Know your gear

Policing protective

February 2008

The International Rugby Board (IRB) is very serious about policing the regulations to ensure that shoulder pads, headgear and other protective garment meet their requirements and that all products sold are accompanied by the IRB Approved logo, declares their head of communications, Greg Thomas.

But strong language and good intentions do not guarantee excellent results.

Somebody must have distorted the text messages from the IRB via the South African Rugby Union (SARU) to the retailers.

There are some ominous signs of frustrations and apparent ignorance within the industry that provide IRB-approved clothing to players at school, club, provincial and even Super 14-level.

Despite warnings from SARU and an article in Sports Trader (February 2007) that retailers may only sell rugby protective gear and garments with the IRB Approved label, many still believe that this only applies to games played at national or international level.

The confusion may stem from other sporting codes where international federation approval is only required for international matches. FIFA, for example, have several tiers of approval: FIFA Inspected, FIFA Approved etc. and does not require that equipment used at club and school level has their stamp of approval.

There is no such leeway with sale of rugby protective garments.

But, because nobody is aware of a local player being penalised for not wearing IRB Approved protective gear, the belief exists that it does not really matter.

"The IRB is continuing to look at ways of improving the policing of Law4/Regulation 12 and ensuring that its unions take a pro-active role (in applying the regulation). This is a matter which is taken very seriously by the IRB," says Thomas.

Internationally, IRB approval on protective gear is being taken very seriously.

Prior to the Rugby World Cup in 2007, all teams were reminded of their obligation and duty to comply with law 4/regulation 12 in relation to player dress.

The IRB law 4/regulation 12 governs what players may wear on the field. This is referred to as Player’s Dress and covers footwear, clothing and padded clothing, including headgear.

Regarding the 2007 Rugby World Cup, there was random checking of protective wear at the World Cup and at the international games approximately one year leading up to the world event, says Gary Blakey, marketing manager of Rugbytech.

He says the policing and the enforcement was so comprehensive that a few international players wearing non-conforming garments in fact removed them before the game started as they did not want to receive penalties and fines going forward.

Match officials, and specifically touch judges, were tasked with policing the player dress regulation on the ground.

All teams were checked prior to kick-off, according to Thomas. When players were found to be wearing non-compliant dress, the match officials ensured that the necessary changes were made prior to kick-off. This happened on several occasions.

"It is a question of enforcing a minimum standard on a global basis on equipment that is permitted in the game. Unapproved equipment — or equipment that does not fall within the parameters of the laws/regulations permitted for rugby matches — and players who attempt to wear such equipment, run the risk of being ordered from the field or being prevented from stepping out in the first place," says Thomas.

But, how effectively is the IRB — and in particular SARU — policing the application of their rules regarding protective gear at a local level?

SARU has asked the provinces to be the watch dog at club, school and provincial level and ultimately, the referees are tasked with checking the protective gear of the players.

"As far as we know, these regulations have not been enforced at a provincial, club or even schools level," says Blakey.

But, according to Analize Pedregal, marketing manager of Canterbury, at school level parents and children have gained a heightened awareness of the importance of the IRB Approved logo the past four years.

"This is because the players and their parents have been informed at several rugby clinics about the necessity of IRB-logos on protective gear — for example, all the federations have conducted clinics. That awareness campaign has worked tremendously well the past four years," she added.

She believes that all the manufacturers apply the IRB-regulations regarding their clothing and protective gear and that they adhere to it strictly.

The retailers and manufacturers get a list of specifications. And if manufacturers and retailers want to take chances, they are checked by the parents of players, she believes.

Retail obligations

The IRB regulations concerning approved protective wear has not affected the retail trade at all because the policing thereof is not done by the retailers or by the rugby officials, says Blakey.

"It is unfortunate, as many customers are aware of the regulations and of course stock only products that do conform to standards. Others do not. To date, as far as we know, no one has been caught out.

"The retailers have an obligation to the buying public to make them aware of the rules — and this is even more so at the entry level consumer," he added.

If a referee refuses a player the right to wear a non-IRB-approved product and the shop-owner who sold it to him is held accountable, that trader would soon learn that he should only buy IRB-approved products, adds Tony Barker of Optimum SA.

Since it is an IRB ruling that all countries should abide by a standardisation of rugby protective gear, why should SA bend the rules? he asks.

"It is ethically right that SA should abide by the rules," says Barker. "What happens if there is an injury to a player wearing a non IRB approved product? Who is responsible, the manufacturer or the seller?"

Barker says the top four manufacturers of protective gear — Optimum, Rugbytech, Gilbert and Canterbury — have all agreed to conform with the rule and apply for IRB labels on all their protective gear and rugby clothing ranges.

Yet, there are still local companies selling non-IRB-approved products at more or less similar prices as the top four.

"A lot of people are still laughing at the IRB-regulations regarding protective gear and the requirement that the clothing should be accompanied by an IRB-logo.

"Many retailers are still saying that they don’t really care about the IRB logo, as long as they can save a few bucks by stocking cheaper non-compliant products," he says.

Despite SARU and IRB assurances that they communicated the ruling to everybody concerned, there still seem to be a lot of confusion about the legal requirements.

Even some suppliers are unaware that only IRB-approved protective gear may be sold by retailers, irrespective of the level or age group of the player.

According to Brendon Geary of Puma there is also quite a considerable cost involved in getting the approved labels.

Manufacturer frustrations

A manufacturer has to buy an IRB Approved label from the IRB for every single item of protective gear sold. They may not make and apply their own approved labels. That immediately raises the price per item.

Apart from that, products may only be tested for approval in IRB-designated international test centres.

Local manufacturer Jaco Kirsten, owner of Orbit Sport in Port Elizabeth, says he is frustrated by the lack of cooperation that he received from the IRB. He has been trying to establish a local facility to test his gear and to get them IRB approved, but when he contacted the IRB and the SA Rugby Union about it, they did not even bother to reply.

He has to pay a testing facility in France hundreds of thousands of rand simply because a local testing facility is not available. The process of testing an IRB Approved range of shoulder pads and headgear could cost in the region of R140 000.

He says the law and regulations regarding IRB-approved dress code and protective gear should be published and sent to all manufacturers, not only the big international brands. The lack of information is a source of frustration for him.

He says the lack of cooperation by the IRB and the SA Rugby Union is confusing. "Who answers you when you have pressing questions? It seems as if the people to whom I have sent Emails, have all been on extended leave."

Thomas says that the IRB does audit manufacturers’ products within the IRB Approved scheme to ensure compliance with IRB regulations.

Only those padded equipment products that meet the standards in regulation 12 are entitled to use the IRB mark of approval. In the past, product had been recalled by manufacturers when it had been found not to comply with the IRB regulations.

Meetings are held twice annually with manufacturers dealing with players’ dress matters, as well as individual meetings where appropriate. The IRB has worked closely with unions on this matter, including SARU, says Thomas. Occasionally SARU will send a threatening letter to the manufacturers.

All the manufacturers have a manual with technical specifications guiding them on what is IRB Approved and what not.