Ball sizes

[Which Tyler]

World Rugby considers smaller ball for women

World Rugby is collecting training and playing data on a smaller size 4.5 ball for the women's game.

www.bbc.co.uk

Good call IMO - I've often wondered why women don't use a size 4 ball (4.5, or "Touch" as it's otherwise known) is a move in the right direction, but unlikely to be far enough to overcome the difference in hand size : ball size ratio between men and women.
It would improve handling in the women's game massively (as anyone who's tried throwing around a size 4 ball will appreciate, and is why Touch rugby uses a size 4.5).

FTR, difference in average hand size is about 89%.
Difference in circumference (the important bit for handling, in terms of easy information) between a size 5 and a size 3 is 92%

 

[die_mole]

women's basketball uses a smaller size and it just makes too much sense.

 

[Which Tyler]

women's basketball uses a smaller size and it just makes too much sense.

And cricket, and discuss, and javelin, and...
If you hold a thing in your hand, and the spread of your hand on the ball matters, then it just makes sense that the sizes should be different

 

[Vieux Talonneur]

And cricket, and discuss, and javelin, and...
If you hold a thing in your hand, and the spread of your hand on the ball matters, then it just makes sense that the sizes should be different

Absolutely. Although getting really really pernickety…..the maximum diameter of a women's 600g javelin where it's gripped is exactly the same as the minimum diameter for the men's 800g.

The discus of course being the only event where the women's world record mark is greater than the men's. At 1KG the implement is just half the weight though.

Apparently opinion in the women's game is a bit mixed on the smaller ball size.

 

[Which Tyler]

Apparently opinion in the women's game is a bit mixed on the smaller ball size.

It is, but the only argument I've seen so far is along the lines of "anything the men can do", "don't belittle us by telling us that were smaller", "kids use size 4 balls, stop infantilising us" all of which I classify as "ego".

Interestingly, we had 2 of the women come join us for walking rugby last night. They both had fairly string views against using a size 4 ball, but loved the ball we were playing with (guess what size that was!).
Unfortunately, I had. Webinar after, so couldn't catch up in the bar after and chat.

 

[stus768]

It is, but the only argument I've seen so far is along the lines of "anything the men can do", "don't belittle us by telling us that were smaller", "kids use size 4 balls, stop infantilising us" all of which I classify as "ego".

Interestingly, we had 2 of the women come join us for walking rugby last night. They both had fairly string views against using a size 4 ball, but loved the ball we were playing with (guess what size that was!).
Unfortunately, I had. Webinar after, so couldn't catch up in the bar after and chat.

I've seen people raise the issue of teams not being able to share balls with the men's team that could affect participation in less well off areas. Seems a reasonable concern.

 

[Which Tyler]

I've seen people raise the issue of teams not being able to share balls with the men's team that could affect participation in less well off areas. Seems a reasonable concern.

I hadn't seen that one.
Are there many clubs with men's and women's teams but not kids? Genuine question, I've no idea.

Either way, it's not an insurmountable problem, but yes, potentially reasonable.

 

[retired9]

Only just spotted this thread, funnily enough I've often thought the same recently - surely a slightly slimmer/shorter ball will help the game?

It just looks a bit too big (as a spectator) and probably doesn't help the smaller, faster backs with handling skills

 

[dirty harry]

Just as an FYI...

Smaller balls require higher skill sets to use. Theres a reason pro players train with smaller and smaller balls, from size 5, 4, beach, mini, tennis, golf and even eggs.

Smaller balls would equal more handling errors.

Lighter balls on the other hand, would not only assist handling, but the obvious kicking problem

 

[stus768]

Just as an FYI...

Smaller balls require higher skill sets to use. Theres a reason pro players train with smaller and smaller balls, from size 5, 4, beach, mini, tennis, golf and even eggs.

Smaller balls would equal more handling errors.

Lighter balls on the other hand, would not only assist handling, but the obvious kicking problem

Smaller sized balls are easier to handle and spin pass, but can be harder to kick due to smaller sweet spot. Obviously if the ball gets really small it then gets harder to handle but it's not like they're dropping to size 3.

 

[Which Tyler]

Smaller sized balls are easier to handle and spin pass, but can be harder to kick due to smaller sweet spot. Obviously if the ball gets really small it then gets harder to handle but it's not like they're dropping to size 3.

This.
Both physics and neurology prove the point; not to mention, the experience of anyone who's dropped from a size 5 to a size 4 (though, given the average hand sizes of women, they'd be fine with a size 3 - midi would likely be too far, however)

 

[dirty harry]

Not so. I've been part of an MSc study using the 5, 4, 3 and midi.

Handling errors increased as ball size decreased in every game situation (with the caveat of arguably non sig diff between 3 and midi)

The smaller the ball, the smaller the target, the more movement in flight, the higher risk of recovery upon non perfect finger contact, the extra power through the pass, and the reduced size in peripheral vision.

Similarly happened with colours, sharper colours increased accuracy.

The common sense argument of smaller ball in smaller weaker hands just doesnt apply to live game scenarios.

What I would say though, is dropping the size would increase pass distance especially at pace, but that's arguable as to whether that would increase errors also.

 

[dirty harry]

I'd also add, if we are talking dropping from 5 to 4, the difference in negligible, and the benefits of the reduced weight may outweigh the drop in accuracy of the catch.

 

[stus768]

Not so. I've been part of an MSc study using the 5, 4, 3 and midi.

Handling errors increased as ball size decreased in every game situation (with the caveat of arguably non sig diff between 3 and midi)

The smaller the ball, the smaller the target, the more movement in flight, the higher risk of recovery upon non perfect finger contact, the extra power through the pass, and the reduced size in peripheral vision.

Similarly happened with colours, sharper colours increased accuracy.

The common sense argument of smaller ball in smaller weaker hands just doesnt apply to live game scenarios.

What I would say though, is dropping the size would increase pass distance especially at pace, but that's arguable as to whether that would increase errors also.

I've played lots of rugby with smaller sized balls in touch and this doesn't happen. It's easier to carry in one hand and much easier to spin.