Continued decline in Sydney Junior Rugby

[Quick Hands]

I've just come back into the 10s age group and I must admit to having underestimated the depth of the problem. From talking to people around the club, the JGC has had a negative effect on village registrations - in some cases it's enough to cause teams to fold or amalgamate.

What I don't get is that we are the smallest of the football codes, yet we are trying to run competitions across 3 days (Friday nights, Saturdays and Sundays) and we also have more competitions running than any other code - probably more than the other codes put together. We are trying to apply a Sydney wide solution to problems which aren't necessarily Sydney wide and we seem to upsetting/disillusioning the maximum number of people.

League play juniors for their local club and their are district rep sides at 14s, 16s and 18s - no zones, no combined Sydney, no JGC.

Soccer play juniors for their local club and only have district rep sides in the older age groups - again no zones, no combined Sydney etc.

Rugby have a myriad of overlapping competitions, village, district (from 10s for heaven's sake!), zone, JGC, Sydney, NSW plus the schools and now 7s for an ever diminishing pool of players so that in many cases the same boys are propping up different competitions - but these boys can't be everywhere and the increasing physicality of the game in A competitions and at rep level means that they are going to become less and less likely to back up past 14s.

The structure is dysfunctional and is set up to fail. Is it any wonder that it is failing?

I think we may well have lost a generation to other codes - perhaps the crowds at Waratah and to a lesser extent Wallaby matches reflect this.

 

[Hugh Jarse]

It is not all doom and goom out west.

Some good-ish news from @Cattledog at Penrith (posted in the Colts thread).
Long story short - countering my view that Colts should take over running U16 and above, in Emuland, the Penrith Juniors have taken over running the Penrith Colts programme. The same mob have raised a new junior village club (Penrith RSL Jnr Rugby Club IIRC) and the Penrith Junior Rugby Academy.

They may be farting against thunder, with little support from the Shiraz Swillers, but their farts seem to be pretty decent ones, and by all accounts, they are bearing fruit.

I like this type of thinking coming out of Emuland. There should be more of it.

Thanks Hugh small but fairly good steps so far. In regards to the U17's we have had a few return but a number have not and have chosen to go elsewhere for various reasons (subbies, work, uni ,other colts & league). Oh well we can only do so much in a smalll space of time to make ourselves lovable (so to speak).

In regards to U16 - U18's there is again talk of a Premier / District U18's comp that may be connected to Colts & Shute Shield. It has come up at several meetings (NSWSRU / SJRU) that a quallity district U18 comp (on a saturday) for those young blokes who do not attend large rugby playing schools might be of benefit on a number of levels.

Clearly a quality (and intense) district comp for Yr 11 & 12's (or U16 - U18) who do not attend large rugby playing schools would be of benefit in providing another player stream into colts & also be of great benefit for the development of the lads who reside outside the mainstream rugby schools. The obvious benefits to CCC, CHS, & AICES students would be undeniable.

I think this concept will get traction (in some areas) but for those clubs who have a strong relationship with the schools network the buy in may not be as great.

However, in my deallings with clubs everyone is talking about ways to connect with players from non taditional pathways so perhaps a comp which has to be filled with players from non rugby playing schools is great place to start.

 

[I like to watch]

I've just come back into the 10s age group and I must admit to having underestimated the depth of the problem. From talking to people around the club, the JGC has had a negative effect on village registrations - in some cases it's enough to cause teams to fold or amalgamate........

Why do you suggest the JGC had a negative impact on rego's?
I'm not disputing the assertion,just wanting to understand the logic.

 

[Quick Hands]

It's just what people are telling me. In the past their kids played school Saturday and club Sunday so they could qualify for district reps and beyond. Now, son is in JGC so there's not enough hours in the week to play JGC, school and club, so they've dropped club and as they are in JGC, presumably there's no real need to play district reps.

I realise that JGC is now finished, but that seems to be the mindset. A mate told me last night that his son has just finished JGC, will play at school and will play junior league with his mates. I'm not sure if there is a logic to it.

It's part of the dysfunctional structure. Elite level plays at the start of the year, so there's no need to play village and district - at least in the mind of some.

 

[Quick Hands]

HJ - juniors taking over colts and colts taking over the older juniors are essentially the same thing I think (and a good thing).

I assume it means that in Penrith older juniors and colts are now part of the same structure? I think that more and more clubs will realise that this is the way to go for 15s and above.

 

[Hugh Jarse]

Yep, @cattledog and his mates seem to be doing some good stuff out in Emuland.

Others could emulate.

 

[tavytoo]

It's just what people are telling me. In the past their kids played school Saturday and club Sunday so they could qualify for district reps and beyond. Now, son is in JGC so there's not enough hours in the week to play JGC, school and club, so they've dropped club and as they are in JGC, presumably there's no real need to play district reps.

I realise that JGC is now finished, but that seems to be the mindset. A mate told me last night that his son has just finished JGC, will play at school and will play junior league with his mates. I'm not sure if there is a logic to it.

It's part of the dysfunctional structure. Elite level plays at the start of the year, so there's no need to play village and district - at least in the mind of some.

 

[tavytoo]

many of the boys in the gold squads play both codes already and are rep players in both too. i think it is only local rep players (not gold squad) who have to join a local club for the season to compete. it is the same at CHS level with most of the squad often primarily league players who also play union not vice versa. If this is the case and these players aren't going to commit to the existing local club and rep structure then gold squad is an own goal in development of grassroots rugby union unless clubs consider the new penrith model

 

[Fat Cat]

My information tells me that in the Gordon 16's teams Chatswood will not survive post state champo's, and Wahroongah will be signing boys on who are not playing in the village comp only for the Gordon reps. I hope this info is incorrect.

This is one of the big reasons there is the decline in this age group. If these boys are not committed to the comp they should no have access to this rep pathway.

 

[Inside Shoulder]

My information tells me that in the Gordon 16's teams Chatswood will not survive post state champo's, and Wahroongah will be signing boys on who are not playing in the village comp only for the Gordon reps. I hope this info is incorrect.

This is one of the big reasons there is the decline in this age group. If these boys are not committed to the comp they should no have access to this rep pathway.

I thought there was no comp post state champs.
It could get decidedly ugly if boys sign on but don't/won't play and there is forfeit on the basis that they only signed on for eligibility.
Hunter/Mosman U16s trial on Sunday had produced about 4 injuries so Im predicting problems with the "just signing on" model!!

 

[Quick Hands]

The whole model employed by some clubs is a problem. This is the same age group where when they were 13s Wahroonga recruited players from Manly to bolster their club side and the Gordon rep side. Not only is this model destructive to the very essence of the village club system, in which one would expect teams to be organic based on their local area, it is also not a good strategy long term for any district club.

I think it's no co-incidence that Gordon colts have struggled recently. I've heard the explanation of the letter that didn't go out, but I find in hard to accept that no-one played colts because they didn't receive a letter. I'd suggest that their treatment by the club in juniors would have a much bigger impact on them playing/not playing. Anyone who's played rugby since juniors would know about colts, they would also know how that club has treated them over the junior years.

 

[Inside Shoulder]

The problem with that is QH that 4(?) gordon juniors are over at the Wicks being sold the dream.
The letter was 2 seasons ago now so I agree that's not explaining the current issues.
As was explained to me today apparently the current crop in Gordon Colts were coached by Dempsey in u16s and won the state champs - further proof of the irrelevance of U18 performance to long term rugby potential?
I played gordon colts because they sent me a letter and my junior club did not!

 

[Quick Hands]

I'm not saying that Gordon are the only club acting in a particular way. If Gordon juniors are over at the Wicks then that is just as bad. My point is that from a whole club point of view, it's actually in your best interest to develop what you have rather than poach from elsewhere. Most people will cop playing Bs or Cs or 2nds or 3rds or whatever if the person ahead of them is part of the club and happens to be better than them, what most people won't cop is when people with no connection to the club or the area are brought in to form a super team. (I'm talking about juniors here, not SS or professional teams).

I think (can be corrected) that the team that Dempsey coached are currently in Year 12 - many at Riverview or Alos so might not be in colts until 2015.

 

[Brainstrust]

I'm not saying that Gordon are the only club acting in a particular way. If Gordon juniors are over at the Wicks then that is just as bad. My point is that from a whole club point of view, it's actually in your best interest to develop what you have rather than poach from elsewhere. Most people will cop playing Bs or Cs or 2nds or 3rds or whatever if the person ahead of them is part of the club and happens to be better than them, what most people won't cop is when people with no connection to the club or the area are brought in to form a super team. (I'm talking about juniors here, not SS or professional teams).

I think (can be corrected) that the team that Dempsey coached are currently in Year 12 - many at Riverview or Alos so might not be in colts until 2015.

Dempsey coached last years school leavers at Gordon for I think one year, and this current year 12 for a few years up until I think the 14's or 15's. Gordon has had quite a disruptive colts program for a few years and I think that they suffered this year because they had no firm program in place to promote. They have managed to rebuild from basically inheriting half a team to having two and a half colts teams. Next year will tell a lot to see if they can grab most of those juniors. The problem they and many other clubs face is that the best players receive multiple approaches from clubs and when they gave all those offers on the table they are in a position to choose what's best for their rugby. And sadly that isn't always staying with the club that they played their junior rugby with.

 

[Hugh Jarse]

This is what Buddha is telling us for Round 1, compared to previous years:
The figures are the number of teams in Sunday, or not Sunday Competitions.

Under 10
Not Sunday - 2011 = 22, 2012 = 17, 2013 = 19, 2014 = 22
Sunday - 2011 = 56, 2012 = 65, 2013 = 68, 2014 = 67
Total - 2011 = 78, 2012 = 82, 2013 = 87, 2014 = 89

Under 11
Not Sunday - 2011 = 9, 2012 = 16, 2013 = 18, 2014 = 12
Sunday - 2011 = 61, 2012 = 63, 2013 = 63, 2014 = 69
Total - 2011 = 70, 2012 = 79, 2013 = 81, 2014 = 81

Under 12
Not Sunday - 2011 = 5, 2012 = 17, 2013 = 8, 2014 = 13
Sunday - 2011 = 42, 2012 = 57, 2013 = 54, 2014 = 53
Total - 2011 = 47, 2012 = 74, 2013 = 62, 2014 = 66

Under 13
Not Sunday - 2011 = 6, 2012 = 11, 2013 = 3, 2014 = 0
Sunday - 2011 = 49, 2012 = 42, 2013 = 46, 2014 = 40
Total - 2011 = 55, 2012 = 53, 2013 = 49, 2014 = 40

Under 14
Not Sunday - 2011 = 7, 2012 = 9, 2013 = 0, 2014 = 0
Sunday - 2011 = 38, 2012 = 39, 2013 = 39, 2014 = 40
Total - 2011 = 45, 2012 = 48, 2013 = 39, 2014 = 40

Under 15
Not Sunday - 2011 = 2, 2012 = 4, 2013 = 5, 2014 = 0
Sunday - 2011 = 32, 2012 = 35, 2013 = 39, 2014 = 28
Total - 2011 = 34, 2012 = 39, 2013 = 44, 2014 = 28

Under 16
Not Sunday - 2011 = 3, 2012 = 7, 2013 = 0, 2014 = 0
Sunday - 2011 = 24, 2012 = 24, 2013 = 21, 2014 = 19
Total - 2011 = 27, 2012 = 31, 2013 = 13, 2014 = 19

Open
Not Sunday - 2011 = 1, 2012 = 6, 2013 = 0, 2014 = 0
Sunday - 2011 = 12, 2012 = 22, 2013 = 13, 2014 = 11
Total - 2011 = 13, 2012 = 28, 2013 = 13, 2014 = 11

All Grades (U10 - Open)
Not Sunday - 2011 = 55, 2012 = 87, 2013 = 53, 2014 = 47
Sunday - 2011 = 314, 2012 = 347, 2013 = 343, 2014 = 327
Total - 2011 = 369, 2012 = 434, 2013 = 396, 2014 = 374


Over the past 3 years, the team numbers for the Born 1996 cohort in the SJRU competition been thus: 34, 31, 13. (Under 18 this year - Some of these may be playing Opens, Some are in Colts)
Over the past 4 years, the team numbers for the Born 1997 cohort in the SJRU competition been thus: 45, 39, 13, 11 (Under 17 this year)
Over the past 4 years, the team numbers for the Born 1998 cohort in the SJRU competition been thus: 55, 48, 44, 19 (Under 16 this year)
Over the past 4 years, the team numbers for the Born 1999 cohort in the SJRU competition been thus: 47, 53, 39, 28 (Under 15 this year)
Over the past 4 years, the team numbers for the Born 2000 cohort in the SJRU competition been thus: 70, 74, 49, 40 (Under 14 this year)
Over the past 4 years, the team numbers for the Born 2001 cohort in the SJRU competition been thus: 78, 79, 62, 40 (Under 13 this year)
Over the past 3 years, the team numbers for the Born 2002 cohort in the SJRU competition been thus: 82, 81, 66 (Under 12 this year)
Over the past 2 years, the team numbers for the Born 2003 cohort in the SJRU competition been thus: 87, 81 (Under 11 this year)
This year the team numbers for the Born 2004 cohort (U10) in the SJRU competition is: 89

 

[Man on the hill]

All I'm hearing is discontent - unannounced forfeits / no shows - referees failing to appear - the draw being distributed later than even the poor standard that is normal for SJRU, the draw still being meddled with as late as Friday. A shambles as one old head described.

 

[sarcophilus]

It seems the age groups to target for recruiting over the next two years would be the U10 - U13 "tweens" big consumers of mum and dads attention/money and very fashion conscious. These age groups seemed to benefit greatly around the years associated with the world Cup. given the cup is in September advertising the universal nature of the sport may be of use. Maybe ignore the NAB as they seem to want to isolate "fortress Australia"

Retention of players will be difficult as Rugby does require a certain discipline and physicality not suited to all, but large scale recruitment may also bring an influx of those suited to the other vital disciplines in th4 game such as administration and adjudicating. Also addressing the future issues raised by MOTH as I am typing this

 

[Inside Shoulder]

competition is: 89

I wanted to see if there was a pattern in that when a cohort reaches a certain age the numbers follow a semi-predictable course.
There's more 16s than last year.
In the last 3 cohorts to move from 15s to 16s the decline has been:
3 teams
26 teams
15 teams
from 14s to 15s:
6
4
9

When kids move from primary to high school (12s to 13s) the losses have been
+6 (!!!)
25
22
I cannot really see much of pattern (except a variable rate of decline as they get older) this might explain why the SJRU finds it so difficult.

 

[Quick Hands]

The pattern, if there is one, is that 10s and 11s are going well and there seems to be quite a drop off at 12s. There wouldn't appear to be an outside influence such as private schools in this, as most 12 year olds are in Year 6. Then there is another drop off at 13s (Year 7) which steadies at 14s and there is a big drop off again at 15s on.

The only real explanation that I can think of for the drop off at 12 is that parents have had 2 years of traipsing all over Sydney on a Sunday and if their son is not really heading for the elite, they find something more local.

If I may offer a slightly old-fashioned view that SJRU is too big and unwieldy to run competitions. They've managed to reverse the economies of scale theory by making so big that it requires a rigid bureaucracy to run it. The zones weren't perfect, but they were more manageable in size and generally co-operated well to keep competitions going in the older age groups.

There is also the geographic size of Sydney to be considered and I suspect that many parents at the participation level would prefer to drive to the next suburb to lose that drive an hour and a half each way with their 10 year old. How parents with 3 or more boys playing cope when their kids could be anywhere between Sylvania, Blue Mountains, Windsor, Newport, Manly and Coogee I have no idea.

 

[Man on the hill]

The pattern, if there is one, is that 10s and 11s are going well and there seems to be quite a drop off at 12s. There wouldn't appear to be an outside influence such as private schools in this, as most 12 year olds are in Year 6. Then there is another drop off at 13s (Year 7) which steadies at 14s and there is a big drop off again at 15s on.

The only real explanation that I can think of for the drop off at 12 is that parents have had 2 years of traipsing all over Sydney on a Sunday and if their son is not really heading for the elite, they find something more local.

If I may offer a slightly old-fashioned view that SJRU is too big and unwieldy to run competitions. They've managed to reverse the economies of scale theory by making so big that it requires a rigid bureaucracy to run it. The zones weren't perfect, but they were more manageable in size and generally co-operated well to keep competitions going in the older age groups.

There is also the geographic size of Sydney to be considered and I suspect that many parents at the participation level would prefer to drive to the next suburb to lose that drive an hour and a half each way with their 10 year old. How parents with 3 or more boys playing cope when their kids could be anywhere between Sylvania, Blue Mountains, Windsor, Newport, Manly and Coogee I have no idea.

QH / please print this out & post it to SJRU Committee. Perhaps the best summary of the circumstances - the old system had its flaws but it did work. Maybe the "best" outcome would be a blend of sydney wide & geographically local comps.