Concussion Legal Action Against WR

[Niegs]

I'm absolutely amazed no one has been killed or disabled from this part of the game. It's a lot more dangerous that getting a decent "shoeing" back in the day to clear a ruck and which was banned because it looked bad.

Edit: even looking at that example, if the Ireland 3 had let go of his grip on Hogg a split second later he would have had 20 stone, at top speed, stright down on his neck and spine. Scary to even look at.

Completely agree! 3 doesn't put the shoulder in as we've seen some players do (and in many cases rightly get pinged for it). But I've been folded like Hogg before, thankfully avoided serious injury too, but felt things being stretched that'd never been stretched that way before, especially in my back and hamstrings!

[Uncle fester]

The clear out is perfectly legal because he did bind onto Hogg but jesus, I'd die if I was on the receiving end of that.

[Blackmac]

The clear out is perfectly legal because he did bind onto Hogg but jesus, I'd die if I was on the receiving end of that.

I think that is what is wrong with the game. We go nuts when we see a slightly high tackle that really is unlikely to do any harm but then that is perfectly legal. It's a testament to the conditioning of the players that Hogg can cope with that, but it is utterly ridiculous.

[Slick]

The clear out is perfectly legal because he did bind onto Hogg but jesus, I'd die if I was on the receiving end of that.

Well yes, not complaining about the legality of it, just that it’s fucking mental that it’s legal

[Sandstorm]

The clear out is perfectly legal because he did bind onto Hogg but jesus, I'd die if I was on the receiving end of that.

Well yes, not complaining about the legality of it, just that it’s fucking mental that it’s legal

It’s a dangerous high-shot anywhere away from a ruck and the Irishman would probably get a red and then 4 weeks off.

Laws need a serious change.

[robmatic]

The clear out is perfectly legal because he did bind onto Hogg but jesus, I'd die if I was on the receiving end of that.

Well yes, not complaining about the legality of it, just that it’s fucking mental that it’s legal

It’s a dangerous high-shot anywhere away from a ruck and the Irishman would probably get a red and then 4 weeks off.

Laws need a serious change.

Basically you're allowed to go flying off your feet into a ruck as long as you fly into an opposing player - that shouldn't be right.

[Torquemada 1420]

Still not on board with the concept of forcing players to play 80 more often as a way to reduce size. If you want to reduce player size, legislate for it directly. 120kg behemoths are a problem? Get rid of them then.

You may be right but I'd still want to see this for all the other benefits: in particular the space it creates later on in games. Guys like Thomas and May would have field days later on and it would bring back crowds. It really in only us purists who'd put up with the likes of Eng v Fra last week and even my patience is wearing at such exhibitions: I'd certainly not pay to watch it.

[Torquemada 1420]

I'm absolutely amazed no one has been killed or disabled from this part of the game. It's a lot more dangerous that getting a decent "shoeing" back in the day to clear a ruck and which was banned because it looked bad.

Edit: even looking at that example, if the Ireland 3 had let go of his grip on Hogg a split second later he would have had 20 stone, at top speed, stright down on his neck and spine. Scary to even look at.

It is mental and have wondered if it needs to be depowered in the same way as the scrum engagement i.e. you have to bind with the player first before being permitted to push.

[JM2K6]

Still not on board with the concept of forcing players to play 80 more often as a way to reduce size. If you want to reduce player size, legislate for it directly. 120kg behemoths are a problem? Get rid of them then.

You may be right but I'd still want to see this for all the other benefits: in particular the space it creates later on in games. Guys like Thomas and May would have field days later on and it would bring back crowds. It really in only us purists who'd put up with the likes of Eng v Fra last week and even my patience is wearing at such exhibitions: I'd certainly not pay to watch it.

Yes, I agree, and I don't think that just getting rid of the biggest players solves the problem on its own.

[Blackmac]

There is a poll on Wales Online asking would you allow your child to play rugby. The sheer ignorance and lack of understanding as to how and why the evolution of rugby since professionalism has led to these issues is mind blowing.

[Torquemada 1420]

From an article in The Times

Reduced replacements

The logic behind this is straightforward. Fewer replacements mean that the starting XV have to stay out on the pitch for longer. They will become more fatigued, therefore both the frequency and severity of collisions over the course of 80 minutes will drop.

Although the players will still be just as fresh at the start, one of the principal causes of chronic traumatic encephalopathy is regular, moderate bangs to the head. It is hoped that with players more fatigued – therefore opening up more space on the pitch – these collisions will be more infrequent.

Signs of the growing importance and influence of a replacements bench to a team’s performance have not exactly been subtle; the vernacular says it all. ‘Game-changers’, ‘finishers’, and ‘impact players’ are all terms used to describe what was, until rugby turned professional, one forward and one back sitting on the bench.

For the most extreme example of rugby’s replacement malaise, we can turn to South Africa’s ‘bomb squad’ in the 2019 World Cup final, where six, fresh 18-stone breezeblocks joined the match in the second half.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/rugby-union ... l-reduced/

[GogLais]

I take the point re more space on the pitch thus fewer collisions but individual players are going to be on the pitch for longer. Perverse logic but more subs might be better. I fully expect this to be shot down in flames.

[Chrysoprase]

I take the point re more space on the pitch thus fewer collisions but individual players are going to be on the pitch for longer. Perverse logic but more subs might be better. I fully expect this to be shot down in flames.

Presumably if individual players are going to be on the pitch for longer then this will suit players with greater stamina and cardio fitness over lumbering behemoths who can only last 60 minutes before they're blowing out their arse. Consequently the average size, weight and power of players will start to reduce and hits will be less damaging.

[sockwithaticket]

I take the point re more space on the pitch thus fewer collisions but individual players are going to be on the pitch for longer. Perverse logic but more subs might be better. I fully expect this to be shot down in flames.

Could be bollocks, but I was under the impression that fatigue increases the likelihood of injury.

I'm increasingly minded that what would create more space on the pitch is
1. Consistent improvement in enforcing the offside line
2. Rucks where all must keep their feet. Potentially, no more jackalling, you have to push over the ball before it can be picked up
3. Ruling out swimming up and around the maul so that more players will be sucked in to combat a well set one.

[GogLais]

I take the point re more space on the pitch thus fewer collisions but individual players are going to be on the pitch for longer. Perverse logic but more subs might be better. I fully expect this to be shot down in flames.

Presumably if individual players are going to be on the pitch for longer then this will suit players with greater stamina and cardio fitness over lumbering behemoths who can only last 60 minutes before they're blowing out their arse. Consequently the average size, weight and power of players will start to reduce and hits will be less damaging.

I suppose I think there are always unintended/unexpected consequences. Rhetorical question really - will it make much difference to the concussion issue if props are a stone or two lighter?

[JM2K6]

"Frequency of collisions is a problem, so let's make players play for longer" is a curious take.

And no, I suspect getting hit 4 times by Alec Hepburn is just as dangerous as getting hit 3 times by Harry Williams tbh

[SaintK]

It's possible that this won't even reach court

The expected multimillion pound lawsuit from rugby players who have suffered permanent brain damage has less than a 50/50 chance of succeeding and a settlement is the most likely outcome, two sports law experts have told the Guardian.

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2020 ... rld-rugby

[Carter's Choice]

Tinkering with the size of the bench feels like re-arranging deck chairs on the Titanic.

[Torquemada 1420]

2. Rucks where all must keep their feet. Potentially, no more jackalling, you have to push over the ball before it can be picked up

I certainly think in regards rucks

a) No-one can join at speed i.e. no more exocet-ing. You must bind to a player before being able to push in the same way we de-powered the scrum engagement.
b) You can ONLY push. No more pulling players into the ruck. I see so many pens where a legit jackaller is then pinged for going off his feet when it's an oppo who has pulled him........ often a player
on the floor who is meant to be out of the game.

[Torquemada 1420]

"Frequency of collisions is a problem, so let's make players play for longer" is a curious take.

And no, I suspect getting hit 4 times by Alec Hepburn is just as dangerous as getting hit 3 times by Harry Williams tbh

Surprised me i.e.the implication that repetition is more damaging than the odd, big collision. I assume they have data supporting that conclusion.

[Chrysoprase]

I suppose I think there are always unintended/unexpected consequences. Rhetorical question really - will it make much difference to the concussion issue if props are a stone or two lighter?

Not on its own no, but I don't think there's a simple solution and reducing the weight of the players smashing into each other must be a contributing factor in making the game "safer". I say that in quotes because the nature of the game is that it's never going to be completely safe or free of risk.

[GogLais]

Another random thought - teams replace some of them because they can but now most second and back rows seem to be able to last a game, in fact they have to. Thinking about props, mightn’t one team choose to play 20+ stone ones against smaller ones because they’ll get so many scrum penalties that it won’t matter if they’re strolling around in the last 20? The disparity in size might make scrums more dangerous as well.

[GogLais]

"Frequency of collisions is a problem, so let's make players play for longer" is a curious take.

And no, I suspect getting hit 4 times by Alec Hepburn is just as dangerous as getting hit 3 times by Harry Williams tbh

Surprised me i.e.the implication that repetition is more damaging than the odd, big collision. I assume they have data supporting that conclusion.

It makes sense really if it is the case that football players end up with problems after heading a ball so many times.

[Niegs]

2. Rucks where all must keep their feet. Potentially, no more jackalling, you have to push over the ball before it can be picked up

I certainly think in regards rucks

a) No-one can join at speed i.e. no more exocet-ing. You must bind to a player before being able to push in the same way we de-powered the scrum engagement.
b) You can ONLY push. No more pulling players into the ruck. I see so many pens where a legit jackaller is then pinged for going off his feet when it's an oppo who has pulled him........ often a player
on the floor who is meant to be out of the game.

To your b), that has to include rolling them over as well.

I'd also ban attacking players from holding onto their man on the ground, allowing defenders an actual opportunity to push them off the ball. This could mean more attacking players in the breakdown to secure, giving defenders the advantage, but might also encourage a LOT more offloading or even quicker service with no defender able to get a hand in to slow it down (buying time for the defensive line to set up)

Funny that we could potentially have a quicker game by refereeing the laws!?

[Sandstorm]

It’s pretty tough to only change the laws to prevent attacking team from “doing their job” at a ruck.

Remember the old days when the only player making turnovers was the open side and if a team didn’t pick one, they didn’t try one in 80 mins?

These days every single player has a go - a good go too! - from 9s, wingers, fullbacks, even Lanky Locks. It’s a nightmare for those trying to protect their own attacking ball.

The influx of 7s players into many backlines makes ruck work child’s play for almost everyone now. Once 10s start making turnovers, the ruck is dead.

[Torquemada 1420]

These days every single player has a go - a good go too! - from 9s, wingers, fullbacks, even Lanky Locks. It’s a nightmare for those trying to protect their own attacking ball.

Nail. Head. Stop making your 1st aim to go to floor, try looking for space and try passing it. This is union, not sh*thouse league.

[Niegs]

These days every single player has a go - a good go too! - from 9s, wingers, fullbacks, even Lanky Locks. It’s a nightmare for those trying to protect their own attacking ball.

Nail. Head. Stop making your 1st aim to go to floor, try looking for space and try passing it. This is union, not sh*thouse league.

That was my point, and frustrates me as a coach. Our national and provincial coaches had webinars telling us to tell our players to do the same stupid shuffle you see pros do before contact, flop on bellies and then twist to lay the ball back. Latch and seal if you're close. How about more skills and tactics to exploit/manipulate defences and get through them rather than play straight into them?

I cringe when I hear amateur coaches, especially, talk about 'winning the collision'. Fcuk off!

[Random1]

Loving all of this conversation - it seems there are three camps;

1- the problem is the breakdown and if we clean that up, then it should create space as ball will be quicker and more defenders will be out of the game, thereby creating space.

2 - we need to change the laws to deal with the consequences of the current breakdown to try and create space and minimise kicking tennis e.g. by reducing the use of the box kick somehow

3 - reduce the number of breakdowns by reducing player numbers or making players more tired.

All the solutions to 1 seem to be complex and will put just feel like they’ll lead to a whole host of other symptoms.

The solutions to 2 seem more simple, but not sure of efficacy and it’s treating symptoms and not the cause.

And 3 risks fundamentally changing the game.

Hurts my head.

Edit: can’t count to three.

[Torquemada 1420]

These days every single player has a go - a good go too! - from 9s, wingers, fullbacks, even Lanky Locks. It’s a nightmare for those trying to protect their own attacking ball.

Nail. Head. Stop making your 1st aim to go to floor, try looking for space and try passing it. This is union, not sh*thouse league.

That was my point, and frustrates me as a coach. Our national and provincial coaches had webinars telling us to tell our players to do the same stupid shuffle you see pros do before contact, flop on bellies and then twist to lay the ball back. Latch and seal if you're close. How about more skills and tactics to exploit/manipulate defences and get through them rather than play straight into them?

I cringe when I hear amateur coaches, especially, talk about 'winning the collision'. Fcuk off!

I'm with you 100% brother.

[Line6 HXFX]

Look the rugby culture is all
"grow a pair".
"Man up".
"Dry those eyes, sweatheart".
"Get back in line and shut up"..
"Don't complain ever".

And that is just amongst the supporters.

Imagine the shit the players live with every day.
(Let's pause for a second to imagine the shit the players have to live with, ontop of financial responsibilities and their professional contracts they cannot just walk away from).

So how do we all think this intense toxic masculinity shit, when faced with the very real problem with èarly onset dementia will cope?
Bare on mind Eddie Jones refuses to wear a mask to protect himself from Covid etc.
Again.. I'll help..so let's pause for a second and really think about the phrase "rationalising like crazy mental fuckers" because that is where they will go.


Because I'm guessing the culture of toxic masculinity, together with just the fucking love for the sport, will make Donald Trumps election defeat look like a picture of heartwarming good grace and responsibility.


Guys you love a sport where the players are damaging their brains, and for your own personal entertainment.

You really need to look at yourselves.
I am sure there are many fanatics that don't give a shit.
There are many people who love dogfighting.


The facts have changed.
Change with them.

Rugby is fucked.

[SaintK]

Look the rugby culture is all
"grow a pair".
"Man up".
"Dry those eyes, sweatheart".
"Get back in line and shut up"..
"Don't complain ever".

And that is just amongst the supporters.

Imagine the shit the players live with every day.
(Let's pause for a second to imagine the shit the players have to live with, ontop of financial responsibilities and their professional contracts they cannot just walk away from).

So how do we all think this intense toxic masculinity shit, when faced with the very real problem with èarly onset dementia will cope?
Bare on mind Eddie Jones refuses to wear a mask to protect himself from Covid etc.
Again.. I'll help..so let's pause for a second and really think about the phrase "rationalising like crazy mental fuckers" because that is where they will go.


Because I'm guessing the culture of toxic masculinity, together with just the fucking love for the sport, will make Donald Trumps election defeat look like a picture of heartwarming good grace and responsibility.


Guys you love a sport where the players are damaging their brains, and for your own personal entertainment.

You really need to look at yourselves.
I am sure there are many fanatics that don't give a shit.
There are many people who love dogfighting.


The facts have changed.
Change with them.

Rugby is fucked.

Sounds just like Yeeb on the other bored
Oh and Eddie Jones has worn a mask every time I've seen him on TV at a match

[Torquemada 1420]

Sounds just like Yeeb on the other bored
Oh and Eddie Jones has worn a mask every time I've seen him on TV at a match

Have I been whooshed or is he still posting there?

[yermum]

weight limit per team. you can field 120 kg behemoths but you will also have to have cloned peter stringer for 9-15...

[SaintK]

Sounds just like Yeeb on the other bored
Oh and Eddie Jones has worn a mask every time I've seen him on TV at a match

Have I been whooshed or is he still posting there?

Yep, still as Backrow there
Been all over the "Is this the end for rugby" thread
Not particularly on the side of the players concerned

https://forum.planetrugby.com/viewtopic ... &start=240

[fishfoodie]

Does anyone know how work is progressing on the human, shock watches, they were trialing in NZ ?

If we accept that this is cumulative, then surely the logical thing is to measure when players heads get a knock of x g's & above; & then when a player gets over the limit for how many they can have in a rolling period, they have a mandatory break, & a full medical assessment.

I wonder if this is something that a number of sporting bodies should be cooperating on as well; because if NFL says you can only have 5 x 3g hits in a month, & RU says you have have 8x 3g; then we'll have the confusion we have with Covid, & the lawyers will feed in those gaps. A cooperative approach will also lead to cost savings, & some mutual safety, in that all parties can say they are working to best known practices.

[Torquemada 1420]

Sounds just like Yeeb on the other bored
Oh and Eddie Jones has worn a mask every time I've seen him on TV at a match

Have I been whooshed or is he still posting there?

Yep, still as Backrow there
Been all over the "Is this the end for rugby" thread
Not particularly on the side of the players concerned

https://forum.planetrugby.com/viewtopic ... &start=240

Split personality. Maybe the result of too many....

[JM2K6]

Nicked from that thread:

Abstract

Objective To determine the incidence, nature and causes of concussions sustained during men's elite professional Rugby-7s and Rugby-15s.

Design A prospective cohort study recording injuries classified as a time-loss concussion.

Population Players competing in the following tournaments: Rugby 15s—English Premiership (2007/2008 to 2010/2011), Rugby World Cup (2007, 2011), Pacific Nations Cup (2012, 2013), Junior World Championship (2008, 2010–2013), Junior World Rugby Trophy (2008, 2010–2013); Rugby 7s—Sevens World Series (2008/2009, 2010/2011 to 2012/2013).

Method The study was implemented according to the international consensus statement for epidemiological studies in rugby union; the main outcome measures included the number, incidence (number of concussions/1000 player-match-hours), mean and median severity (days absence) and cause of concussion.

Results The incidence of concussion in Rugby-7s was significantly higher than that in Rugby-15s (risk ratio=1.84; p<0.001). The severity of concussions were significantly higher in Rugby-7s than Rugby-15s (mean—Rugby-7s: 19.2, Rugby-15s: 10.1; median—Rugby 7s: 20, Rugby-15s: 7; p<0.001). The main causes of concussion were tackling (44.1%) in Rugby-7s and collisions (43.6%) in Rugby-15s. Significantly more (risk ratio=1.49; p=0.004) concussed players were removed immediately from the game in Rugby-7s (69.7%) compared to Rugby-15s (46.7%).

Conclusions Six actions were identified to improve the management of concussion in rugby: implement a pitch-side concussion assessment protocol; improve compliance with return-to-play protocols; work with referees to review the nature and consequences of collisions; improve players’ tackle technique; investigate the forces involved in tackles and collisions; and evaluate reasons for the higher incidence of concussions in Rugby-7s

seem to skewer the idea that more space and fewer, lighter players would improve things

[Torquemada 1420]

Nicked from that thread:

Abstract

Objective To determine the incidence, nature and causes of concussions sustained during men's elite professional Rugby-7s and Rugby-15s.

Design A prospective cohort study recording injuries classified as a time-loss concussion.

Population Players competing in the following tournaments: Rugby 15s—English Premiership (2007/2008 to 2010/2011), Rugby World Cup (2007, 2011), Pacific Nations Cup (2012, 2013), Junior World Championship (2008, 2010–2013), Junior World Rugby Trophy (2008, 2010–2013); Rugby 7s—Sevens World Series (2008/2009, 2010/2011 to 2012/2013).

Method The study was implemented according to the international consensus statement for epidemiological studies in rugby union; the main outcome measures included the number, incidence (number of concussions/1000 player-match-hours), mean and median severity (days absence) and cause of concussion.

Results The incidence of concussion in Rugby-7s was significantly higher than that in Rugby-15s (risk ratio=1.84; p<0.001). The severity of concussions were significantly higher in Rugby-7s than Rugby-15s (mean—Rugby-7s: 19.2, Rugby-15s: 10.1; median—Rugby 7s: 20, Rugby-15s: 7; p<0.001). The main causes of concussion were tackling (44.1%) in Rugby-7s and collisions (43.6%) in Rugby-15s. Significantly more (risk ratio=1.49; p=0.004) concussed players were removed immediately from the game in Rugby-7s (69.7%) compared to Rugby-15s (46.7%).

Conclusions Six actions were identified to improve the management of concussion in rugby: implement a pitch-side concussion assessment protocol; improve compliance with return-to-play protocols; work with referees to review the nature and consequences of collisions; improve players’ tackle technique; investigate the forces involved in tackles and collisions; and evaluate reasons for the higher incidence of concussions in Rugby-7s

seem to skewer the idea that more space and fewer, lighter players would improve things

Hmm. I find that very, very hard to believe. I watch plenty of 7s too and struggle to think of HIA incidents whereas there is probably one per 15s game these days. Does that study state whether that data is time weighted: 7s is a very short game?

[Margin__Walker]

Interesting Kearnan Myall interview on the subject.

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2020/ ... understand

Suggests reduced contact in training and baseline EEG brain activity tests / basic cognitive memory tests as a first step rather than focusing on the laws of the game.

[JM2K6]

Nicked from that thread:

Abstract

Objective To determine the incidence, nature and causes of concussions sustained during men's elite professional Rugby-7s and Rugby-15s.

Design A prospective cohort study recording injuries classified as a time-loss concussion.

Population Players competing in the following tournaments: Rugby 15s—English Premiership (2007/2008 to 2010/2011), Rugby World Cup (2007, 2011), Pacific Nations Cup (2012, 2013), Junior World Championship (2008, 2010–2013), Junior World Rugby Trophy (2008, 2010–2013); Rugby 7s—Sevens World Series (2008/2009, 2010/2011 to 2012/2013).

Method The study was implemented according to the international consensus statement for epidemiological studies in rugby union; the main outcome measures included the number, incidence (number of concussions/1000 player-match-hours), mean and median severity (days absence) and cause of concussion.

Results The incidence of concussion in Rugby-7s was significantly higher than that in Rugby-15s (risk ratio=1.84; p<0.001). The severity of concussions were significantly higher in Rugby-7s than Rugby-15s (mean—Rugby-7s: 19.2, Rugby-15s: 10.1; median—Rugby 7s: 20, Rugby-15s: 7; p<0.001). The main causes of concussion were tackling (44.1%) in Rugby-7s and collisions (43.6%) in Rugby-15s. Significantly more (risk ratio=1.49; p=0.004) concussed players were removed immediately from the game in Rugby-7s (69.7%) compared to Rugby-15s (46.7%).

Conclusions Six actions were identified to improve the management of concussion in rugby: implement a pitch-side concussion assessment protocol; improve compliance with return-to-play protocols; work with referees to review the nature and consequences of collisions; improve players’ tackle technique; investigate the forces involved in tackles and collisions; and evaluate reasons for the higher incidence of concussions in Rugby-7s

seem to skewer the idea that more space and fewer, lighter players would improve things

Hmm. I find that very, very hard to believe. I watch plenty of 7s too and struggle to think of HIA incidents whereas there is probably one per 15s game these days. Does that study state whether that data is time weighted: 7s is a very short game?

Well, you quoted the bits of my post that talk about it. Incidence is "number of concussions/1000 player-match-hours", severity is days absence, etc.

Anecdotally, I rarely watch 7s but thinking back I reckon every time I have in the last year or two I've seen at least one bad head injury each time. Not per game, obviously!