Don't let the NRL ruin junior rugby league

If the kids dont get to tackle then it wont be real footy to them and they will play another sport. And if you are supportive of those initives then i highly doubt your kids would have played anyway. As some one said above thier is touch and oz tag available for those that are afraid of thier kids getting hurt . who are they to stop the rest of the kids from having fun.

And exactly that will be done. Way to miss the point completely. The changes ensure that kids are TAUGHT to tackle before they are expected to tackle or be tackled in game situations.

What makes you think it's the kids who need to learn to win and lose?!!. Kids are fine it's the parents who need to learn that it's not that important. As adults we play social tennis, cards golf etc and we play to have fun and winning is not important. If I told members of our social golf club they have to train twice a week and blow up when my partner slices into the trees I wouldn't have too many partners, unfortunately we don't afford that same right to ten year olds.

I think a lot of you are missing what has happened in the real world. Head knocks impact players immensely. Especially kids who may take some time to learn to tackle properly. Take out the collisions at those ages, allow them to develop skills, and then when the time is right, introduce tackling. It also allows kids to last a lot longer in the sport, and hopefully continue to play with some confidence when tackling is introduced to there age group.

Your final point about the age rule being abused to get large kids playing down a level won;t be as much of a risk if coupled with the no grand finals until u13. In the years before that there won;t be an incentive to try and stack a team in that way.

What do you think the fundamental reason is that parents don't allow their children to play rugby league? The collisions right? Take the collisions out of the game while they learn how to run step, swerve etc. Let them learn tackling and falling techniques at training for a couple of years and then introduce it to games. Once a kid is in a team for a few years and the parents form friendships, they are far less likely to be removed. Junior numbers are dying and so will the game. Right now there is zero percent chance my wife will let my son play when he is old enough. With these initiatives he would have a chance (though I would allow competitive games from about 8 or so.

Your last point isn’t a valid concern. Kids want to play against kids in the same school year. The rule is designed to: 1. stop those kids who were born at the end of the year but went to school in the next year from having to play with kids who aren’t their friends. 2. Allow genuinely small kids to play against kids their own size. The idea that all the average sized kids born in July will all move down an age group is fanciful nonsense. They don’t want to play with younger kids.

Just a few thoughts. It's important for kids to learn how to tackle BUT it is even more important for children to learn how to land safely. The latter skill can be used in all manner of physical games young ones play, so teaching children how to tackle safely and land safely will increase confidence but also help avoid injuries. I think games should be competitive at any age BUT comradeship, support for other players, acknowledgement it is only a game, etc are equally important lessons for children to learn. Once the games are finished, BOTH sides get together, shake hands, share a drink, etc. More importantly, parents from both sides at the least should shake hands and acknowledge the opposition team. This would send a clear message to the kids but would hopefully reduce some of the horrible behaviours some parents exhibit on the sidelines. The issue about what level or age group kids should play is at the same time easy and complex. It's easy because it affects only a small percentage of players, but complex because of the issues that need to be worked out when deciding what level a child should play. Before the season starts, each under 13 side identifies those players it thinks should play up or down. The player, parents and coach front a committee made up of one or two reps from outside the Club and they go through the relevant factors; age, size, skills, ability to cope, etc. A decision is made which can be reviewed any time.

Again and again for last 50 years attempts have been made to have no tackle or molly coddle kids under 13. Under 10s was the early major attempt which did produce mini and mod football which still retained tackles and has held game in good stead. By saying non competitive they are only trying to say if your little team gets overrun by a huge islander team its ok as no real competition. Wrong wrong call.

I also agree with two of those initiatives. Tackling needs to be preserved, obviously, as kids need to learn those fundamentals early on. If there was no tackling you might as well abolish junior RL and flood the touch comps with kids. No comp until U13s is a great idea, as it shuts down the ultra competitive coaches that break kids hearts. My son was a late signer with the local club as was told that due to signing up late, he was relegated to the B team. The next season we signed him up at 9AM on the first days of sign-ups and the same coach relegated him to the B team again. His reasoning was that he didn't want my son in his team, and there was another one available for him to move to. When challenged on his stance the previous season we were advised that he can do whatever he wants, and the rules didn't apply to him. The B team coach was in no way qualified to coach, and the B side was noticeably far less skilled in games because of this. The two teams trained side by side, and coach A refused to help coach B with the kids. It was, and is, a travesty. Not to mention all those arse-hat parents screaming on the sideline and bagging/threatening refs. Removing the competition provides extra validation that their behaviour is unacceptable. Having kids born after June 20 being allowed to play in the grade below is a good idea, provided it's not abused to get large kids playing against small kids in younger grades. There can be massive differences in physical development as kids grow, even over period as small as 6-12 months.

A better solution regarding weight for age needs to be the main focus instead of dancing around the issue with these other fringe agendas. The REAL problem is a 40kg kid having to play against someone twice their size. This leads to kids dropping out of the sport eventually.

I can't sign your petition sorry as I am ok with 2 of the 3 initiatives. I have no problem with the idea of introducing tackling later. I wasn't allowed to play league as a kid, I would have without the tackling and by the time the kid is in a team environment and been learning skills at training, it will be harder for the parent to pull the kid from the team, so I actually think this is a very good idea. I don't like the no grand finals until u/13's. I think there are a whole range of reasons why kids should be allowed to compete and you are punishing the kids because of parent behaviour, and that isn't fair. As for the age thing - they have some compelling data, so who am I to argue with that until someone comes up with a better solution to the weight/age issue which has been a challenge since day dot.