From SARugby.net
September 04, 2014
A schools rugby coach who breached South African Rugby Union (SARU) rules governing under age rugby has been suspended and the points his school took for the match were overturned, following a SARU disciplinary hearing.The charge was the first brought to SARU under new regulations that were introduced to protect players under the age of 18 at the start of last season.
They stipulate that no player may appear for a team if he is over age or if he is more than two years younger than the maximum stipulated age for that particular age group. In practice the regulations means that in under-13 rugby, for example, only players who are turning 12 or 13 in the year of play can appear. Players, who are 13 at the time of the match, but turning 14 in the same year, would be ineligible. Similarly a player turning 11 in the same year (or younger) would be ineligible.
“The safety of rugby players at all ages is of paramount importance to SARU,” said Jurie Roux, CEO of SARU. “These critical regulations were approved and brought into force last year by all 14 member provinces to ensure the safety of players at schoolboy age.
“Prior to their introduction there was the danger of players as young as 14 or 15 playing against boys of 19 with all the inherent risks that that implies.
“These regulations were passed to outlaw that dangerous practice and we will pursue those who breach these regulations.” Roux said that the rules did allow for the age band to be expanded to a maximum of three years for specific high school players in exceptional circumstances, and only upon official application and approval received by the provincial unions. But those exceptions would only be granted if a number of compulsory criteria were fulfilled on the recommendation of a qualified IRB Level II coach.
“The regulations have required a cultural change at schoolboy rugby level where age may not have been a factor in selection before,” said Roux. “But they have been introduced for the benefit and safety of players.
“Coaches must understand that if they breach these regulations and players are seriously injured as a result that they have potentially laid themselves open not only to SARU’s disciplinary code but also to the criminal courts.
“These are important regulations that we take very seriously.”
The regulations are part of SARU’s BokSmart national rugby safety campaign and can be found in full at http://boksmart.sarugby.co.za/content/boksmart-legislation
In the match in question, players from the De Aar Secondary School were falsely passed off as being Under-17 in a match against Vaalharts Secondary School, when, in fact, they were 18.
Mr Jan Botha, the coach responsible, was suspended from all forms of rugby under the jurisdiction of SARU for six months (suspended for one year) and the league points earned by De Aar were forfeited and credited to Vaalharts.
@GreenBlooded: Can’t u16 boys can play for the 1st team provided that there is no u19 player in the opposition team? Most do not play for the 1st team as their participation would be a very stop-start affaire.
If not, wouldn’t the ISRF at Michaelhouse a few months ago have broken the rules in many games, as most of the teams had u16 players.
@GreenBlooded: This whole over age issue is a moot point with me. I hope Saru once a for all agrees on the age for schoolboy rugby. I think it would alleviate a number of problems. At the moment U/19 kids may play SBR. If that is the rule fine but then the rule governing the open ages will have to be amended.
No doubt a big guy, handsomely endowered with facial hair would easily be picked up by refs for being of a different age to the rest of the team. But, what if the guy is slightly built and looks no older than the peers in the teem. He will probably play although the rule is broken.
This is where SARU needs to consentrate. If we say all SBR is U/18 then it would solve that problem but the poor kid that started school late would never be able to play with his class peers.
This is a tricky situation. SARU has by implication ruled that SBR is only up to U/18 with the Craven week being U/18 and SA schools also U/18.
@Pedantic: An U16 player is still out of the U18 age band. He would have to have the Schedule A forms approved and Schedule B for front row players. We (referees) have recently been given a directive to tighten up on this aspect. The Schedule A and B forms as required need to be presented at the field. No forms – no play.
@GreenBlooded: WRT to point 2 … I was under the impression that the Tier 2 schools in KZN had agreed to limit their open rugby to Under 18, which would in turn give their Under 16’s opportunity to participate in the open age group.
Has this not been the case this year ?
The examples you mention about coaches simply changing the birthdate on the teamsheet are probably the reason why SARU had to make an example of the coach in question – blase attitude can lead to tragedy.
Whilst these age-banding regulations are very necessary in my opinion, there are 2 unfortunate consequences that have come about because of them:
1. U14 players at primary school.
Primary school is banded as U13, which means only boys turning 12 or 13 in the year in question can play. Often there are U14 boys who have either had a remedial year somewhere down the line or for whatever reason started school a year late that cannot play for their schools. Despite this well known rule, I have still come across some primary schools who try and sneak U14 boys onto fields. As a referee I have on quite a few occasions had to send U14 boys back to the changeroom before the team runs on – heartbreaking. Normally results in tears from the boy, a full-of-kak attitude from the coach and an old man that want’s to bliksem me. Somehow a solution needs to be found for these boys. Playing for the local high school has problems. Colts club rugby is a great idea – but that is only in the 3rd term when his mates are finished playing – he still spends the entire 2nd term watching his mates from sideline.
2. U16 Players in Tier2/3 Schools
In times gone by, if a school could not garner enough U16 players to make up a team, these players would slot into the 3rds and 2nds. Or 1sts if they were good enough! This is no longer allowed. So what option do these boys have? Not many. Colts rugby once again – but this is only in the 3rd term. Nevertheless, what is not acceptable is schools who BLATANTLY LIE about a players age to get him into the open teams. I have seen this with my own eyes at a school where a player I recognized from Club rugby was playing for the 2nd team and I knew this player to be U16. Later on when I drew the players birth certificate from club rugby records, his date of birth was exactly the same as on the Boksmart team sheet – but the year had been changed from 1998 (U16) to 1997 (U17)!! I enquired of another father how his lighty managed to play 1st team the whole season when he was U16 – he casually remarked “They just change his birth date on that form that they have to give to the ref”. Nice!!
Anecdotal – but a real headache. How do we make sure the (very necessary) rules are enforced but at the same time take into account the boys who just want to play the game but cant??
And boys that are 20 and over?? They should be playing senior rugby, let alone u20.