Rugby - too dangerous to play?

[strawclearer]

Just read another insightful article from Austin Healey...http://www.telegraph.co.uk/rugby-union/ ... rous-play/

I've 'banged on' for ages to anyone who'll listen - and even some who won't - that players have to become lighter. It stands to reason that two 13 stone guys crashing into each other are going to inflict less damage than two 18 stoners having a 'head on'. My old dad played outside centre for Tigers and was approximately half a human being lighter than the present incumbent. I know you can't extrapolate from a sample of one but he never had anything approaching a serious injury and used to say he was in more danger from Peter Jerwood - his skipper - in the bar afterwards than he ever was on the pitch!

So - stop lifting at the lineouts; allow 2 replacements and only for injuries etc etc...I'm banging on again.

Seems like Austin agrees.

[Big Dai]

Plus take the mark on the deck and get back to passive scrums. And no lifting to take the kick off / restart. It's also a tackle not a hit. There will be those who will call me soft but I believe the old laws were there for a reason. Changing laws to improve the spectacle has made it more hazardous.

[CJ]

A lot of sense here. Lifting is anathema to me- get a bloke who can jump higher than the others.
As for the size of players, well, the population in general is bigger than 50 years ago but the rugby player today is so much taller, stronger and fitter that it guarantees injuries, imho.

[strawclearer]

A lot of sense here. Lifting is anathema to me- get a bloke who can jump higher than the others.
As for the size of players, well, the population in general is bigger than 50 years ago but the rugby player today is so much taller, stronger and fitter that it guarantees injuries, imho.

Yes but - if there's no lifting in the lineout or at restarts then the jumpers need to be leaner so they can jump higher. If the props have to stay on for 80 minutes, they need to be leaner to last the pace.

Leaner = lighter = fewer injuries all things being equal.

(Having to run around for 80 instead of 55 minutes might persuade a few props to stop pratting about at the scrum as well in order to avoid each half taking 60 minutes!)

[strawclearer]

I'm embarrassed to admit that Mrs Strawclearer dropped a clanger at a recent family get-together by wondering out loud whether we should be encouraging our 2 year old grandsons to play rugby when they're 'of age' because, as she put it, "it's such a dangerous game."

Tumbleweed blew silently across the garden and an iciness descended over those assembled who stared in disbelief at this 'viper in our familial bosom'.

She's still ostracised, of course...but I suspect other grandmothers and mothers will share her concern which doesn't bode well for our great game..?

[jgriffin]

Posted this before but this all was predicted by former national athletics coach and until recently one of the oldest rugby players in the UK, Tom McNab. He forsaw (two decades ago) the predilection in athletics for fat-reduction catching on in rugby, making people more muscular and lean, without understanding that fat was needed in a collision sport to avoid severe tissue damage. Rugby used to be a balance between lean and fat, with those undergoing more collisions (the FatBoys)needing ballast. The idea also was that backrowers were long, lean greyhounds (e.g. Andy Ripley types) and scrums were restarts, not comic operas.
I'm afraid until the brown stuff hits the revolving metal for World Rugby, nothing will be done except handwringing and tinkering. There was a golden time for rugby, but that receded when proper rucking was outlawed and barging/diving allowed. BTW Smurf wants to go back to the footruck, as it was less injurious and made the game quicker, as did fold-in scrums, hooking and 9's whipping the ball out fast (like Shazam). You could rip the ball without being done (as I've seem this season several times) too.

[Lutontiger]

My son was in a car accident recently - hit from behind by another car. He had whiplash-related aches and pains for over a week, and he was protected by his seat and the vehicle. Rugby players are crashing into each other very heavily, with no such protection. No wonder they get injured. I'm particularly worried by the head injury implications for their future wellbeing. This HAS to be addressed for the sake of our players' health and for the sake of the game. How do we campaign for safer rugby?

[Iain]

My son was in a car accident recently - hit from behind by another car. He had whiplash-related aches and pains for over a week, and he was protected by his seat and the vehicle. Rugby players are crashing into each other very heavily, with no such protection. No wonder they get injured. I'm particularly worried by the head injury implications for their future wellbeing. This HAS to be addressed for the sake of our players' health and for the sake of the game. How do we campaign for safer rugby?

We're too far down the road to reverse it now. Players are too big, hence so are the collisions. How do you make players smaller?

[jgriffin]

You have to make all of them cover more ground, speeding up play, widening offside lines to make play development more likely - suggestions?
Non-tackle contact is by bilateral engagement over the ball, at least one arm wrapped , no barging or diving, but free hands use if ruck not called, after that, drive over old skool style (speeds up play)?
Gate is narrowed and all gatekeepers must be behind first players back foot (frees up flanks a bit)?
Tackles below armpit exclusively (makes offloads more likely)?

Any other ideas alongside the lineout stuff? My view it is scrums not lineouts that are an issue. You have to make dynamic play a necessity and give avoidance a premium over collision.

[h's dad]

I'm embarrassed to admit that Mrs Strawclearer dropped a clanger at a recent family get-together by wondering out loud whether we should be encouraging our 2 year old grandsons to play rugby when they're 'of age' because, as she put it, "it's such a dangerous game."

Tumbleweed blew silently across the garden and an iciness descended over those assembled who stared in disbelief at this 'viper in our familial bosom'.

She's still ostracised, of course...but I suspect other grandmothers and mothers will share her concern which doesn't bode well for our great game..?

I may be with Mrs Strawclearer, I'm not sure than any child should be encouraged into rugby - certainly not by a rugby enthusiast.

Regarding suggestions made, I'm not sure I see how reducing the number of replacements will lead to fewer and less severe injuries. I am in favour of making players run round for closer to 80 minutes and I can see this producing players and games less like to cause or receive major injuries. As a caveat, teams reactions to this may not be as expected - a fatboy did say to me that the first thing to do in any game is to take out the kickers - on both sides.

[fleabane]

Late tackles, especially the marginal ones, a la Lawes on Toby (twice), to be yellow each time.

No double tackles / hits, and all below the armpit.

No choke tackles, open up the play?

Total weight of players on the field? Maximum weight for a single player? Fiddly, but not impossible. There are plenty of sports which determine a maximum number of years of experience or games played as limits on participants.

[strawclearer]

Total weight of players on the field? Maximum weight for a single player? Fiddly, but not impossible.

Works for boxing!

[h's dad]

Late tackles, especially the marginal ones, a la Lawes on Toby (twice), to be yellow each time.

No double tackles / hits, and all below the armpit.

No choke tackles, open up the play?

Total weight of players on the field? Maximum weight for a single player? Fiddly, but not impossible. There are plenty of sports which determine a maximum number of years of experience or games played as limits on participants.

Not sure a choke tackle is a safety issue, I think you're saying that banning it will make it easier to pass (and open up play) and possible leading to more tries. I'm not completely sold and I know many want it banned but I like opportunities to promote turnovers.

If any late tackle is penalised, ie, if the ball has been released, could this lead to balls just being jettisoned after commitment and an instant before the tackle as the 'late' tackle and the penalty will occur before the ball hits the ground for a knock on - the need for an accurate well timed pass will simply disappear?

[jgriffin]

The late tackle has to be a ref's judgement. I think the overal weight idea has some merit, except every player would need weighing as they arrived for the game!!!!
TBH it is only the first 3 or 4 divisions where this is an issue.
I'm just for making getting to the tackle and getting the ball away as important as it was thirty years ago, and defensive offside being 5 metres.

[Soggypitch]

You have to make all of them cover more ground, speeding up play, widening offside lines to make play development more likely - suggestions?
Non-tackle contact is by bilateral engagement over the ball, at least one arm wrapped , no barging or diving, but free hands use if ruck not called, after that, drive over old skool style (speeds up play)?
Gate is narrowed and all gatekeepers must be behind first players back foot (frees up flanks a bit)?
Tackles below armpit exclusively (makes offloads more likely)?

Any other ideas alongside the lineout stuff? My view it is scrums not lineouts that are an issue. You have to make dynamic play a necessity and give avoidance a premium over collision.

I agree with all of that. But for some to say rugby is dangerous and we should not encourage our children to play it, is wrong. It's only at the elite level where there is a real problem and the benefits of playing amateur rugby, far outweigh the risks.