Should giant held-back-a-year child be allowed to play rugby out of year group?

[Onthetrain75]

There is a child in my son’s year 7 who would technically be a year 8 but has been held back for academic reasons. He’s a sturdy big child, I would say around 5ft 6 and 10 stone.

He’s a keen rugby player and is playing down a year to be with his class mates. But I’ve heard rumblings from other schools that parents aren’t happy he is playing under 12s when he should be under 13. Mostly I think they are concerned about safety of the other kids though I think they probably would also prefer the scores if he didn’t play.

I don’t know whether to say anything to his mum about the bad feeling that I know this is causing. What do you think?

YANBU - let him play with his mates
YABU - given his size and age he should be playing under 13s.

Dd played, we had to provide a copy of her passport to prove her age. You can't play in the wrong year group for inter school or club

What's the relevance that he's been held back a year?

He is a year too old for the team.

Children the same age come in all shapes and sizes.

He is not the same age.

Is he 12, or 13? That would seem to be the deciding factor on whether you play in an under -12s match.

The three male family members or friends of mine who are male and 12-13yo are 6’3, 6’3 and 5’10

They all tower over me. Why would 5’6 be considered a problem?

There's probably a few inches and a few kg different between him and the biggest boy in year 7 to be honest

Rugby although a contact sport and physical once they get to puberty it's like a pick and mix, who's sprouting, who's putting on weight who isn't and before you know it they are all 18+ and in the men's team where your winger is about 1.7m and 80kg and your tighthead prop is 1.9m and 126kg.

Just the way it is.

If he's under 13 still then of course he can play - it's split by age, not year group.

Y7 is U12 I think. Which this boy isn't as he is a year too old - you yourself said "it's split by age not year group".

I would leave this to the coaches - they will be aware of the issues

If he’s U13 he shouldn’t be playing with U12s. I don’t see that it’s your place to tell his mother unless you are the coach, in which case you should have enforced the rules long ago.

Regardless it will resolve itself; the rumblings will simply turn into open challenge. It’s not unheard of for coaches to carry proof of age for unusually big children who are nevertheless playing in the correct category.

I strongly suspect that the OP has got her facts wrong here. If that is not the case then yes I feel that she should approach the school/ club as the rules are very clear that this is not allowed. (Any competent PE teacher should know this.)

@2boys21

How can you have am under 12s team but also an under 13s team? Maybe I have misunderstood. I have never heard of a child being held back a year either even if they are behind

"U12" basically means "the season in which you turn 12"

You can play up a year but not down.

Obviously for things like PE it’s done in classes so difficult for him to join another group he’s the right age for.

But for playing on a team it should be purely by age. Yes there are kids of all shapes and sizes within an age group but that’s life. What’s not fair is a child who’s a year older, bigger and stronger playing against younger children

But you can’t speak to his mum, what do you expect her to say?! If you’re concerned raise it with whoever organises the team, if you have a child who’s affected.

He should play in his age group absolutely. There are age groups for a reason. His intelligence levels are irrelevant

No you shouldn't warn the mum. If you know there are rumblings (or you genuinely think there's a safety issue) then suggest that the rumbling parents contact the coach and reference the safety concerns.

If you're not one of the rumbling parents, then just keep your nose out.

I'm also curious about the circumstances as I've never heard of a child in the UK being held back a year for academic reasons.
But anyway. 5'6" and 10 stone is not unusual for a year 7. My DS was shocked when he got to secondary and saw how huge some of the other boys (and girls) were. They all grow at different rates there's a huge height / weight range over the first few years of secondary. In DS's footy team, the small kids are chest height to the taller ones

Helm have to pay his age group out of school anyway and that’s not an exceptional size. My January birthday son was 5 foot 7 on leaving primary

@PiesNotGuys

The three male family members or friends of mine who are male and 12-13yo are 6’3, 6’3 and 5’10

They all tower over me. Why would 5’6 be considered a problem?

A 13-year-old boy measuring 167cm / 5ft 6in is on the 91st centile for height. A boy on the 99.6th centile of the same age would be 176cm, or 5ft9. A 13-year-old at 190cm is an exceptionally unusual outlier.

If he has an August birthday, then he may be closer in age to the September born children in the year below than those born in the follow summer.

My db has a late August birthday. One of his best friends was over 11 months older than him, both in the same school year.

@Porcupineintherough

In more enlightened rugby playing countries they sort players by height and weight rather than age for precisely this reason. I wouldn't say anything to his mum but neither would I be happy about my child playing against him if he were much smaller and lighter - but Id take that up with the school.

Yes, exactly this. It's beneficial all around: safer for the smaller children, develops skills better because you're playing against like, and a better competition since there's not that one massive child to boulder down the rest of the team.

It's one reason why NZ is so far ahead of other countries with regards to rugby skills and depth.

At this age kids vary so much in size so it probably does t matter too much, but as a principle in a school team he should play by age group not year group.

Whats the problem? Is age or size?

Would you make a large kid in the correct cohort play in the year above?

Or a small child play in the year below?

They should give over and let him play with his friends. If it's a health and safety issue then the coach should raise it with the child's parents.

5'6" doesn't sound particularly giant for year 7. My son hit 6ft at year 8 and is now in year 11 and is 6ft 4 and still growing. I personally would say nothing.

And the FA are changing their rulings over this. As more kids join different cohorts clubs are loosening up on the rules (as they should).

Age is arbitrary. If anything, they should go by size.

The thing is even in the same age bracket, kids can vary hugely in terms of size. My ds 13 plays football. All the boys on the team are in the same school year. Some are tiny and look like they could be in primary school and some are the size of full grown men!

If he's down a year, that means he's 12.

Just like a significant number of the other Year 7s.

Now, he might be 13 in the Spring/Summer - but that's after the end of the Rugby season, so entirely irrelevant to any of the muttering Rugby parents, as he is playing in his age group.

cue the OP saying Well Actually, he's 13 already

There is an RFU process for the club and the school to follow for exactly this scenario and it is allowed. All coaches are aware of this & will have followed it due to the impact on insurance. What other parents think is irrelevant. If you have an issue, take it up with the RFU.

Holding a child back a year is common place in private schools if they are July or August born, I know of several. They also play down for school and club rugby.