This week most teams begin their season. Despite temperatures an average of 15 degrees below normal, everybody's excited about the upcoming games.
Although they haven't been updated in two weeks, Rugby Magazine's most recently posted girls rankings see Kettle Moraine move into the Top 10, after not being ranked. This is probably in recognition of their impressive fall season, with their only two losses coming to DSHA. Brookfield drops to #13 without losing a match. Sorry ladies! Probably just an adjustment in fairness to Kettle Moraine's higher finish.
It should be pointed out that these rankings are not the work of WGR, nor do they express the opinions of any WGR staff or adminstration. They are mentioned here purely to generate interest and debate, as well as, perhaps, motivation.
While it appears that only three of the teams in the top twenty field players from only one school, these three single school teams are all in the top ten. Most of the programs listed draw players from mutiple schools.
GIRLS HIGH SCHOOL/U19 TOP 201
(1) Summit (Colo.) (8-0). Idle
2 (3) DSHA (Wisc.) (7-1). Idle
3 (4) Fallbrook (Calif.) (2-0). Defeated Hawaiian Gardens 75-0, Back Bay 53-7
4 (5) Kent (Wash.) (2-0). Defeated West Linn 24-0, Budd Bay 20-0
5 (2) Sacramento Amazons (Calif.) (1-1). Dftd Alameda 51-5, lost to Mthr Lode 22-10
6 (unr) Kettle Morraine (Wisc.) (6-2). Idle
7 (unr) St. Joseph's Academy (Ohio) (8-1). Idle
8 (9) West Carroll (Md.). Idle
9 (8) Portland (Maine). Idle
10 (19) Mother Lode (Calif.) (2-0). Dftd Lobo Girls 66-12, Sac Amazons 22-10
11 (10) Canby (Ore.). Idle
12 (11) Douglas County (Colo.) (6-2). Idle
13 (6) Brookfield (Wisc.) (4-4).
14 (12) Ravenwood (Tenn.). (1-0). Defeated Independence 43-17
15 (13) Fairax (Va.). Idle
16 (17) Maryville (Tenn.) (1-0). Defeated McMinn 109-0
17 (14) Fullerton (Calif.) (1-1). Lost to Back Bay 15-5, defeated SOC Gators 68-0
18 (15) Fairport (NY). Idle
19 (16) Fox Chapel (Pa.). Idle
20 (18) North Clackamas (Ore.). Idle 20 (20) Harbour (Wash.). Idle
Monday, March 28, 2011
Tuesday, March 22, 2011
Tuesday, March 15, 2011
The Substitution Laws
The Substitution Law
In an older era, rugby teams started a game with fifteen players, and if a player was unable to continue, they played short. It was an accomplishment of stamina and toughness to finish a match. Each game had a sense of accomplishment attached to it. Later, changes were made to allow the replacement of injured players. This made sense, since playing injured could lead to further injury.
This was taken another step farther with the introduction of tactical substitutions. A quick summary of the laws, taken from Rugby Football History, is quoted below:
“The Replacement of injured players was added to the 1968-69 Laws (law 12: up to two players per team).
Mike Gibson replaced Barry John in the Lion’s first test against South Africa in 1968 was the first official replacement in a test match (although replacements happened unofficially in New Zealand, South Africa and Australia before that.
Tactical substitutions were introduced in 1996 (three replacements).”
Eventually substitutions were increased to seven per match. Some professional competitions recently adopted an eighth substitute that can only be a front row player to prevent uncontested scrums. The one caveat is that substituted players cannot return to the match, except as a “blood sub.” Just as in other sports, a player with blood must be substituted, treated, and may return. In rugby the player has ten minutes to be treated, and then may return if the referee deems their return clean and safe.
Last week’s story brings up the issue of substitutions with youth teams. Would allowing players to be substituted and then to return later, be better for the youth game? Certainly it would help more kids get on the pitch. Young players could more experience and coaching: they could be subbed out, and coach could immediately address situations in the game with the player. It could be a great teaching tool. Then, they could return to immediately apply what they’ve learned. Furthermore, newer or younger players could be given five or ten minutes of experience in the middle of a match. This would help keep players happier, more focused, and would improve their development. It may also have benefits for less fit players. They could contribute to the team as they continue to progress as athletes.
How many of you coaches have also felt unable to substitute a player out, because that player coming off is your backup 9,10, and 15 or some other combination that experienced players offer? Teams with that tricky middle number of 24 players could get everyone in the game. This would also be safer. Some young players just aren’t ready for the physical demands of a full sixty minutes of an a-side level high school rugby match.
Now, Wisconsin High School soccer allows players to be substituted in and out of matches, without slowing the match down. In rugby this could be done after a score, at injury minutes, or lineouts near one’s own sideline. That way the flow wouldn’t be interrupted.
On the other side of the argument is tradition and character. Would we be losing part of what makes rugby so unique and special if this change were made? Is it worth the trade off?
So, coaches and players, what do you think?
In an older era, rugby teams started a game with fifteen players, and if a player was unable to continue, they played short. It was an accomplishment of stamina and toughness to finish a match. Each game had a sense of accomplishment attached to it. Later, changes were made to allow the replacement of injured players. This made sense, since playing injured could lead to further injury.
This was taken another step farther with the introduction of tactical substitutions. A quick summary of the laws, taken from Rugby Football History, is quoted below:
“The Replacement of injured players was added to the 1968-69 Laws (law 12: up to two players per team).
Mike Gibson replaced Barry John in the Lion’s first test against South Africa in 1968 was the first official replacement in a test match (although replacements happened unofficially in New Zealand, South Africa and Australia before that.
Tactical substitutions were introduced in 1996 (three replacements).”
Eventually substitutions were increased to seven per match. Some professional competitions recently adopted an eighth substitute that can only be a front row player to prevent uncontested scrums. The one caveat is that substituted players cannot return to the match, except as a “blood sub.” Just as in other sports, a player with blood must be substituted, treated, and may return. In rugby the player has ten minutes to be treated, and then may return if the referee deems their return clean and safe.
Last week’s story brings up the issue of substitutions with youth teams. Would allowing players to be substituted and then to return later, be better for the youth game? Certainly it would help more kids get on the pitch. Young players could more experience and coaching: they could be subbed out, and coach could immediately address situations in the game with the player. It could be a great teaching tool. Then, they could return to immediately apply what they’ve learned. Furthermore, newer or younger players could be given five or ten minutes of experience in the middle of a match. This would help keep players happier, more focused, and would improve their development. It may also have benefits for less fit players. They could contribute to the team as they continue to progress as athletes.
How many of you coaches have also felt unable to substitute a player out, because that player coming off is your backup 9,10, and 15 or some other combination that experienced players offer? Teams with that tricky middle number of 24 players could get everyone in the game. This would also be safer. Some young players just aren’t ready for the physical demands of a full sixty minutes of an a-side level high school rugby match.
Now, Wisconsin High School soccer allows players to be substituted in and out of matches, without slowing the match down. In rugby this could be done after a score, at injury minutes, or lineouts near one’s own sideline. That way the flow wouldn’t be interrupted.
On the other side of the argument is tradition and character. Would we be losing part of what makes rugby so unique and special if this change were made? Is it worth the trade off?
So, coaches and players, what do you think?
Thursday, March 10, 2011
The Rugby Spirit Moment of the Season?
It's basically a playoff game. The two top teams in the conference. Neither team has been seriously tested until this match. Both sides are anxious, athletic, and amped up. They go at it, back and forth. One side gets up; the other claws back.
This was the scene of the Northshore - Menomonee Falls match at the end of the regular season. Amidst this all, there's the background too: of Northshore losing their back captain, Sydney Tabakin, to a tragic car crash earlier in the year. And of Falls being a first-year team to conference play and finidng itself loaded with athleticism and potential, making a remarkable run at the playoffs.
Like many smaller teams, Northshore struggled with numbers in the teens. Their captain kept getting dinged up, taking an injury minute on two occassions. Finally, nearing the end of the half she comes off the pitch for a subsitute. At the second-half kickoff, she asks to be subbed back on, having gotten herself back together, along with some tape. The referee, knowing this is a conference match, follows the laws and won't let her back on. Confusion. Tears. From Northshore's point of view, they'd had some earlier blowouts, and as frequently happens these teams suspended the subsitution laws, in the best interest of getting kids to play more.
But this was different. Right?
Then the Menomonee Falls captain stepped up to the ref, "It's okay sir. Just let her play." A quick confirmation from the sir, "You sure?" And the reply comes immediately, "Yep."
A knowing glance and nod is briefly exchanged between oppossing captains; a quiet recognition of mutual respect that most everyone else misses.
There are a lot of great plays and moves over the course of a season. Then there are the gestures that make coaches, teammates, and yes, even opponents, proud to play rugby.
This was the scene of the Northshore - Menomonee Falls match at the end of the regular season. Amidst this all, there's the background too: of Northshore losing their back captain, Sydney Tabakin, to a tragic car crash earlier in the year. And of Falls being a first-year team to conference play and finidng itself loaded with athleticism and potential, making a remarkable run at the playoffs.
Like many smaller teams, Northshore struggled with numbers in the teens. Their captain kept getting dinged up, taking an injury minute on two occassions. Finally, nearing the end of the half she comes off the pitch for a subsitute. At the second-half kickoff, she asks to be subbed back on, having gotten herself back together, along with some tape. The referee, knowing this is a conference match, follows the laws and won't let her back on. Confusion. Tears. From Northshore's point of view, they'd had some earlier blowouts, and as frequently happens these teams suspended the subsitution laws, in the best interest of getting kids to play more.
But this was different. Right?
Then the Menomonee Falls captain stepped up to the ref, "It's okay sir. Just let her play." A quick confirmation from the sir, "You sure?" And the reply comes immediately, "Yep."
A knowing glance and nod is briefly exchanged between oppossing captains; a quiet recognition of mutual respect that most everyone else misses.
There are a lot of great plays and moves over the course of a season. Then there are the gestures that make coaches, teammates, and yes, even opponents, proud to play rugby.
Wednesday, March 2, 2011
"Rugby in America: Worth a Try"
Rugby coaches and players aften remark how this sport is the fastest growing in the country. I've seen the same claim made anecdotally by a few other sports as well. The article below quotes some statistics from an independent business group that support the claim that, yes, rugby is the fastest growing team sport in America.
Rugby in America: Worth a try
More and more Americans are being converted to the sport
Feb 3rd 2011 SAN FRANCISCO
Some passages below from a recent article in the Economist:
"Last year almost 360,000 children played a non-contact form of the sport at school, according to USA Rugby, the sport’s national governing body. That has helped raise rugby’s profile: a study by America’s Sporting Goods Manufacturers Association (SGMA) found that between 2007 and 2009 (the latest year for which data is available), it was the fastest-growing team sport in the country, outpacing rivals such as lacrosse and hockey. In 2009, says the SGMA, some 750,000 Americans played rugby, over 20% more than in 2007. “For the sport to be on our radar screen is a sign it’s got some legs,” says Mike May, an executive at the association."
"To bolster the game’s appeal, USA Rugby is launching a college premier league next month that will see teams compete in four regional “conferences”, with the top two from each conference heading to playoffs in May. The league’s promoters hope it will act as a magnet for high-school players, as well as introducing rugby to more students."
"The sport in America also stands to gain from the fact that a seven-a-side version of rugby (as opposed to the standard 15-a-side contest) will be included in the 2016 and perhaps the 2020 Olympic games. The last time rugby featured in the Olympics, back in 1924, America won the gold medal. Although a repeat performance is unlikely in five years’ time in Rio de Janeiro, the prospect of representing the USA Eagles, as the national team is known, should attract more athletes to the game. Some impressive players already compete in an annual super league competition, which includes teams from some of America’s 2,400-odd rugby clubs."
Rugby in America: Worth a try
More and more Americans are being converted to the sport
Feb 3rd 2011 SAN FRANCISCO
Some passages below from a recent article in the Economist:
"Last year almost 360,000 children played a non-contact form of the sport at school, according to USA Rugby, the sport’s national governing body. That has helped raise rugby’s profile: a study by America’s Sporting Goods Manufacturers Association (SGMA) found that between 2007 and 2009 (the latest year for which data is available), it was the fastest-growing team sport in the country, outpacing rivals such as lacrosse and hockey. In 2009, says the SGMA, some 750,000 Americans played rugby, over 20% more than in 2007. “For the sport to be on our radar screen is a sign it’s got some legs,” says Mike May, an executive at the association."
"To bolster the game’s appeal, USA Rugby is launching a college premier league next month that will see teams compete in four regional “conferences”, with the top two from each conference heading to playoffs in May. The league’s promoters hope it will act as a magnet for high-school players, as well as introducing rugby to more students."
"The sport in America also stands to gain from the fact that a seven-a-side version of rugby (as opposed to the standard 15-a-side contest) will be included in the 2016 and perhaps the 2020 Olympic games. The last time rugby featured in the Olympics, back in 1924, America won the gold medal. Although a repeat performance is unlikely in five years’ time in Rio de Janeiro, the prospect of representing the USA Eagles, as the national team is known, should attract more athletes to the game. Some impressive players already compete in an annual super league competition, which includes teams from some of America’s 2,400-odd rugby clubs."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)