Common Issues and Differences in Motivational Support and the Effects of Rugby for the U-15 and U-16 National Teams

Abstract

This study determines the differences in opinion of U-15 (20 boys) and U-16 (29 boys) rugby players from Romanian national teams, regarding motivational support (MS) and the effects/benefits (EB) of the sport. The evaluation questionnaire (based on 21 items with closed answers and 7 items with free answers) was applied between 29 November 2019 and 13 December 2019. The statistical calculation indicates the absence of significant differences between the groups for most items, with the exception of financial motivation (where the U-16 group has a higher score, p < 0.05) and the usefulness of rugby for the population as a variant of active leisure (where the U-15 group has a higher score). However, U-15 athletes are more motivated by the examples of elite players, have increased involvement in terms of passion in training and competitions, and assign high scores to their relationships with the coach and teammates, while U-16 players are more optimistic about self-perceived skills as the basis of success in rugby. The U-15 team is more confident regarding most of the benefits of a rugby game, and those in the U-16 team have superior values in the context of favorable effects on attitude, as well as a better ability to concentrate at the levels of academics and sports. Masculine characteristics, the uniqueness, and physical contact are the main factors of attraction for rugby. Over 56% of the players practiced or practice other sports and sports games, with contact sports being at the top. A total of 96% of players suffered injuries, with the legs and arms being the most affected, but 25% of the U-15 group also suffered injuries to the head, with the main causes being physical contact with opponents and the superficiality of the warm-up. Workouts associated with physical training are the most difficult to bear, and the U-15 group is more bored with routine and monotony. A higher level of physical training/self-perceived fitness is the main strength of players, followed by technical and tactical knowledge.

1. Introduction

1.1. A Brief Analysis of the National and International Rugby Game Context

As it is less popular and receives less media coverage in Eastern European countries, the game of rugby is not on the list of preferences of young people in these regions, often being outclassed by soccer, basketball, and handball [1]. For adolescents in rural Romania, favorable opinions regarding the rugby-tag variant (a simplified form with 5–7 players, but with the involvement of both genders and without physical contact) were studied in [2]. There was higher involvement by these students in school sports activities and extracurricular sports activities, better attendance in terms of physical education lessons, and a degree of tolerance towards physical activities in terms of the participation of colleagues (regardless of gender). Not all countries have optimal conditions for playing rugby. The involvement of Romanian girls in rugby is very low (with only four women’s teams), with the rugby variant proposed having seven which serves as a strategy to promote the sport among children, especially at 10–12 years of age when differences between genders are minimal [3]. The expansion of the game of rugby in Italy is mentioned in [4], and mental abilities, the quality of relationships, and the environment influencing performance were discussed. The relationships of young players with adults and the need to create a dialogue with them (and be listened to) are very important. In the Fiji Islands, although it is known as a national sport for men, women have managed to overcome social barriers and sanctions, qualifying for the first time at the Rio 2016 Olympic Games [5].

1.2. Aspects of Motivational Support in Rugby Game

The importance of the game of rugby for men in Taiwan (aged 54–83 years) is studied in [6], and the reasons that determine participation are listed: Joy and passion for the game, involvement in a men’s sport, physical and mental activity, and maintaining a self-identity. According to [7], the reasons that motivate the involvement of Australian rugby players in competitions (Golden Oldies World Rugby Festival) are diverse: Orientation towards a healthy lifestyle, psychological coping, maintaining an optimal body mass, gaining high self-esteem, competitive spirit, giving meaning to life, and recognition/status.

An analysis of the basic psychological needs that characterize top rugby players in New Zealand indicated competence, autonomy, and relationships/relatedness. These traits are associated with the phenomenon of exhaustion, which results in exhausted/high-burnout players having lower scores of competence and autonomy than those who have a lower state of exhaustion, as determined in [8]. The motivations for giving up in the case of professional rugby players (nine cases), investigated less than a year after ending their sports career, are varied and include negative experiences at the club/academy, education problems, unsuccessful transfers to other clubs, lack of long-term focus, and the desire to perform at a high level as quickly as possible. These lead to overwork, physical and nervous exhaustion, lack of motivation, and, ultimately, abandonment [9]. A Japanese version of the Baron Depression Screener for Athletes (BDSA) for evaluating depression symptoms in professional rugby players has been proposed [10].

Psychological skills in rugby play a major role in performance, and the training and development of these skills by disadvantaged players in South Africa (through a 6-week program based on psychological skills training (PST)) led to significant improvements in these skills [11]. Rugby players (18 years old) with psychological sports skills (early developers (ED)), compared to those at an average level (average developers (AD)) and those at a low level (late developers (LD)) have definite advantages in terms of setting goals, better mental training, increased confidence at the beginning of training, etc. [12]. Personality type should be analyzed to generate training stimuli that increase an individual’s motivation. According to [13], using a group of 126 women players, narcissistic personalities in women’s rugby are distinguished by superior involvement in effort and better self-control.

The involvement of young people in rugby is favorably influenced by pleasant emotions (pleasure, the fun factor, and positive experiences) and are motivating factors for physical activity. The application of the half-game rule (where all selected players on the day of a match will play at least one round in the rugby match) generates superior involvement and increased pleasure, but also increases the intention to continue practicing the sport [14]. The motivations for Canadian women in terms of playing rugby (at the elite level) are varied and include the physical challenge and aggression, the desire to try a new sport, interaction and socialization with other players, a team environment, community and friendship, and the need to be a nonconformist [15]. The selection of high school students in Zimbabwe for rugby is based on qualities at multiple levels (performance, attitude, skills, and physical qualities), and coaches identify both categories of motivation (intrinsic and extrinsic) to determine the involvement of athletes [16]. Further research highlights the role of emotional intelligence as an important variable in the quality of interactions, as well as in the functionality of sports teams (soccer, handball, volleyball, and rugby) [17].

The transition of young rugby players to elite leagues involves consistency, a balanced lifestyle, a focus on tasks, adequate resources, a proactive approach to educating athletes, encouraging self-determination, and individualized programs focused on personal needs and expectations, from the perspective of players and coaches [18]. Athletes’ need to be competent and intrinsic motivation are the predictors of sports performance, and intrinsic motivation and self-perceived sports performance are the predictors of physically active behavior in future stages [19]. The relationship between motivation types and burnout states for New Zealand rugby players (18–42 years old) is studied by [20]. They found a positive association between burnout and the state of amotivation, while intrinsic motivation (a self-determined form of motivation) had negative associations with states of exhaustion and extrinsic motivation had weak and insignificant relationships with burnout. The same topic was addressed by [21] in a group of young Spanish athletes regarding the role of mediating the motivation regarding burnout states, their involvement in activities, and the satisfaction of the basic needs (BPN)/basic psychological needs. Increased levels of self-determinant motivation are negatively associated with burnout and have positive associations with the involvement of effort, which was not confirmed for a low level of self-determinant motivation. The motivation of young rugby players in New Zealand is conditioned by maintaining a balanced athletic identity, along with sports, education, social relationships, and cultural concerns, which ensure the generation of pleasant emotions and mental wellbeing, according to [22].

Coaches have complex roles in young rugby teams, in terms of transmitting pro-social norms, building confidence, shaping character, team building, and formulating goals, given that victories are a priority and players often go through tense competitive situations, according to [23,24]. For professional rugby players in Fiji—who play in other countries—a high level of self-determined as well as non-self-determined motivation is reported. Proper management should follow coach feedback, effective coaching, and personal and family welfare [25].

Rugby referees play a decisive role in the education of players and their emotional support for children aged 6–12, in order not to take them away from this game and reduce the negative behaviors of the players by adopting preventive measures. They must respond to the emotional, cognitive, social, and health needs of children, according to [26,27]. The models offered by family and colleagues, the team culture, the physical appearance and well-being promoted in the media, as well as the accessibility and cost of food, are the main factors influencing the quality of nutrition and sports performance of young, high-level rugby players (16–18 years) in New Zealand [28].

Psychological skills in rugby play a major role in performance, and their training and development at the level of disadvantaged players in South Africa through a 6-week program based on PST (psychological skills training) led to significant improvements in this factor, according to [11]. Rugby players (18 years old) with sports psychological skills (ED—early developers) have definite advantages in terms of setting goals, better mental training, increased confidence at the beginning of the training, etc., according to [12]. Personality type must be analyzed to generate training stimuli that increase individual motivation. The narcissistic personalities in women’s rugby are distinguished by superior involvement in effort and better self-control, according to [13], as evidenced in a batch of 126 women players.

The type of sports activity generates self-confidence and a variable level of concern before competitions. Young people involved in rugby and soccer are more confident and less worried compared to sports in which the technique and aesthetics of the movements are important (gymnastics) and where the evaluation is subjective [29].

1.3. Aspects Related to Physical Performance and the Effects/Problems of Specific Rugby Training

The efficiency of talent detection strategies in ERFU (England Rugby Football Union) implies the creation of a safety net for young people with delayed development and closer collaboration between senior high-level coaches and volunteer coaches [30]. The age of 7 is indicated for the involvement of children in rugby but is doubled by participation in other sports, which would bring beneficial effects on motor skills; they may even give up rugby. Top coaches also recommend competitive games, but with simplification of the rules, while the fun element should not be missing from training, according to [31].

The evaluation of the motor potential of young rugby players generates divergences between the perception of the coaches and those responsible for S&C (stress and conditioning) regarding the correct interpretation of the results of physical tests and anthropometric measurements/physical development. Unexpected results often appear, related to the particularities of each player, with the collaboration between the two categories being decisive in shaping an efficient training strategy, according to [32].

The existence of differences in strength and power between the genres (for National Amateur Rugby Players) is reported by [33], with these being relevant qualities/factors in improving the performances of the players. In elite women’s rugby in New Zealand, there are higher values of stature, body weight, total and general body composition, and skin folds for the players in the attack line/forwards identified, compared to the values for those in defense/back, according to [34]. The recovery of young rugby players (20 years old) at 20 h after the end of training is conditioned by load, according to [35]. An impairment of recovery processes, motivation, sleep quality, stress, fatigue, muscle pain, and appetite disorders are reported for large loads (load = 90 min) compared to low loads (load = 15 min). Rugby performance is improved by using sleep extension, which reduces stress and cortisol levels and improves reaction times [36].

The lack of information for young Italian rugby players regarding the symptoms and effects of concussion and the consequences of immediate recovery during the game is signaled by [37]. Reducing and preventing injuries in rugby can be achieved by promoting workshops and programs (Workshop for Activate) among coaches [38].

In order to reduce the risk of injury in rugby, the implementation of a monitoring system (TMS—training monitoring system) is proposed, being perceived as having a moderate to high efficiency by both coaches and players, whose feedback is important in its operation [39]. Unilateral jumps with 180° rotation are proposed as a way to identify the potential for injury in the game of rugby, which occur frequently during the performance of physical tasks involving body rotation. Aspects related to the kinematics of the knee, thigh, and pelvis for the dominant/non-dominant leg, inter-segmental coordination, and differences in movements in the loading and landing phases are measured, according to [40]. Other researchers approach the study of head impacts during rugby attacks based on multi-body models, but these are still incomplete/unsuitable for the reconstruction of rugby/head kinematics during individual rugby union tackle cases [41]. Chronic shoulder/scapula-humeral joint and spine disorders negatively affect the propulsion and motor performance of quadriplegic/wheelchair rugby athletes according to [42].

The financial costs of tournament injuries for young South African rugby players are analyzed by [43]. Only 2% of the 3652 athletes included in the study requested medical care after the tournament, but with very high financial costs, and players without health insurance did not receive adequate treatment, with most costs being associated with fractures and injuries in the upper limbs.

Summarizing the information presented above, we consider that there are not enough studies at the national level related to motivation to play rugby and its effects on children and juniors. These aspects deserve to be investigated in depth in this research by designing and applying a questionnaire within the Romania national U-15 and U-16 teams, as well as by comparing and interpreting the results obtained, thus constituting an element of novelty in reference to the studies analyzed in the introduction.

The Purpose of the Study Defines Two Complementary Research Directions:

• Investigation of the members of the national junior teams for the mentioned age groups, in order to construct a scientifically based questionnaire (based on closed-ended and open-ended items), used as a tool to measure the perception related to motivational support and the effects/benefits of rugby.
• Application of the questionnaire and collection and interpretation of data provided by members of the target group, highlighting differences and common issues of the perceptions of U-15 and U-16 groups, as well as similar points or divergences in relation to other scientific research. The outcomes could be useful to specialists in optimizing the selection and training processes in the field of rugby for these age categories.

Working hypotheses:

Hypotheses 1.1 (H1.1).

The factor analysis applied to the questionnaire highlights the adequacy of the sampling for analysis (via the values of the Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin test), a good correlation between the items of each factor of the questionnaire (through the values of Bartlett’s Test of Sphericity), and the loading/grouping of the items of each factor by components (after applying the orthogonal rotation procedure with Varimax variant).

Hypotheses 1.2 (H1.2).

The questionnaire used to investigate the target group accurately measures the features associated with each analyzed factor, an aspect confirmed by the significant results of the internal consistency coefficient (Cronbach alpha).

Hypotheses 1.3 (H1.3).

The average values of the questionnaire items are different at the level of the two factors of the applied questionnaire; this aspect is expressed by the results of Hotelling’s T-Squared Test.

Hypotheses 2.1 (H2.1).

It is estimated that the independent variable, the age stages, will influence significant differences in terms of the dependent variables (opinions expressed by answering the items with closed answers), associated with the motivational support factor/MS and the effect–benefit factor/EB.

Hypotheses 2.2 (H2.2).

It is estimated that there are opinion discrepancies between the U-15 and U-16 groups, expressed by the percentage values associated with the items with open/free answers for the two groups subject to analysis.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Participants

The investigated group included 49 rugby players, all members of the Romanian national team (20 from the U-15 group and 29 from the U-16 group). The participants come from 8 clubs and sports high schools: SCM Gloria Buzău, CSS Rugby Tecuci, CSS Focșani, LPS Focșani, CSS Bârlad, CSS Gura Humorului, CSS Unirea Iași, and LTATV Galați. The average age of the U-15 team is 14.405 ± 0.458 years, with a history of playing rugby of 3.500 ± 1.463 years. The average age of the U-16 team is 15.672 ± 0.288 years, with a history of playing rugby of 3.931 ± 1.672 years. Participants received, filled in, and returned the questionnaires in the physical format/printed on paper. The organization and conduct of the research complied with the rules of voluntary participation of players and respect for the confidentiality of data recorded and processed, with both groups informed of the purpose of the planned research and treated in accordance with the Helsinki Declaration [44,45]. The performance and publication of this study are in accordance with the agreement of the Ethics Commission of the higher education institution (648/CEU/ 8 December 2021).

2.2. Procedure

The applied work methodology is specific to attitudinal-type investigations, with the study being designed and carried out for cross-sectional research. The design of the questionnaire was based on the occasion of participating in the regional training and improvement course of the U-15 and U-16 rugby teams, organized by the Romanian Rugby Federation that took place at the “Municipal” Rugby Sports Complex in Galați, between 29 November 2019 and 13 December 2019. All players in the training teams were consulted on the issues related to motivation and effects/usefulness of the rugby game, with their feedback/answers and opinions facilitating the construction of the questionnaire, which was conducted at the Research Center for Human Performance, affiliated with the Faculty of Physical Education and Sports from Galați. Prior to application, players were presented with the questionnaire and informed of the meaning of each item and how to select/fill in the desired options, in view of eliminating any unclear aspects related to the intensity of the selected options. The questionnaire included 21 items with closed answers, grouped into 2 distinctive factors: Motivational support (12 items) and effects/benefits (9 items), to which 7 items with free answers were added. For the items with closed answers, a 5-point Likert scale was used, in order to measure the intensity of the expressed opinions. The following are select examples of the quantification of the intensity of the answers: 5 (Main influence, Certainly, Always, Very strong satisfaction); 4 (Great influence, Largely, Often, High satisfaction); 3 (Medium influence, On average, Sometimes, Average satisfaction); 2 (Low influence, Too little, Rare, Low satisfaction); 1 (No influence, I have no models, Never, Lack of satisfaction). The items of the questionnaire, the method of quantifying the answers, and the percentages recorded at the level of the whole group for each item and score are available in the appendix attached to our study.

2.3. The Statistical Analysis of Data

The statistical calculation of the obtained data was performed using SPSS software (version 24). A factor analysis with varimax rotation was applied for the items with closed answers (with the calculation of KMO and Bartlett’s Test and the loading of items on components), and we determined the values of Alpha Cronbach coefficients at the level of the 2 factors (in order to assess the fidelity of measuring the opinions of players) and Hotelling’s T-Squared Test values in order to investigate the variability of the answers [46,47,48]. Levene’s Test of Equality of Error Variances was used. An analysis of variance (ANOVA—Multivariate and Univariate test) was used to determine the values of F, mean values of the answers of both groups, the differences between the averages of the items for the 2 groups of athletes and their significance thresholds (using the Bonferroni correction factor), and the values (Ƞ²_p/partial eta squared) as an expression of the size effect [49,50,51]. For the items with closed answers (from the Annex), the percentages associated with each selected variant were calculated (at the level of the whole group), and for the open questions, the percentage values for the free answers were expressed separately for the U-15 and U-16 groups, as well as for the whole group [52,53]. The confidence interval was set at 95% (p < 0.05).

3. Results

Statistically processed data are summarized in tables and graphs.

Table 1. KMO and Bartlett’s Test/MS factor.

KMO and Bartlett’s Test/MS Factor
Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy.		0.690
Bartlett’s Test of Sphericity	Approx. Chi-Square (χ2)	179.126
	df	66
	Sig.	0.000

,

Table 2. MS factors—rotated component matrix ^a.

MS Factor—Rotated Component Matrix a
	Component
	1	2	3
MS11 The importance of the relationship with the coach	0.770	0.051	−0.024
MS10 The importance of victory as a motivation in rugby	0.657	0.527	−0.049
MS12 The importance of the relationship with teammates	0.654	−0.194	0.310
MS3 The motivation and support of the coach	0.600	0.078	0.110
MS1 The spectacularity of the rugby game	0.586	0.486	0.315
MS9 The Self-perception of rugby skills	−0.035	0.789	0.243
MS5 The financial motivation in rugby	0.031	0.752	−0.261
MS6 The involvement out of passion and pure pleasure	0.494	0.519	0.311
MS2 The motivation and support of family/friends	0.094	0.496	0.350
MS7 The existence of quitting moments	0.371	0.379	0.057
MS8 The attractiveness of technical vs. physical training	0.002	0.025	0.776
MS4 The existence of players as career models	0.347	0.168	0.772
Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis. Rotation Method: Varimax with Kaiser Normalization.

^a Rotation converged in 5 iterations.

,

Table 3. KMO and Bartlett’s Test/EB factor.

KMO and Bartlett’s Test/EB Factor
Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy.		0.811
Bartlett’s Test of Sphericity	Approx. Chi-Square	170.087
	df	36
	Sig.	0.000

and

Table 4. EB factors—rotated component matrix ^a.

EB Factor—Rotated Component Matrix a
	Component
	1	2
EB2 The manifestation of the feeling of physical superiority	0.865	−0.195
EB3 The satisfaction produced by training and game	0.662	0.469
EB1 The effects on the formation of positive attitudes	0.621	0.193
EB4 The positive effects on physical development	0.590	0.413
EB8 The utility and accessibility for an active lifestyle	0.563	0.470
EB6 The frequency of rugby injuries	0.441	0.309
EB7 the impairment of school performance	0.031	0.822
EB5 The effects on health	0.225	0.808
EB9 The usefulness of reintroduction in profile faculties	0.594	0.650
Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis. Rotation Method: Varimax with Kaiser Normalization.

^a Rotation converged in 3 iterations.

contain relevant information related to the factor analysis for closed-response items, and Figure 1 and Figure 2 show the distribution of items by components in the varimax rotation axis system.

3.1. The Results of the Factor Analysis and the Internal Consistency for the Items of the Constructed Questionnaire

The Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin test (KMO = 0.690) for the MS factor indicates a value >0.5, so it is above the Kaiser/Kaiser’s Criteria threshold, which verifies the adequacy of the sampling adequacy for analysis, according to Table 1. The result of Bartlett’s Test of Sphericity (χ² = 179.126 with Sig. = 0.000) indicates a good correlation between the MS factor items (rejects the hypothesis that the variables would not be correlated), so there are one or more common components to apply factor reduction via the PCA technique (principal component analysis). In this case, there are three main components, which cumulatively explain 57.20% of the total variance: Component 1 (34.165% of the variance), component 2 (12.806% of the variance), and component 3 (10.228% of the variance).

Table 2 indicates the loading of items/variables on the three main components after applying the orthogonal rotation procedure with the Varimax variant, which reduces/minimizes the number of variables with high loads (>0.6) for each component. Component 1 is strongly loaded on items MS11, MS10, MS12, and MS3 (quality of the relationship with the coach and teammates, support and motivation of the coach, and victory as a motivating factor) and secondarily (moderate) on MS1 and MS 6 (spectacularity of the game as motivation and involvement out of pure passion). Component 2 only has two items with strong loads: MS9 and MS5 (self-perception of rugby skills and financial motivation), but there are four items (MS10, MS1, MS6, MS2) with a moderate load (importance of victory, spectacularity of the game, involvement out of passion, motivation and family support). Component 3 also presents two items with a strong load: MS8 and MS4 (attractiveness of technical training and the existence of players as career models). It is observed that the item MS7 (existence of moments of abandonment) has weak loads for all components, but it will not be removed from the composition of the MS factor because the values presented above are also significant in its presence.

The Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin test (KMO = 0.811) for the EB factor indicates a value of >0.5, being above the Kaiser/Kaiser’s Criteria threshold, an aspect that also verifies the sampling adequacy for analysis, according to Table 3. The result of Bartlett’s Test of Sphericity (χ² = 170.087 with Sig. = 0.000) also indicates a good correlation between EB factor items, so there are one or more common components, and factor reduction can be applied via the PCA (principal component analysis) technique. In this case, however, only two main components were found, which cumulatively explain 59.681% of the total variance: Component 1 (46.602% of the variance) and component 2 (13.079% of the variance).

Table 4 indicates the loading of the items/variables of the EB factor on the two main components after the application of the orthogonal rotation procedure with the Varimax variant. Component 1 is strongly loaded on items EB2, EB3, and EB1 (appearance of the feeling of physical superiority, satisfaction produced by training, effects on the formation of positive attitudes) and moderately on items EB4, EB8, EB6, and EB9 (positive effects on physical development, utility for an active lifestyle, frequency of injuries in rugby, utility of reintroduction in profile faculties) (Figure 2). Component 2 has three items with a strong load: EB7, EB5, and EB9 (impairment of school performance, effects on health, usefulness of reintroduction in profile faculties). Furthermore, there are three items (EB3, EB4, and EB8) with moderate weight/load (satisfaction produced by training, positive effects on physical development, usefulness for an active lifestyle). It was observed that all items have strong (>0.6) or moderate (>0.4) loads for both or at least one of the components.

Table 5. The values of the internal consistency coefficient (Cronbach’s Alpha) and the test of equality of the averages for the answers to the items of the two factors of the questionnaire/N = 49.

Factors	Reliability Statistics			Hotelling’s T-Squared Test
	Cronbach’s Alpha	Cronbach’s Alpha Standardized Items	N of Items	Hotelling’s T-Squared	F	df1	df2	Sig.
F1/motivational support	0.793	0.809	12	224.749	16.175	11	38	0.000
F2/effects and benefits	0.840	0.849	9	100.333	10.713	8	41	0.000

shows the fidelity values (Cronbach’s Alpha) and those of Hotelling’s T-Squared Test.

The results related to the internal consistency coefficient (Cronbach’s Alpha) and the indicators of the equality test for the averages of the items corresponding to the two analyzed factors (Hotelling’s T-Squared Test) are summarized in Table 5. For both factors (effects and benefits of motivational support), values of internal consistency >0.8 are obtained, an aspect that demonstrates the fidelity of the measurement of the questionnaire for the items with closed answers, thus confirming the first hypothesis of the research/H1. For Hotelling’s T-Squared Test, statistically significant values are recorded (p < 0.001) for both factors, so we can conclude that there is diversity among the choice of answers/item scores, with the obtained averages not being equal, aspect: F1 (11,38) = 16.175; F2 (8,41) = 10.713, confirming, in this case, Hypotheses H1.2 and H1.3.

3.2. The Findings of the Analysis of the Results Obtained when Processing and Interpreting the Items with Close-Ended Answers (for the Two Factors) and the Items with Open-Ended Answers

Table 6. Univariate test results (ANOVA) and pairwise comparison of average values for factor 1 (motivational support).

Dependent Variable	Group	Mean	SD	Std. Error	a/b	F (1, 47)	Sig b.	Ƞ2p	Observed Power
MS1 Spectacularity of the rugby game	a. U-15	4.150	0.587	0.150	0.047	0.057	0.813	0.001	0.056
	b. U-16	4.103	0.724	0.125
MS2 Motivation and support of family and friends	a. U-15	2.550	1.050	0.223	−0.519	3.201	0.080	0.064	0.418
	b. U-16	3.069	0.961	0.185
MS3 Motivation and support of the coach	a. U-15	3.400	1.095	0.229	−0.255	0.734	0.396	0.015	0.134
	b. U-16	3.655	0.973	0.190
MS4 The existence of players as role models	a. U-15	3.600	1.095	0.290	0.290	0.591	0.446	0.012	0.117
	b. U-16	3.310	1.416	0.241
MS5 Financial motivation in rugby	a. U-15	2.900	0.552	0.182	−0.652 *	7.629	0.008	0.140	0.772
	b. U-16	3.552	0.948	0.151
MS6 Involvement out of pure passion and pleasure	a. U-15	4.450	0.759	0.143	0.140	0.566	0.455	0.012	0.114
	b. U-16	4.310	0.541	0.119
MS7 The existence of quitting moments	a. U-15	4.100	0.718	0.165	0.169	0.619	0.435	0.013	0.120
	b. U-16	3.931	0.752	0.137
MS8 Attractiveness of technical training vs. physical training	a. U-15	3.650	0.812	0.162	−0.040	0.035	0.852	0.001	0.054
	b. U-16	3.690	0.660	0.135
MS9 Self-perception of rugby skills	a. U-15	3.300	0.656	0.141	−0.355	3.743	0.059	0.074	0.474
	b. U-16	3.655	0.613	0.117
MS10 The importance of victory as a motivation in rugby	a. U-15	4.000	0.973	0.189	0.138	0.316	0.576	0.007	0.085
	b. U-16	3.862	0.742	0.157
MS11 Importance of the relationship with the coach	a. U-15	3.900	0.718	0.166	0.072	0.112	0.739	0.002	0.062
	b. U-16	3.828	0.759	0.138
MS12 Importance of the relationship with teammates	a. U-15	3.650	1.182	0.201	0.409	2.453	0.124	0.050	0.335
	b. U-16	3.241	0.635	0.167

* The mean difference is significant at the 0.05 level. ^b Adjustment for multiple comparisons: Bonferroni.

and

Table 7. Univariate test results (ANOVA) and pairwise comparison of mean values for factor 2 (effects/benefits).

Dependent Variable	Group	Mean	SD	Std. Error	a/b	F (1, 47)	Sig b.	Ƞ2p	Observed Power
EB1 Effects on the formation of positive attitudes	a. U-15	4.100	0.967	0.176	−0.141	0.382	0.540	0.008	0.093
	b. U-16	4.241	0.635	0.146
EB2 Manifestation of the feeling of physical superiority	a. U-15	3.400	0.940	0.223	0.124	0.184	0.670	0.004	0.070
	b. U-16	3.276	1.031	0.185
EB3 Satisfaction produced by training and game	a. U-15	3.950	0.686	0.145	0.053	0.081	0.777	0.002	0.059
	b. U-16	3.897	0.617	0.120
EB4 Positive effects on physical development	a. U-15	4.200	0.894	0.179	0.234	1.014	0.319	0.021	0.167
	b. U-16	3.966	0.731	0.149
EB5 Effects on health	a. U-15	4.000	0.858	0.184	0.276	1.332	0.254	0.028	0.204
	b. U-16	3.724	0.797	0.153
EB6 Frequency of rugby injuries	a. U-15	3.500	1.000	0.185	0.052	0.046	0.831	0.001	0.055
	b. U-16	3.448	0.685	0.154
EB7 Impairment of school performance	a. U-15	3.250	1.019	0.204	−0.267	1.019	0.318	0.021	0.167
	b. U-16	3.517	0.828	0.169
EB8 Utility and accessibility for an active lifestyle	a. U-15	4.300	0.864	0.193	1.197 *	22.829	0.000	0.327	0.997
	b. U-16	3.103	0.859	0.160
EB9 The usefulness of reintroduction in profile faculties	a. U-15	4.100	0.788	0.176	0.238	1.077	0.305	0.022	0.174
	b. U-16	3.862	0.789	0.146

* The mean difference is significant at the 0.05 level. ^b Adjustment for multiple comparisons: Bonferroni.

show the values of Univariate tests, the comparison between the averages of the items for the U-15 and U-16 groups, the significance thresholds, and the values of Ƞ²_p, while Figure 3 and Figure 4 show the average values of the items of the two factors for the whole group of athletes.

Table 6 summarizes the results of the variance analysis and the differences between the mean values of the U-15 and U-16 groups for the MS factor. Most of the values of F and the related significance thresholds indicate a lack of significance of the differences between the mean values (p > 0.05), in addition to the weak values of Ƞ²_p. The only significant difference between the groups is in the case of item MS5 (financial motivation in rugby), where those in the U-16 group have a higher score than the U-15 group, with F = 7.629 and p = 0.008. In fact, 14% of the variance in this item is explained by the age stage influence, so with the transition to a new group, money and financial security become more important, motivating factors. For the U-15 group, having role models to follow is more important, while the pleasure of involvement also has a higher average value. In this group, there are lower abandonment tendencies, and victory is also more important in motivation, compared to the U-16 group, which is a slightly surprising aspect if we take into account that the pressure of results is stronger with the selection in the higher age range. The U-15 group assigned higher scores to the relationships with the coach and teammates in influencing their own performance, so the relationship with authority and the quality of group interactions are perceived as more important. The U-16 team obtains higher average scores regarding the motivational support provided by parents/entourage and teachers and coaches, as well as the ability to self-perceive/self-evaluate their own skills needed in the game of rugby, thus being more confident in their own abilities to achieve high performance in sports.

Table 7 shows the results of the analysis of variance and the differences between the mean values of the U-15 and U-16 groups at the EB factor level. The only item where significant differences are reported in the opinions expressed by the investigated groups is EB8 (usefulness and accessibility of the game of rugby as an active lifestyle for any person), with the U-15 group being overly optimistic about this (F = 22.829, p = 0.000), and 32.7% of the variance of this dependent variable being explained by the effect of age stages/independent variable. The major difference in opinions can be attributed to the greater experience of those in the U-16 team, who faced several problems associated with the game of rugby and better understand its difficulty and complexity, as well as the weaker popularity among all categories of the population. The enthusiasm of those in the U-15 group for most of the effects and benefits of rugby is noticeable, even if all the values of F and their thresholds are insignificant (p > 0.05) and the values of Ƞ²_p are weak. The U-15 team has a high perception of physical superiority over other athletes (as a manifestation of the egotistic component and belonging to an exclusive group), has higher scores related to the effects of rugby on health and physical development, is more satisfied with the training and less affected by injuries (probably as a result of the shorter average duration of involvement and participation in training/competitions), and believes more in the usefulness of reintroducing the game of rugby in the profile faculties. The U-16 group obtains a higher average score related to the favorable effects on the attitudinal component, and this group also reports fewer problems related to the impact of school performances as a result of concentrating on a sports career, a sign that experience generates better adaptation to these multiple tasks (academic and sports). Insignificant differences between the mean values of the two groups (for most of the questions in Table 6 and Table 7) lead to the idea that. in these cases, Hypothesis H2.1 is not confirmed (Figure 3).

Figure 3 shows the distribution of average scores for responses to MS factor items. It is observed that ranking highest in motivational support is the pleasure/passion for rugby, its spectacularity, the desire for victory/success, and the quality of the relationship with the coach (average scores > 4, related to the Likert scale), and ranked last is the quality of the relationship with teammates, financial motivation (with average values within the range of 3 and 4 on the Likert scale), and parental support in practicing this sport, with this last item having the lowest average value/<3, which is slightly surprising.

Figure 4 shows the distribution of average scores for responses to EB factor items. The highest values are related to the formation of positive attitudes, harmonious physical development, the usefulness of reintroducing the game of rugby in faculties, satisfaction induced by training, and favorable influences on health (with average scores of approximately 4 on the Likert scale), and the lowest values are allocated to neglecting school activities and the feeling of physical superiority compared to athletes from other disciplines. For this factor, the lowest average score is >3, which is higher than the average value of the Likert scale; as a result, all the effects/benefits of the game of rugby are evaluated as having high importance.

The free answers provide complementary information to the items based on closed answers because they allow the identification of particular problems and issues, related to the characteristics and specificity of the investigated groups. The percentages corresponding to each answer option (associated with the eight items with free answers) indicate differences between the opinions expressed by the two groups; hence, this aspect validates the last hypothesis (H2.2).

Table 8. Answers related to the reasons behind the attractiveness of rugby.

Crt. No.	Expressed Opinion	U-15/N = 20		U-16/N = 29		Total/N = 49
		No.	Percent	No.	Percent	No.	Percent
1	Uniqueness (oval ball, different rules, players do not protest)	8	40%	7	24.13%	15	30.61%
2	It has a pronounced masculine character	11	55%	15	51.72%	26	53.06%
3	It involves hard physical contact	4	20%	12	41.37%	16	32.65%
4	There is strong collaboration between players	3	15%	7	24.13%	10	20.40%
5	High level discipline and fair play	3	15%	6	20.68%	9	18.36%

,

Table 9. Answers for the other sports disciplines practiced.

Crt. No.	Expressed Opinion	U-15/N = 20		U-16/N = 29		Total/N = 49
		No.	Percent	No.	Percent	No.	Percent
1	I practice nothing but rugby	10	50%	11	37.93%	21	42.85%
2	Boxing, judo, wrestling	4	20%	5	17.24%	9	18.36%
3	Sports games (football, handball, basketball)	6	30%	9	31.03%	15	30.61%
4	Tennis/table tennis	1	5%	3	10.34%	4	8.16%
5	Bodybuilding/fitness	1	5%	5	17.24%	6	12.24%
6	Athletics	0	0%	1	3.44%	1	2.04%

,

Table 10. Answers to the frequently injured body areas.

Crt. No.	Expressed Opinion	U-15/N = 20		U-16/N = 29		Total/N = 49
		No.	Percent	No.	Percent	No.	Percent
1	Head, face	5	25%	2	6.89%	7	14.28%
2	Legs	15	75%	26	89.65%	41	83.67%
3	Abdomen	3	15%	0	0%	3	6.12%
4	Arms	4	20%	11	37.93%	15	30.61%
5	Back and spine	2	10%	7	24.13%	9	18.36%
6	I was never injured	2	10%	0	0%	2	4.08%

,

Table 11. Answers to the causes of injuries.

Crt. No.	Expressed Opinion	U-15/N = 20		U-16/N = 29		Total/N = 49
		No.	Percent	No.	Percent	No.	Percent
1	Poor warm-up at the beginning of training	6	30%	10	34.48%	16	32.65%
2	Forced movements, with too much amplitude	4	20%	7	24.13%	11	22.44%
3	Training loads too high	1	5%	4	13.79%	5	10.20%
4	Difficult and unconsolidated technical procedures	2	10%	5	17.24%	7	14.28%
5	Blows/hardness of physical contacts of opponents	11	55%	17	58.62%	28	57.14%

,

Table 12. Answers to difficult aspects to bear during training.

Crt. No.	Expressed Opinion	U-15/N = 20		U-16/N = 29		Total/N = 49
		No.	Percent	No.	Percent	No.	Percent
1	Physical training (gym, sprints, long-term efforts)	8	40%	22	75.86%	30	61.22%
2	Monotonous and boring trainings, routine	5	25%	2	6.89%	7	14.28%
3	Everything is attractive, I like everything I do during training	7	35%	5	17.24%	12	24.48%

,

Table 13. Answers categorized by position.

Crt. No.	Expressed Opinion	U-15/N = 20		U-16/N = 29		Total/N = 49
		No.	Percent	No.	Percent	No.	Percent
1	Yes, I have a stable position within the team	16	80%	26	89.65%	42	85.71%
2	I’m still in tests, I didn’t specialize in a certain position	4	20%	3	10.34%	7	14.28%

and

Table 14. Answers of individual self-appreciated qualities on the factors of sports training.

Crt. No.	Expressed Opinion	U-15/N = 20		U-16/N = 29		Total/N = 49
		No.	Percent	No.	Percent	No.	Percent
1	Good level of fitness (speed, strength, power, endurance, etc.)	14	70%	21	72.41%	35	71.42%
2	Good level of tactical training on the position	3	15%	7	24.31%	10	20.40%
3	Good level of specific technical training	6	30%	17	58.62%	23	46.93%

summarize the main variants of free answers, with the percentages allocated to each group and cumulated for the whole group. The data presented above (in connection with the factor analysis) confirm the adequacy of the sampling for analysis, while the good inter-item correlations for the two factors of the questionnaire, for each factor of the questionnaire, and the distribution of the items of each factor by component confirm the hypothesis H1.1.

The reasons that rugby is attractive for these age groups are numerous, but the masculine characteristic is the highest-ranked factor (with over 50% of answers), followed by hard physical contact (over 32% at the level of the whole group, but with dominance for the U-16 group with 41%). The unique character has values of over 30% at the level of the whole group but is dominant for the U-15 group (40%). The existence of collaboration and the higher level of fair play and discipline have lower values for the whole group, but higher percentages for the U-16 group.

Over 40% of players did not practice or currently practice another sport, with a higher percentage for the U-15 group (50%), which is problematic because multilateral training may have beneficial effects on the motor skills of players and facilitate the reorientation of sport in the event of rugby failure. Other sports games ranked highest among the variants practiced for the whole group (over 30%), followed by contact sports (18%), bodybuilding/fitness types, and tennis and athletics, with higher values for the U-16 group and lower values for the U-15 group.

The area with the most problems related to injuries is the legs (over 83% in the whole group), followed by the arms (over 30%), the back and spine (18%), and the head with more than 14%. However, the cause for concern regarding the head and face is that 25% of those with problems are in the U-15 group, similar to abdominal problems. For the rest of the listed regions, the U-16 group has higher percentages of injuries, and those who have never been injured (only 4.8%) were in the U-15 group.

The main cause of injuries is identified as blows and contact with opponents, as a peculiarity of the game of rugby (over 57%), followed by poor warming-up (over 32%), forcing the amplitude of motion (22%), the execution of unconsolidated procedures/poor technique (over 14%), and only 10.20% report excessive loads during training, which shows that the extent of effort is still properly planned. The U-16 group has higher percentages for the entire category of listed factors.

The most difficult aspect for young players to bear is related to the hardness of physical training (over 61% for the whole team, with an increase to over 75% for U-16). Routine and standardized/pattern/workouts are reported by 14.28% of the whole group, but with higher values in the U-15 group (25%), so the ability to concentrate and engage in uninteresting/unattractive and rigid activities for this age category it is more limited. However, 35% of the U-15 players are satisfied with absolutely everything that is planned in training, compared to the U-16 group with only 17%.

The specialization of positions is obviously at a higher level for the U-16 group (almost 90%), with only 10% of these players still being in the test/testing phase. For the U-15 group, the values of specialization of positions are naturally lower (only 80%), and 20% of the players are in tests.

Regarding the ability to self-assess strengths in training, for the whole group, the opinion that the level of specific physical training/fitness is the best-developed skill dominates (over 71%), followed at a great distance by the quality of training/technical skills (47%) and tactical ones (over 20%). The superior values of the U-16 group are noticeable for all these factors of sports training, but especially for the technical and tactical skills.

4. Discussion

The results of this study indicate mismatches in opinion between these two groups for the MS and EB factors. However, from a statistical point of view, these are significant only for two items: MS5/financial motivation in rugby and EB8/utility and accessibility for an active lifestyle, for which Hypothesis H2.1 is validated. For both groups, the average scores of the Likert scale exceed the average limit of 3; scores over 4 are registered for certain items, which emphasize the importance of the motivational factor and the effects/benefits of the game of rugby for the participants in the study. The free answers allowed for additional information about the characteristics of this sport’s attractiveness, being involved in other sports disciplines, and in parallel, the matter of injuries in various parts of the body and their causes, aspects difficult to tackle during training, the self-perceived strong points, and the issues that need to be dealt with. Several studies are analyzed in this chapter to compare the results of our research, in order to identify similar or divergent points.

The effectiveness of consulting rugby players (as research partners in the university environment/colleagues) was demonstrated in a previous study [54]. They made an important contribution to the construction of a questionnaire aimed at assessing their health, noting superior involvement, additions and improvements for standardized items or those with free answers, and suggestions about their own experiences, similar issues also encountered in our study.

The risk of losing talented rugby players (U-14, U-15, U-16/South Africa) due to RAE (relative age effects) is identified by [55], noting that grouping by age categories (depending on the date of birth) is often erroneous due to the major differences that often occur between chronological, biological, and psychological age and individual motor potential. Other authors propose a system for identifying and developing young rugby players in the UK who mature later through programs for late-maturing players within the young rugby league, with this facilitating a larger selection base, according to [56]. Our research also identifies problems related to excessively intense training sessions, which are not adapted to biological age and training level; from technical and tactical points of view, weak points that need improvement have been highlighted.

The financial impact and exodus of South African rugby players to other countries (as a business model) were investigated by [57]. Financial investments are needed in this sport, in order to prevent the exodus of players to other countries, an aspect also valid in Romania where the weak media coverage and insufficient financial support do not allow a significant expansion of this sport among young people. In our study, financial motivation is significantly more important for the U-16 group.

Unrealistic predictions of young rugby players about the longevity of their sports careers, but also the poor support of clubs and academies, are inhibitory factors for career and post-career planning. Sacrificing the education provided by schools and the exclusive search for financial contracts are mistakes that many young players make, neglecting the concern for other alternative and realistic careers for those who fail in rugby [58]. Our study identifies more significant issues, related to neglecting school activities, for the U-15 group. The role of rugby players models dedicated to young British players (U-13 and U-14) is captured by [59]. Almost everyone selected a favorite model/player, chosen for physical skills, technical skills, and temper, aspects also confirmed by our research, with higher scores for the U-15 group.

Attractive training options generate better motivation for young people in rugby. After the implementation of a 24-week program based on TGFU (Teaching Games for Understanding) for U-12 players, the authors found increased learning through cooperation and effort, decreased attitudes of rivalry and inequality, conscious involvement, and a positive attitude towards rugby, according to [60]. Our study identified a lack of interest in monotonous and stereotypical activities in the U-15 group.

Motivation is influenced by the interaction style of the coach, which must be seen as a source of support to meet the needs of athletes [61,62], as also confirmed by our study. Coaches who offer rugby players options and the opportunity to get involved in decision-making will have a positive influence on how competent and autonomous athletes feel. Relationships are perceived as being of high quality for athletes who feel that coaches care and are interested in them, rather than just the results. We have obtained high scores for the importance of victory, which proves that pressures of results also exist for these age categories, with higher values for the U-15 group.

A study conducted on young Spanish rugby players (15–19 years old) identified the importance of the models offered by parents and their role/influence in playing the game in the early years, but also draws attention to the low popularity in the media [63], a situation similar to the state of rugby in Romania. The parents of young rugby players are advised to constantly talk to them about their wishes and needs and to provide them with the support they need [64]. The study of 314 boys in England (average age of 16.23 years) showed positive associations between parents’ receptivity to youth prosperity/vitality and negative associations between parents’ receptivity to athletes’ anxiety and anxiety levels before and after competitions, mediated by self-esteem. However, we obtained lower values of motivation to play rugby from parents/entourage, but higher values associated with the influence of the coach.

Differences in the motivational factors for rugby players are reported depending on gender. Even if both genders have high scores for intrinsic motivation, the tendency of men to orient themselves towards external rewards (extrinsic rewards) is indicated, and the component related to the social aspect is very important, according to [65], an aspect confirmed by our study for the U-16 group.

Interviews with rugby coaches (for U-13 groups) conducted by [66] point out that early specialization is not indicated, with less than 25% of children from the U-13 group found in U-18 groups and late specialization (high school) being indicated, while in the U-16 group, one can move on to talent identification when physical maturation indicates the presence or lack of qualities for rugby. In our study, 90% of the U-16 group already have a clearly defined specialization. Maintaining a larger group of young athletes is important, rather than just small elite groups. Attempts at several branches of sport in the U-13 group are recommended to diversify motor skills. In our study, 50% of the sportsmen in the U-15 group and 62% of the U-16 group practice other sports disciplines, where other sports games are prevalent. The pressure of results at a young age should be avoided, and the provision of sufficient time for homework should be allowed, as the issue of motivation related to victory and neglect of schoolwork (especially for the U-15 group) is also reported in our study.

The problems generated by the early selection and over-specialization, as well as the important role of the coach in the education and motivation of young players in understanding their needs related to the development phases, are also signaled by [67]. The need for a multidimensional/holistic assessment of talented young rugby players in Australia is highlighted by [68], which insists on investigating the real potential (physical performance, anthropometric measurements, technical-tactical skills, mental traits, etc.) as a way to minimize RAE (relative age effects), a topic also highlighted by [69].

Knowing the mental, motor, and physical characteristics of the players allows trainers to individualize and adapt the training process. The comparative study of young players (16 years old) in rugby, football, and basketball showed that all specializations have a good ability to manage stress, superior motivation, and self-assessment skills, but those in rugby have better scores related to the evaluation of performance and mental capacity, and those in football to control stress, motivation, and cohesion of the team, according to [70]. We noted higher scores of favorable self-assessments of their own abilities for the U-16 group.

Attention to injuries in rugby for young people is addressed by [71], highlighting the hardness and the fact that it is a contact sport (full-contact collision), in which the force to gain possession of the ball is often extreme. Young people and children are more prone to injuries due to physical vulnerability; our study shows that most injuries are caused by direct contact with opponents, even if this is a particular attraction of rugby.

Players with high workloads and training throughout the season recovered faster than those with moderate or low values. The analysis of shorter stages (intense competitive phases) generated high levels of stress and poor recovery for those involved more, so not all young people can cope with stress and rapid recovery processes, which can affect results, cause injuries, and result in overtraining, according to [72]. It is recommended to reduce the intensity of the effort on the day when rugby players report, in the morning before training or competition, an impairment of well-being, so as not to diminish performance, according to [73]. Our group indicates physical training and hard effort as the main aspect that is difficult to bear in training.

Using/wearing mouth guards (MGs) in adult rugby players of Japan is conditioned by their use during the high school period, as a measure of reducing injuries in this area of the body [74].

Concussions can cause long-term neurological complications. Even though 91% of rugby players surveyed know they do not have to play anymore, 75% will continue to do so after a concussion, with men less worried about the long-term effects [75]. A study of Irish rugby players (U-20) found that almost 50% had suffered a concussion at least once, but the problem is that they do not understand the risks associated with the lack of medical investigation after suffering this trauma, and efforts are needed to inform players to reduce the risk of future secondary injuries [76]. A study performed on 304 young rugby players in Ireland (12–18 years old) a decade ago reports a concussion incidence of 6.6%, and 25% of them return to play on the pitch without seeking advice or consent from a doctor. The explanation offered is the internal motivation and the desire to play, which put pressure on the athletes, according to [77]. In our research, we discovered a high frequency of injuries to the legs and arms, with blows to the head and face being more frequent for the U-15 group.

The simultaneous existence of the well-being of professional rugby players in England (athlete welfare) and high sports performance is conditioned by the existence of several factors that generate prosperity (enhance thriving): Quality and strengthened relationships with teammates, good relations between players, coaches, and club management, activating an integrated, inclusive, and trustworthy environment, identifying the sensitive points of the players, and carefully treating families and players who do not always play or belong to the reserves. All these factors ensure development and success, according to [78]; our study also highlighted the importance of qualitative relationships with teammates and the coach in order to facilitate performance.

5. Conclusions

This study validates the hypotheses regarding factor analysis and the internal consistency of the constructed and applied questionnaire and identifies the differences in opinions on the items with free answers. However, the analysis of variance showed that the differences between the scores of the two groups are, in most cases, insignificant (the values of F correspond to the threshold p > 0.05). Exceptions are observed only in the case of two items: Financial motivation (where those in the U-16 group have significantly higher scores, being more concerned about this aspect) and accessibility/usefulness of rugby for the population, as a variant of active leisure (where those in the U-15 group are significantly more optimistic). The U-15 team is more attracted to the top players in terms of role models, more involved in training out of passion, and also more dependent on the quality of relationships with the coach and teammates (with the coach having an important role in supporting and motivating young people), while those in the U-16 team have better scores on self-perceived skills that ensure success in rugby. Surprisingly, however, parents and entourage have much lower scores than coaches, in the motivational support for this sport. The U-15 team has a more optimistic perception of most of the benefits of rugby on multiple levels, and those in the U-16 team have higher scores on favorable effects on attitudes and better manage problems related to school activity, managing to focus better on both levels (academic and sports). The fact that 80% of the members of the U-15 group and 90% of those of the U-16 group already have a specialization in a playing position is a gratifying aspect, which can be explained by the fact that their level of training is higher (by comparison with their colleagues from their clubs of origin).

The masculine characteristics of the game, its uniqueness, and the physical contact are the main factors of attraction for rugby. Over 56% of players have practiced or currently practice other forms of movement, with sports games and contact sports being favorites. Moreover, 96% of the players suffered injuries, with their legs and arms being the most affected, but the high incidence of head and face blows for those in the U-15 group (25%) is surprising, with the main causes for these problems identified as the hardness of the contact with opponents and the superficiality of warming up. Hard, intense, and long workouts (related to physical training) are the most difficult factor to bear, and for the U-15 group, the boredom induced by routine and monotony is noted. However, the high level of physical training/fitness is self-perceived as the main strength of the players, followed by technical and then tactical.

Practical Applications

The results obtained can be used by coaches to optimize the training process by capitalizing on the motivational components identified and eliminating the problems identified by athletes. Trainers can adjust/adapt their behavior and support their players much better, as the relationship between them and the players is emphasized as being relevant for obtaining superior performance. Ensuring a collaboration framework within the group is also important in order to increase both the involvement and the level of self-confidence. Promoting the game within schools and for young people should be based on the aspects that render it attractive (the unique aspect, the man-like aspect, and the high level of fair play). The study also provides relevant information about the options that can reduce boredom and put an end to abandonment, that is, avoiding standard, monotonous training and promoting interesting activities for these age categories. The fact that the players indicate the causes generating injuries frequently represents an opportunity for the prevention and treatment of the non-superficial warming-up stage in training. Focusing on exercises/mobility structures that have beneficial effects on the muscle force and the mobility of the inferior member joints (where most injuries are observed) is a priority. Last but not least, the fact that the players mention a series of training weak points that they consider to prevent them from optimizing their performance might provide guidance and personalization of training by improving these problematic factors.

Limits of the study and future directions of investigation:

The studied scientific literature also includes other research directions, which are missing in our study. We did not address the issue of addictions (especially smoking, but also alcohol and banned substances/doping among rugby players and coaches), an aspect reported by [79], as well as high-risk health behaviors.

The investigation of the coaches working in club teams and in national groups for the questioned age ranges would facilitate a more complete study, providing information related to the investigated issue. Furthermore, questioning athletes in senior teams would identify how to change the perception of the motivational factor and assess the effects of the game of rugby, with increased age and increased competitive experience.

A differentiated analysis of players’ skills in positions and departments would allow a clearer orientation of training, as the investigation of [80] establishes that attackers have better scores for agility tests, and upper body strength is very important for defenders/back players. The analysis of variations and fluctuations in the physical development and motor skills of school rugby players at puberty and adolescence (for close age ranges) would be another direction to investigate, in order to eliminate some of the problems generated by the relative age of athletes, a problem also reported by [81].

Last but not least, a comparative approach between the selection process, the work methodology, and the competitive system in Romania and countries with results and tradition in rugby (Southern Hemisphere and Western Europe) would identify differences that facilitate the achievement of sports performance.