The Coarse Rugby Thread (Union).
Discussion
Gents
As an antidote to discussions on the rarified and frankly remote from reality world of Premiership/professional rugby union, I propose a discussion thread for real Rugby.
My opening will be on the subject of Vets teams.
Now, traditionally vets are over 35. I consider this far far too low an age to be considered a vet. I was still playing first team rugby at 35 for goodness sake!
And , at nearly 53, a 35 year old is young enough to be my son, and likely to be ridiculously fit in comparison.
I think that there should therefore be games organised where the minimum age is 50. Antiques, rather than veterans.
What does the panel think?
As an antidote to discussions on the rarified and frankly remote from reality world of Premiership/professional rugby union, I propose a discussion thread for real Rugby.
My opening will be on the subject of Vets teams.
Now, traditionally vets are over 35. I consider this far far too low an age to be considered a vet. I was still playing first team rugby at 35 for goodness sake!
And , at nearly 53, a 35 year old is young enough to be my son, and likely to be ridiculously fit in comparison.
I think that there should therefore be games organised where the minimum age is 50. Antiques, rather than veterans.
What does the panel think?
IroningMan said:
Having taken the game up earlier this year at 44 I'd say 50 was aiming a little too high - but having said that we do have a lot of overlap between the second team and the vets.
Hasn't stopped the vets from losing every game I've played in, mind you...
taking up the game at 44 is well impressive. Most people are giving up by then.Hasn't stopped the vets from losing every game I've played in, mind you...
Gassing Station | Sports | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff