is very important if we are to ensure administrators are retained/recruited in the game.
• Coach development and quality of coaching is central to solving the problems of player drop-out
• Facilities are very important to the ‘community game’ and in particular attrcating families to the sport.
• Focus the RDO’s on higher and further education.
• Schools are an important factor and sport and rugby on the curriculum needs to be addressed.
• Conditional funding needs to be equitable for the whole game.
• Re-examine the policy of funding by meritocracy and provide funds for those who invest in the sport, its participants and development.
• Improve the image of the sport and put out positive policy messages.
• Assist Clubs with facilities management and how to run their club efficiently and effectively.
• Are the new laws creating a game for athletes and not a ‘game for all’.
• Discourage long distance travel and establish local merit tables or competitions that encourage participation in club lower teams.

APPENDIX A

The table below provides XV examples of initiatives that could be undertaken with immediate effect to assist clubs and constituent bodies in addressing the problem of the ‘declining’ adult game. Some require the reallocation of resources that may have cost implications and others have direct costs that could be reallocated from existing budgets or new sponsorship income found. Many do not require changes to existing policy but do require positive support and resource from the RFU through the CB structure. Some of the ideas are immature and need working papers to develop both the concept and the cost/resource implications. The Task Group believes that most could be undertaken in time for next season if the necessary decisions can be taken in the next few months.
 

Adult Participation Initiatives	Funding	Resource
1. Deregulation of Leagues at Level 9 and below	No	Yes
2. Front Row Recruitment/Retention Drive	Yes	Keith Roach
3. Replacements Regulations	No	No
4. National Under 19 Competition	Yes	Yes
5. Youth Structured Season and Competitions	No	Yes
6. Rugby Development Officers (refocus of YDO to RDO to work in partnership with CB on ‘game development’ plans throughout the community game	Yes	Yes 10 FTE’s
7. Local (CB) Merit Tables	Yes	Yes
8. Long Distance Travel Support – Level 5 and below	Yes	No
9. League Restructure Evaluation	No	Yes
10. Fixture Pools/Bureau Co-ordination – Website? IT?	Yes	Yes
11. Conditional Funding	Yes	Yes
12. Coach Development/Investment/Training	Yes	Yes
13. Referee Recruitment/Retention	Yes	No
14. Facilities Grants- Ground match scheme	Yes	Yes
15. Player Licensing – database, tracking	Yes	Yes

 

Notes to the above table:

2. Front Row Recruitment/Retention Drive

The Development Director will liase with the England Team Management and the National Coaching Development Managers to provide a series of nation-wide clinics on front row play for all current and potential props, hookers and coaches wishing to gain expertise in this area. The programme will run from May to August 2000.

It is envisaged that the programme will include contributions from current and recent England international front row players and will be led by Phil Keith-Roach in partnership with Rugby Development Officers and Constituent Bodies. The programme will extend beyond the initial period to ensure that all aspiring, developing, experienced front row forwards continue their involvement in the game. It also intends to provide coaching expertise in the development and introduction of front row play taking full account of the safety concerns of parents of young rugby players.

4. National Under 19 Competition

Objective:

To provide a competitive fixture structure that will bridge the gap between Youth and Adult rugby.

Proposal:

• Implement a National Under 19 Competition for season 2000/2001 for all club/college teams wishing to enter.
• Competition to be based on local fixtures progressing to regional and then national stages.
• Club and college teams are grouped in local/area clusters playing a minimum of 10 fixtures in a pre-Xmas Merit Table.
• Registration required? Max. of 2 players moving to a new club during the competition?
• Fixtures organised by club fixture secretaries and administered by Web site to collate results and merit tables.
• Fixtures can be played midweek (floodlights/colleges), Saturdays or Sundays.
• At end of first phase top clubs (number to be determined) from each cluster (area) qualify to play in regional leagues of 9 clubs/colleges (8 fixtures).
• Clubs not qualifying for regional stage play reverse fixtures at area level to determine area champions.
• Top team from each regional league progresses to National knock-out stage.
• Season produces National Champion and Area champions.
• Area Champions to progress to Reserve Championship Finals – knock-out.

• Competition administered on the Web by inputting of fixtures and results.
• Operations Department and CB’s (RDO’s) to assist in dispute resolution and monitoring of competition.
• Sponsorship income to be obtained by RFU centrally.
• Knock-out stages organised by Operations Department.

• Immediate consideration to introducing a possible Under 21 Competitions for 2000/2001 and consult within the game regarding U16 & U18 competitions.

5. Youth Structured Season and Competitions

A paper has been prepared and circulated by the Development Director to relevant Development personnel on this subject. The key problem, with not having any structure at the present time, is the impact of County/representative squads/matches on Club fixture lists and players. Under the present system the Club season is severely disrupted by representative calls and leads to player drop-out and break-up of teams at a critical player age of 15 and 16. The introduction of a structured season would enable the key objectives of player development and regular club matches to be achieved. This is a similar problem to that faced by the National Coach, when trying to develop the National Side. This problem is exacerbated by the fact that many of our future community rugby players are lost to the game at this point.

The RFU Youth Committee chaired by John Loughton has carried out research into the changes in examination timetables and it is intended to integrate all the available research and information into a final recommendation for a structured season that can be introduced in season 2001/2002.

6. YDO’s – a further shift in emphasis to "Rugby Development Officers"

Concerns have been expressed as to the accountability of YDO’s in (a) reporting to "volunteer" Management Groups; (b) employment by third parties (local authorities, universities and the like) and (c) their relationship to RFU. The onset of Active Sports funding will allow for a further shift in emphasis of the YDO work programme. Participation targets can be delivered via local "project leaders", funded by Sport England via local authority consortia and managed by the YDO’s, releasing time for them to focus on coach and player development at all levels within the Community game and to address targets within the late teenage/adult sectors of the game.

To increase accountability and provide an appropriate line management structure, the following actions are proposed: -

• An Active Sports Manager (ASM) is appointed to enable the RFU to access active sports monies (c £1m pa) from Sport England via local authority consortia in releasing YDO’s from lower age level participation targets.

• A Rugby Development Manager (RDM) is appointed to have national responsibility for the implementation of the revised rugby development policy.

• 9 YDO Team Leaders (currently employed via CB’s and LA’s) are employed directly by RFU and re-focused on delivering Regional Rugby Development with specified geographical regions within the Community Game, primarily player and coach development as Regional Rugby Development Managers (RRDM) (funding of £200k pa is available from Sport England Exchequer funding which will underpin this initiative).

• A phased programme is agreed with Chief Executive, Finance, CB’s and Local Authorities within which YDO’s are employed directly by RFU and are re-focused as Rugby Development Officers (RDO’s). Extensive consultation with CB’s and local authorities must ensure that the best needs of the CB’s are met (through service agreements) and the current support and subsidies from local authorities are not forfeited (via new heads of agreement). (Full funding implications to be tabled after discussions with the Wavell Wakefield RU Youth Trust and with the Funding and Finance Committee).

Using the existing examples of good practice in Kent, Thames Valley and Northumberland the RFU should provide matched funding to CB’s, Combinations, Districts or clusters of clubs who establish merit table competitions. These would be unregulated playing to a minimum standard set of rules and self-administered by the Clubs or by one or more CB's or under contract by a registrars/results service.

Alternatively they can be administered on the web with clubs inputting their own results and monitoring is effected at CB level. Clubs can provide funds/resource from sponsorship/club or CB funds and this would be matched for administration by a grant from the RFU. Separate Merit Tables/Leagues can be organised for each of Club’s teams and they would play at an appropriate level to their strength and ability. Thus, in one area a club 2^nd XV may be playing other club’s 3^rd or 4^th XV’s to match relative strengths.

Consideration should be given to developing the Australian competition format that includes all the club’s teams in the Club Championship. In Australia this will involve both Senior and Colts teams in the eventual club championship. The advantage of this system is that the emphasis is on all the Club’s teams and not just the 1^st XV.

For example: -

Clubs in a County league such as Surrey 1 would play each other through the club at 1^st, 2^nd, 3^rd and 4^th team level with each teams results counting to a separate merit/league table as well as the Surrey Club Championship.

• 1^st XV results are worth 12 points for a win, 6 points for a draw
• 2^nd XV results are worth 8 points for a win, 4 points for a draw
• 3^rd XV results are worth 6 points for a win, 3 points for a draw
• 4^th XV results are worth 4 points for a win, 2 points for a draw.

The Task Group proposes that the CB’s be offered conditional support to pilot either of the above schemes.

8. Long Distance Travel Support – Level 5 and below.

A Competitions Sub-Committee Task Group has made recommendations that long distance travel payments be made to Clubs for league matches. The RFU already distributes long distance travel support to teams in cup competitions and this would be a similar scheme. The level of support would probably start at round trips of 150 or 200 miles but would not involve payments as high as Cup support. The Task Group support this in principle but this support is conditional with the commencement of a review of the changes proposed by the Competitions Sub-Committee.

9. League Restructure Evaluation

The League restructure Working Group that reported to Competitions Committee in Autumn 1998 focused its attention of achieving commonality of structure across the 4 Divisions. This was achieved after significant debate and a number of appeals from certain areas i.e. Surrey. What was not perhaps fully addressed was the problem of excessive travel and time spent by Club 1^st XV’s fulfilling league fixtures.

Clubs, at Levels 5 and 6 in particular were reluctant to take on the principle of further ‘regionalisation’ that could have provided more local matches but possibly of less competitive standard. One or two more radical solutions were suggested at that time, which would have involved no crossing of divisional boundaries or a redrawing of the traditional divisional boundaries.

These suggestions were intended to overcome the difficulties of extreme travel in areas such as the South West, Maidenhead to Penzance, and the North, Chester to Alnwick. The Working Group after much debate and consultation ultimately rejected them.

The issue of regionalisation was originally raised in January 1996 at the time of the first Birmingham AGM and the previous league restructure. At that time it was proposed that National 1 be split into 2 conferences of 12, North and South, and that National 2 be spilt into the 4 Divisions of SW, North, London and Midlands. This was as it was felt that it would weaken the National League Structure.

It is thought that further consideration could be given to these concepts.

10. Fixture Pool/Bureau Website Administration

One of the major problems facing club administrators is fixture cancellation. Clubs make fixtures in the summer before each season as soon as their league fixtures are known. At that time they are confident and committed to ensuring the fixtures are honoured and the players are circulated with that intention. During the course of the season fixtures will be cancelled for any number of reasons but the principle ones are:

• Inability to raise a team – front row, weddings etc.
• Unwillingness to travel
• Disruption caused by international weekends
• Lack of pitches, facilities – weather etc.

If successful they advise the exchange and agree to play the fixture. On occasions, Clubs have been in the fixture pool in one week for as many as 4 fixtures on a Tuesday, arranged them on a Wednesday, and then had them cancelled again after Club training on a Thursday and the process begins again. On some Friday’s the team Secretary will have spent all Friday evening on the phone endeavouring to obtain a fixture for one or more teams.

The latest time, advised to the Task Group, for achieving this was 1.30 on a Saturday. The partnership between Team Secretary, Team Captain and Fixture Exchange Secretary is fundamental to ensuring the maximum number of players play every Saturday and ultimately pay their match fees and buy their round at the bar, contributing to the financial health of the Club.

To help this process, the Task Group believe that it is possible to establish a National Website administered by the Fixture Bureau that will make this process easier and more efficient. The cost of establishing web technology can be determined by IT and provision should be made to provide computers and access to the network for exchange secretaries.

This will require a clear understanding by Club’s that their lower XV’s are as, if not, more important in driving revenue for the Club than their 1^st XV’s league position. Focusing exclusively on the 1^st XV to the detriment of the club’s lower XV’s will ultimately lead to the demise of the Club overall. To ensure a National Website works effectively the RFU will need to run seminars/courses on team management, player database tracking, fixture making and technology support.
 
 

11. Conditional Funding

The Chairman of the Funding & Finance Committee has developed this concept with / through the NCA and more recently the CB Treasurer’s Conference. Concern was expressed by the Task Group over the level of funds directed to clubs at NCA level for delivering the proposed criteria as being disproportionate to that received at Level 5 and below.

For example, Camberley will receive 3% of approx. £70000 for running an Under 17 XV = £2100, whereas Guildford & Godalming could receive 3% of £2800 = £76. The Clubs are 20 miles apart, 2 divisions apart and at Under 17 level delivering the same product to the game.

The Task Group believes that these disparities will need to be addressed within the game as a whole to ensure that clubs are not disenfranchised. The main objective of Conditional Funding must be to focus investment equitably on those clubs/CB’s who are achieving a greater impact in the development of the sport in their community.

The established criteria could build on the Hampshire ‘Charter Mark’ scheme, which has been developed through the National Facilities Strategy into a potential performance indicator for clubs at all, levels. This is based on the principle of ‘self help’ whereby clubs who do more, receive more. Possible criteria could include the following:
 

Senior Adult XV’s playing and fulfilling their fixtures regularly.	Monitor through CB, Fixture Exchange and Refs. Society.
Development of Referee(s) involved in the game	Referees Society to monitor
Provision of First Aid/Injury Management	CB to monitor in accordance with Nat. Facilities Strategy
Pitch/Playing surface	CB to monitor in accordance with Nat. Facilities Strategy
Changing Accommodation	CB to monitor in accordance with Nat. Facilities Strategy
Coach Development Programmes	RDO to monitor
Youth Development and Schools Liaison	RDO to monitor
Under 21, Under 19 and Under 17 XV’s playing regularly in competitive structures	Administered through Competitive Structures/ CB.
Disabled Facilities	CB to monitor
Equal Opportunities/Child Protection/Racism Policies	RFU/RFUW and CB to monitor

12. Coaching Development

Coaching has been identified as one of the key retention issues in the transition between youth and senior rugby, it is also one of the key retention issues in the senior game. Consequently, the Task Group proposes that training and development programmes are agreed with the NCDM’s and implemented through the RRDM’s and RDO’s to ensure that these provide: -

• Quality coaching for all participants.
• Coaching structure able to sustain sufficient coaches so that every club (and ideally every team within a club) has a qualified coach
• Coaching structure which encourages every club / school with youth players to have a pool of qualified coaches working directly with those young players.
• Identification from within the Community Game, those coaches that can progress to elite levels (as well as a coach development programme in the premier clubs for their players to aid their retention in the game once they have retired from playing.

• RDO – Mini/Midi Levels I, II, III; Youth Levels I, II; Adult Level I
• RRDO – Youth Level III; Adult Level II
• NCDM & PD – Adult Level III

• A coach registration database.
• Access to a well-established information and resource library.
• A progressive and monitored coach education programme.
• A system that ensures that coach tutors and all coaches are re-accredited on a regular basis (probably every 2 years for Adult Level III coaches and all coach tutors and assessors, and every 4 years for all other coaches)

The recruitment of referees is spasmodic, usually through local contact with a player who is thinking of retiring from playing. Best practice from other Unions is to make the provision of a referee by a club an integral part of the conditional funding package (e.g. SRU, NZRFU). Many of these referees will only referee at 2^nd or 3^rd team, however, this relieves the Society from the pressure of appointing referees to all levels of the game.

The club referee must undergo appropriate training to meet the duty of care requirements on a match official. The local Referee Society will deliver such training.

Additionally, the provision of a referee by a club will usually result in an attitude change towards refereeing in general and a consequential change to approach to referees by players, coaches and spectators, which will assist in the retention of referees.

14. Groundmatch Scheme

To assist in the process of improving playing surfaces, changing accommodation and medical resources, identified by the National Facilities strategy as a key retention issue for teams and players, the Task Group is proposing that the RFU reserves a sum of money to distribute in a similar way to the Sports match scheme. Club’s can apply under set criteria for matched finance of up to £3000 to fund the above capital projects. This would be in addition to any monies received through conditional funding.

15. Player and Coach Licensing/Database/Tracking

The Task Group has identified the need for the RFU to establish an RFU Player database that combines the Player League Registration with Youth Registration (Age 13 upwards?) and integrates all players in the adult game including those playing recreational rugby. Similarly to ensure players have access to quality coaching all coaches will need to be listed on a database, tracked through the coach educational programme and re-accredited at regular intervals.

Social and cultural changes mean that the 15-25 age range is increasingly more mobile and prone to lose contact with ‘home’ or new rugby clubs. Many players have experienced playing rugby at mini/junior level over the last decade and numbers continue to rise by an estimated 3% per annum.

The challenge is to keep them in the sport and keep track of them so that they maintain contact with the sport. IT will need to prioritise this project and reference should be made to the successful licensing system utilised in French Rugby and other sports in the UK.
 

 Verwood RUFC