InstantForum.NET v4.1.4Better Rugby Coachinghttp://www.betterrugbycoaching.com/rugbyforum/forum@betterrugbycoaching.comFri, 09 Jan 2009 23:21:17 GMT20http://www.betterrugbycoaching.com/rugbyforum/Topic1100-4-1.aspxThat's interesting and thanks for your comments everyone ....</P><P>I am aware of the idea that everyone is given a number at random, and I can see the benefits ... but it would be a departure from previous practice, last year we stuck with traditional numbering and I think there could well be muttering on the touchline if we changed it. </P><P>I am absolutely certain it would be seen by some as a step back to minis... Rightly or wrongly, as coaches we are amateurs and volunteers and we have to pick our battles carefully, as one can only win so many of them!</P><P>The other side of the coin is that last year a number of our regular players could not wear the "proper" number shirt anyway, as it was too small. So our "main" number 8 wore number 18, and our reserve wore 8...etc!</P><P>The comments about the reserve prop made me smile, have you been watching us play?:DThu, 14 Aug 2008 17:21:51 GMTFerrethttp://www.betterrugbycoaching.com/rugbyforum/Topic1100-4-1.aspxAt youth I think this makes a lot of sense. Refs just want a number to identify - "Get onside 7!" for instance. Refereeing games with and without numbers, I know which I prefer, no matter who plays where.Thu, 14 Aug 2008 16:47:30 GMTDanChttp://www.betterrugbycoaching.com/rugbyforum/Topic1100-4-1.aspxI have just ordered new shirts and asked for them [b]all [/b]to be numbered randomly rather than trying to second guess the enormous size variations in youth rugby. It should be interesting for referees but makes it easier to have the players believe you that they are a squad and not first and second string. The players already have a pecking order so I feel in the interests of morale and player retention that exclusive shirt numbering may be divisive at a young age. Any thoughts?:discuss:Thu, 14 Aug 2008 16:07:51 GMTbassferghttp://www.betterrugbycoaching.com/rugbyforum/Topic1100-4-1.aspxWhoops, meant two L and the rest M (adult sizes)Thu, 14 Aug 2008 16:01:32 GMTKeepsmilinghttp://www.betterrugbycoaching.com/rugbyforum/Topic1100-4-1.aspxFerret - bearing in mind the way that modern shirts are made, and that kids seem to be much bigger nowadays, don't bother with any size 'S' !<br><br>We go for two XL and the remainder L (youth sizes) or two M and the rest L (adult sizes), keeps everyone happy. There's nothing worse than the reserve prop having to squeeze into a shirt that makes the poor lad look like a burst tyre (I've been there...)Thu, 14 Aug 2008 16:00:48 GMTKeepsmilinghttp://www.betterrugbycoaching.com/rugbyforum/Topic1100-4-1.aspxThe classical repartition for the replacement players :<br>16 : hooker<br>17 : prop<br>18 : lock<br>19 : backrower<br>20 : half<br>21 : center<br>22 : wing/fullback<br><br>But some coaches like to have more forwards, usually 2 props, and then #22 is a "utility back".Mon, 11 Aug 2008 09:55:52 GMTJacqueshttp://www.betterrugbycoaching.com/rugbyforum/Topic1100-4-1.aspxWould be glad to hear members' comments ... I am sorting out new match shirts for the new season and am trying to match them to the size of the boys who are likely to play in them ... 1 to 15 are (fairly) easy but there are different views in our coaching team as to 16 to 22.</P><P>Are there any real conventions as to which subs/replacements should wear which numbers? Or is it purely down to team preference?</P><P>Thanks - FerretMon, 11 Aug 2008 09:19:46 GMTFerret