The give it to the big lad happens because that's what coaches encourage both in training and on game day. At junior level the big lad will prosper regardless of who he faces.

Players will do what the coaches tell them and encourage them to do. If at every training session players practice the skills and are encouraged to use them on game day they'll use them. Its that attitude in coaches we have to change, not picking and choosing who are the best 10 year olds and funnelling them into some sort of performance based system at such a young age.


That will happen at every level. Some just find that environment fits them. The big problem is the step between academy and SL. The step between amateur and SL is only a problem because the right skills aren't taught at junior level.


Yeah but that's nothing to do with him not playing with or against good enough players when he was 10 years old. It's to do with the fact he went from playing against 17/18 year olds to playing against men at the elite level with no step in between. The lack of a 2nd team or feeder league like in Australia.


Yes they will. If you coach them properly they will. They're young kids, they do what they're told and encouraged to do.

Thurston and Cronk are in a class of their own.

Johnson is good but can disappear. See many games he's had for the Warriors and NZ versus Samoa.

When you consider the number of halfbacks playing the game in Australia it shows the problem of how many you have to develop before you get the real world class ones. They have lots of decent enough ones but apart from Cronk and Thurston none are much different to Widdop and Smith in ability.

At 12 to 13 the size gap widens if anything, your looking around 15 when the gap is drawn back in.

I believe they use or used the same size system in Oz, the drawback to it is if you have a big 11/12 year old playing against a kid 2/3 years older (not sure what limits they put on it) of the same height and weight but not maturity or muscular development.

Core skils ,movement skills and mental skills for all players are a must.

I currently coach at age U13 and am have taken part in the RFLs Embed The Pathway program, one of the aims of which is allowing all players to develop to their potential and not to rule out certain players at an early age. The relative age effect has a massive part on our game as the early developers dominate in our age bracket, yet theres kids with all the right attributes who do get overlooked.

I find the program and its content very helpful and its helped me develop as a coach and re-think certain aspects, im always open to learn but for everyone of me there's 2/3 old school who go down the win at all costs routes, were flat tracking teams is seen as a major achievement.

Spot on.

I think your last point is nonsense to be honest. it is nothing to do with 'control' its common sense. You are saying that a coaches job at that age is to, what could legitimately be described, as making his player play worse. Kids, parents, coaches everyone wants to win. You are demanding they do something other than try to win. Even more than it forcing teams to do things that aren't working as well at that level, It doesn't make sense that forcing the young Thurston to ignore that massive gaping hole in the defensive line in favour of running a set play to an inferior player is going to make him better. It wont. The difficult part of being a half back is not running, passing or kicking or running a set play, its knowing when to run, when to pass, when to kick and when to run that set play. Teaching kids to pass regardless of what they see isn't going to produce generation of world class half backs, it would produce a generation who wont recognise whats in front them.

I don't dispute that at young ages things like more small sided games, weight restrictions, and better coaches teaching better skills and a focus in coaching them is massively important. But that is an entirely different thing to not funnelling talent to a level congruent with that talent. Every sport in the world does so. Players improve playing with and against better players.

In fact what, I agree with Hutchie, that there will always be coaches who prepare teams to win, and its difficult to say they are doing a bad job. But them doing so effects everything. Kids however talented aren't going to enjoy getting beat, they definitely wont enjoy losing by big margins, they certainly wont stop doing the things that are working when that is one of the reasons they are losing big.

Thats a 2 edged sword for me, i know some very good coaches who would struggle to handle a bunch of 10 year olds, i also know some coaches who revel at the primary ages but you wouldnt want them anywere near youth rugby. It doesnt make you a bad coach and i would encourage all to try various age groups and come out there comfort zones to test their skills, but my philosphy is that i am not just here to teach I am also here to learn.

For what it's worth, for the last few years the Knights have been spending millions on juniors and the results have been remarkable.
They set up what was called the "High Performance Unit" which had it's own coach (former firstgrade halfback Troy Pezet) and their own trainer (a Phd qualified pom). The first real graduate is Sione Mataútia, who has just played for Australia at 18, but the two real stars of the programme are halfback and 5/8 Jack Cogger (son of Trevor Cogger) and Brock Lamb. Those two are 17 years old and have played for Australia and NSW at every age level for the last 3 years and will be on the Australian Schoolboys tour of the UK soon. They are already stars in the under 20s comp and took the Knights to a minor premiership.
Anyway, given a lot of talent to start with and their own quality coach and trainer (shared with about 15 other talented kids across all age groups) they have developed skills a lot of firstgrade halfbacks would be envious of. Lamb has a better kicking game than Luke Walsh.
So all it takes is a few million dollars.

It's not nonsense to suggest that junior coach should be the one in charge of his team and not the juniors themselves!
It's also not nonsense to suggest that an u11's coach should be looking at something other than simply winning the next game. That right there is THE problem with the amateur game in a nutshell. It's actually not the coach's job to win the next game. It's the coach's job to teach the basic skills to as many kids as possible. That entails a fun environment not a pressured one. Now it's important to win SOME games in the year as, as you say, no-one enjoys getting beaten every week. But winning every week doesn't teach the kids their skills.
The really difficult part is the decision making and no-one is saying you never let the kids have a go. But it's your job as coach to provide a structure to their game. Firstly to allow the kids to use the skills you should be teaching them during the week, that are also lacking in general, but also, more passing gets the ball to more kids and so involves, for example, the ones stuck out on the wings who rarely get the ball. Also, at junior level, the big gaps are usually found on the wings, not in the middle. What you get in the middle is missed tackles. Which doesn't help at all with the halfbacks skills because at some point as he goes up the pyramid those missed tackles stop happening.

So you agree coaches should teach and encourage the skills but then call my post nonsense?
I've been coaching kids for over 10 years, I would struggle to say categorically who would benefit from being funnelled into a performance based system at 10 years old. Some probably would, but the majority, in my view, would suffer from being moved away from friends at their original club and then being in a pressured environment at a very, very young age.
It's not necessary and is counter productive in my view. At this age we just need lots of kids practicing the skills.

The skills gained from playing against "good opposition" come much, much later. We've to teach them how to pass & catch and gain confidence tackling first.

I actually agree but I'd say it does make them a bad coach at that level. Shaun Wane seems to be a pretty good coach, I don't think I'd want him coaching an u11's team though...

Yes that was sort of my point, in defence of the coach though it may be he's been chucked in at that level as he is the only one available/ willing volunteer / kids dad etc, you know what a struggle it is and how certain teams do struggle.

Any junior coach that doesnt prioritise learning skills as well as winning ( within reason ) will only ' win ' in the short term , and will eventually be overtaken by others as their players catch up sizewise

Instill good practise and emphasise skills will eventually win you more games when it counts

Having attended seminars hosted by pro coaches, their biggest gripe was having to start coaching 16/17 yr olds basic skills

Agreed. Smith is a capable journeyman halfback but out of his depth at international level but I thought we were let down in the back row. Particularly by Tomkins who did not look fit to me.

What P/Sports did during the Aussie play offs was to also screen the Holden Cup sides, the NRLs under20s competition.

It was a revelation to be honest, the quality of play was practically up to the NRL itself and the differences on view between the amateur or academy game here were immense.
At the Warriors (eventual champions) there were quite a few really exciting lads there who will be pushing for NRL spots in the not too distant future, some already gaining them.
I believe that the lad who played at F/B, for the Warriors, will be giving 'SAM' a bit of push for the F/B NRL spot soon and, that this could see Tomkins having to fit into the halves, like it or lump it. From an English POV, the sooner the better.

Back to the point of coaching. There was evident, a vast difference of approach to the playing of the game than you see from similar aged lads over here, both of flair and also structured play.
It stood out a mile that a hell of a lot of useful time and hard work, had been used in reaching the standards that these young men had at their disposal and really, we are, with our approaches to players in these categories of players, much more than miles behind.

At what ages these lads have been nurtured from I have no idea, but the time invested has clearly been put to excellent use. I hope P/Sports repeats the exercise next term, it really is well worth watching.

this obviously does not appertain to the Aussies alone as it was the Warriors that eventually came out winners, but only narrowly from a B/Bronco's side. It was frightening to watch and I doubt that the bottom half of S/L would have had a stroll against any of those under20s sides that I had the pleasure of watching.