Could have serious impact on Rugby league Academics call for tackles and scrums to be banned from school rugby games - The Independent https://apple.news/ANhAAyuc8QnGGZJjRH3lULA

Could have serious impact on Rugby league Academics call for tackles and scrums to be banned from school rugby games - The Independent https://apple.news/ANhAAyuc8QnGGZJjRH3lULA

We don't need to ban it. We need kids to be coached how to do it properly. Better coaching will mean less risk.

Agreed.

I would say union are more at risk of this than League simply due to the nature of the game. The tackle is a lot more controlled in league than in Union and there’s a greater risk of “secondary” contact to the head during a ruck than a play the ball.

However personally I still think the call for tackling to be banned is unnecessary. I would urge both Union and League to look at ways of reducing that contact and the unnecessary aggression that is too often evident at amateur games. Maybe a tweak of the rules is needed but the biggest and best step would be to ban violent amateur players and the coaches and clubs that allow/encourage them to be so.

Not enough research been done to show a ban is warranted.

Risks differ between the codes rather than union being greater IMO. In League players further apart and hit at greater speeds more often.

Agree it is down to education to teach ways to mitigate risk in tackle area. But wrong to eliminate all risk since it is a part of life.

I don't agree with the report's recommendation to ban contact. However, I do think it's worth RL looking at how it can encourage more non-contact or reduced contact versions of sport.

Forgive the anecdote, but I've currently got a 9 month old boy at home. Now, I'd love him to start playing rugby - its a sport that game me a lot of enjoyment as a child - and if he wants to take it up when he's old enough, I'll encourage it. But I've already got in-laws in my ear about how they don't want him playing it, how he's "too little" and how he'll "get hurt". They'd rather he played tennis or something like that.

Now, I get that sentiment is going to stronger whilst he's still a baby, but it does make me wonder how many kids we lose to the sport because we're percieved as too tough, or too dangerous? I think most people on this forum know that RL is a generally safe sport, but there has been a lot of language in recent surrounding RL (and other contact sports) around "concussions", "head injuries", "neck problems" and equipping every amateur club with a defibrilator. It's right that those discussions are happening, but does that sort of dialogue discourage parents from encouraging their kids into contact sport? After all, if we're supposedly in this "Playstation generation" where kids aren't allowed outside because they'll get hurt, then surely that impacts on contact sports?

There are other benefits to encouraging forms of the sport such as touch and tag - it promotes better handling, lines and evasive running for starters. They could also help us to address a lot of parental anxieties by only introducing the tougher elements of the sport later on, once the kids have properly got the bug. I don't know what age we currently introduce tacking, but given the number of half-time kids games at Headingley where there is one fat kid that seemingly takes up every second carry because they can drag four defenders with them, it's probably too early.

I would generally agree and would suggest that we use the same approach to encourage greater female participation as well as the mixed social side for us old fatties. Perhaps touch rugby could be the next pilates.

Union players just need to learn how to actually tackle. The number of times you see a defender lead with their head is absurd. BBC news are just showing some footage along with this story now and it's just defenders leading with the crown instead of a shoulder.

Tag rugby is definitely a good way to get kids interested and a way to introduce the game without the risk.

We should always be looking at ways to make the game safer.
However, RL scrums are not exactly dangerous and certainly now when compared to Union where the front row collapses with alarming regularity.
Education on tackling can always be improved which will reduce risk but, the sanitisation of sport will eventually kill certain sports and with the population in the UK among the most obese in the world, I would suggest that getting more people involved in any sport is the best thing that can happen and if that happens to be RL in any form (ie touch or tag) it should be massively encouraged.

The lack of any fitness among the younger generation is appalling and perhaps if we hadn't moved away from team sports in the 80's, so that "little Jonnie" didn't get upset about losing or, not getting picked.
the whole nation might just be a little bit healthier.

Strive for improvement but, banning contact sports is just mad.

There are risks in all walks of life, none more so than with road traffic accidents but, were not about to ban the automobile just yet.

Ban Wigan from tackling.

I agree with that, but up to age 16?

Is this report specifically talking about school rugby or all junior rugby? I would imagine schools are more an issue where you get PE teachers coaching teams who don't really know what they are doing. Coaches at proper clubs who are qualified and capable to teach proper technique aren't such an issue.

Jesus Christ. I can't believe we are even having this conversation. Has the world gone mad? I understand the need to make techniques safer (for example, no need for unnecessary pressure on neck so banned the crusher tackle, fair rule) but to ban tackling all together. No wonder my generation is soft. Sledging will be next to be banned soon because feelings will be hurt. Society is well and truly a joke.

I understand no contact for the older generation who want to keep active and non contact (or tag) rugby can benefit but in terms of banning tackling in the game as a whole........wow. I'd be surprised if there isn't calls for a ban on passing soon because the ball might hit the players head. Sorry for the rant!

Judging by some of our defensive efforts this year, we already have been.

Thats because Wigan have stopped playing the game of RL and seem more interested in concentrating on the niggly stuff.
You should put a bid in for Greg Bird, he'd fit in well at Wigan

As a young kid playing rugby many moons ago, I relished the physical contact and being bashed around.... and I wasn't the only one.

Every few years, a university boffin comes out with this "ban tackling" garbage and it gets national press coverage..... yawn. Plenty of evidence to the contrary too that RL is no more dangerous than fishing or snooker

That's a lovely stereotypical rough and tumble attitude - but so long as this kind of academic evidence piles up, the possibility of clubs and/or the governing body of either code being sued out of existence by injured players (or parents of injured kids) becomes more likely. Didn't the NFL settle a class action lawsuit from former players a few years ago, to the tune of about $700 million?

It's not very sensible to dismiss these things based on a perception that it's health and safety gorn maaad.

I don't believe that for one second

I had 8 stitches in my head, ear nearly ripped off twice, 2 broken noses, numerous teeth knocked out/broken, dislocated clavicle, dislodged vertebrae, countless tears & sprains, to name but a few. None of it compares with the pain in my thumbs after tag rugby. It should be banned.

There are more injuries in soccer at schoolkid level from bad tackles and tackles that though not intentional end in injury, massively so.
This was one of the things we pushed in schools in Hertfordshire to try get kids playing RL as opposed to the round ball game.
I had these stored on my PC, I don't doubt that that is significantly different nowadays.

Surely that is related to the numbers actually playing the games though than propensity?

May well be a rough and tumble attitude. And yes there is academic evidence to suggest contact sport can be harmful, it annoys me that these academics come out and say it needs banning. Probably a lot of them undertaking the study have never played contact sport. On the other hand to 'academic evidence' I fell out of a moving taxi going at roughly 30-35mph in Leeds last year. If it hadn't been for all my rugby training and learning to land/roll during contact and constantly conditioning my body for contact then it is safe to say I may well not be here now. So contact within Rugby probably saved my life.

Boxing is probably the worst sport in terms of injuries. And yet there is no outcry to ban boxing or wear helmets? And yes the NFL were rightly sued, they sent players back on the field knowing they had suffered concussions. This was pre-head testing. Now we have a system where a doctor has the final say, not a coach or a player but a professional who determines whether or not it is safe to re-enter the field or miss the rest of the game. Also in America they have to pay for their own healthcare, here it's a lot different. There is no upfront cost or paying thousands for a procedure.

We unfortunately now live in a suing culture. Where everyone is looking to sue someone for every little thing. For me if you want to play contact sport it should be written in the contract that you play knowing the risks, and you are only eligible to sue if there is negligence from the team (like the NFL case) or a player breaks the law and performs a banned tackle which results in serious injury. If people are afraid of getting hurt. Don't play.

Probably, but I wouldn't know what the participation levels are, from that table the [ireported[/i injury ratio is 4.5:1, even if the ratio of participation oustripped the injury ratio there are a heck of a lot of serious injuries in soccer at all levels and no-one is even remotely talking about banning tackling in soccer, it would be ludicrous, just as it would be for rugby at school level.

It's like stating that child cyclists must wear helmets yet 'only' 6 children were killed (non preventable by a helmet in any case and most likely the fault of a motorist) yet ignoring that 12 children were killed by head injury alone in motor vehicles in England and wales plus many more deaths, that despite airbags etc. why not ban children being driven in cars etc as opposed to forcing the vulnerable to adorn something known not to protect at anything above failing whilst tripping speeds

Union introduce the skills at junior level in a much better way than league do IMO, initially its tag rugby- to me that encourages passing and catching skills rather than the league coaches methodof "give it the big lad so they can just run over the rest" - they build up certain skills each year- but of course that's at junior clubs where the coaches are specialised. The issue I feel is that kids suddenly get introduced to rugby at high school aged 11-having never watched or played the game- and the PE teachers aren't able to coach techniques correctly.

In the last 18 months or so, Touch Football Australia has officially aligned with the NRL. Anecdotal evidence suggests that this is being at least somewhat effective in keeping smaller/later developing kids in the game

Ahh, I see the Prof is back on her favourite soapbox again.