NPR

SaintK wrote: ↑Sat Jan 21, 2023 11:22 am Papers reporting serious backlash on this
https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2023 ... le-rules
https://12ft.io/proxy?ref=&q=https://w ... k-knee/
https://12ft.io/proxy?ref=&q=https:// ... es-need/

Slick wrote: ↑Sat Jan 21, 2023 11:36 am

SaintK wrote: ↑Sat Jan 21, 2023 11:22 am Papers reporting serious backlash on this
https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2023 ... le-rules
https://12ft.io/proxy?ref=&q=https://w ... k-knee/
https://12ft.io/proxy?ref=&q=https:// ... es-need/

It does seem a little rushed and not fully thought out but I’m finding the backlash a bit weird. Without repeating ourselves, it’s just going back to how it used to be. Folk screaming that they don’t want to play any longer because of it just sounds a bit silly

Slick wrote: ↑Sat Jan 21, 2023 11:36 am

SaintK wrote: ↑Sat Jan 21, 2023 11:22 am Papers reporting serious backlash on this
https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2023 ... le-rules
https://12ft.io/proxy?ref=&q=https://w ... k-knee/
https://12ft.io/proxy?ref=&q=https:// ... es-need/

It does seem a little rushed and not fully thought out but I’m finding the backlash a bit weird. Without repeating ourselves, it’s just going back to how it used to be. Folk screaming that they don’t want to play any longer because of it just sounds a bit silly

Slick wrote: ↑Sat Jan 21, 2023 11:36 am

SaintK wrote: ↑Sat Jan 21, 2023 11:22 am Papers reporting serious backlash on this
https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2023 ... le-rules
https://12ft.io/proxy?ref=&q=https://w ... k-knee/
https://12ft.io/proxy?ref=&q=https:// ... es-need/

It does seem a little rushed and not fully thought out but I’m finding the backlash a bit weird. Without repeating ourselves, it’s just going back to how it used to be. Folk screaming that they don’t want to play any longer because of it just sounds a bit silly

Tichtheid wrote: ↑Sat Jan 21, 2023 11:43 am

Slick wrote: ↑Sat Jan 21, 2023 11:36 am

SaintK wrote: ↑Sat Jan 21, 2023 11:22 am Papers reporting serious backlash on this
https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2023 ... le-rules
https://12ft.io/proxy?ref=&q=https://w ... k-knee/
https://12ft.io/proxy?ref=&q=https:// ... es-need/

It does seem a little rushed and not fully thought out but I’m finding the backlash a bit weird. Without repeating ourselves, it’s just going back to how it used to be. Folk screaming that they don’t want to play any longer because of it just sounds a bit silly

I do have some sympathy with the fact that players probably haven't been coached in the same way as we were, but are today's mini's taught to tackle upright with a leading shoulder?

At what point do players get coached to tackle in the way we see now?

JM2K6 wrote: ↑Sat Jan 21, 2023 12:02 pm

Tichtheid wrote: ↑Sat Jan 21, 2023 11:43 am

Slick wrote: ↑Sat Jan 21, 2023 11:36 am

It does seem a little rushed and not fully thought out but I’m finding the backlash a bit weird. Without repeating ourselves, it’s just going back to how it used to be. Folk screaming that they don’t want to play any longer because of it just sounds a bit silly

I do have some sympathy with the fact that players probably haven't been coached in the same way as we were, but are today's mini's taught to tackle upright with a leading shoulder?

At what point do players get coached to tackle in the way we see now?

IMO it's the general attitude that needs to change. No longer "put your body [and therefore the opponent's] on the line in every contact". More focus on skill, technique, accuracy. Make a big defender be the guy who cuts you down every time, who makes great decisions, who rarely misses - not the guy who can smash you into next week. The ruck should go the same way.

Paddington Bear wrote: ↑Sat Jan 21, 2023 12:12 pm There is something very amusing about blokes playing in the lower levels of the Herts & Middlesex Merit Table saying ‘but my whole game is big hits!’

Pity the refs trying to deal with this.

JM2K6 wrote: ↑Sat Jan 21, 2023 12:00 pm

Slick wrote: ↑Sat Jan 21, 2023 11:36 am

SaintK wrote: ↑Sat Jan 21, 2023 11:22 am Papers reporting serious backlash on this
https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2023 ... le-rules
https://12ft.io/proxy?ref=&q=https://w ... k-knee/
https://12ft.io/proxy?ref=&q=https:// ... es-need/

It does seem a little rushed and not fully thought out but I’m finding the backlash a bit weird. Without repeating ourselves, it’s just going back to how it used to be. Folk screaming that they don’t want to play any longer because of it just sounds a bit silly

Yeah. To be honest there's some journos who treat the entire concussion issue as a way to play both sides and whip up controversy in everything. Aylwin and Kitson at the Guardian are particularly bad for it. Aylwin did some big thing on concussion a while back and was banging the drum for change and being a serious doom monger, then three days later putting the boot in over a couple of red cards and decrying the entire idea. It's utterly transparent.

I don't think it has been rushed but I can understand why you'd think that. 7+ years of research and trials, allied to a growing disquiet about concussion, the failure of sanctions alone to change behaviour, and the increasing scale of legal challenges, means waiting any longer might be a mistake. And while I can't say with any confidence that it will help matters, the fact that the amateur game is largely dying on its arse means that now is probably the only real chance to do anything - and you never know, it might lead to wider participation.

Slick wrote: ↑Sat Jan 21, 2023 1:00 pm

JM2K6 wrote: ↑Sat Jan 21, 2023 12:00 pm

Slick wrote: ↑Sat Jan 21, 2023 11:36 am

It does seem a little rushed and not fully thought out but I’m finding the backlash a bit weird. Without repeating ourselves, it’s just going back to how it used to be. Folk screaming that they don’t want to play any longer because of it just sounds a bit silly

Yeah. To be honest there's some journos who treat the entire concussion issue as a way to play both sides and whip up controversy in everything. Aylwin and Kitson at the Guardian are particularly bad for it. Aylwin did some big thing on concussion a while back and was banging the drum for change and being a serious doom monger, then three days later putting the boot in over a couple of red cards and decrying the entire idea. It's utterly transparent.

I don't think it has been rushed but I can understand why you'd think that. 7+ years of research and trials, allied to a growing disquiet about concussion, the failure of sanctions alone to change behaviour, and the increasing scale of legal challenges, means waiting any longer might be a mistake. And while I can't say with any confidence that it will help matters, the fact that the amateur game is largely dying on its arse means that now is probably the only real chance to do anything - and you never know, it might lead to wider participation.

I meant rushed in as much as there seems to have been no discussion with anyone and, I think, no guidance on things like what the hell you do defending a ruck on your own line etc

Tichtheid wrote: ↑Sat Jan 21, 2023 12:12 pm

JM2K6 wrote: ↑Sat Jan 21, 2023 12:02 pm

Tichtheid wrote: ↑Sat Jan 21, 2023 11:43 am


I do have some sympathy with the fact that players probably haven't been coached in the same way as we were, but are today's mini's taught to tackle upright with a leading shoulder?

At what point do players get coached to tackle in the way we see now?

IMO it's the general attitude that needs to change. No longer "put your body [and therefore the opponent's] on the line in every contact". More focus on skill, technique, accuracy. Make a big defender be the guy who cuts you down every time, who makes great decisions, who rarely misses - not the guy who can smash you into next week. The ruck should go the same way.

Speaking of skill, technique and accuracy, I'm appalled at my insertion of a Greengrocer's apostrophe in minis

Slick wrote: ↑Sat Jan 21, 2023 1:00 pm

JM2K6 wrote: ↑Sat Jan 21, 2023 12:00 pm

Slick wrote: ↑Sat Jan 21, 2023 11:36 am

It does seem a little rushed and not fully thought out but I’m finding the backlash a bit weird. Without repeating ourselves, it’s just going back to how it used to be. Folk screaming that they don’t want to play any longer because of it just sounds a bit silly

Yeah. To be honest there's some journos who treat the entire concussion issue as a way to play both sides and whip up controversy in everything. Aylwin and Kitson at the Guardian are particularly bad for it. Aylwin did some big thing on concussion a while back and was banging the drum for change and being a serious doom monger, then three days later putting the boot in over a couple of red cards and decrying the entire idea. It's utterly transparent.

I don't think it has been rushed but I can understand why you'd think that. 7+ years of research and trials, allied to a growing disquiet about concussion, the failure of sanctions alone to change behaviour, and the increasing scale of legal challenges, means waiting any longer might be a mistake. And while I can't say with any confidence that it will help matters, the fact that the amateur game is largely dying on its arse means that now is probably the only real chance to do anything - and you never know, it might lead to wider participation.

I meant rushed in as much as there seems to have been no discussion with anyone and, I think, no guidance on things like what the hell you do defending a ruck on your own line etc

Raggs wrote: ↑Sat Jan 21, 2023 2:09 pm How many people have actually gone looking for the info though?

Loads saying there's nothing, but those same people are claiming it's below the waist, which is straight up wrong.

It's been coming for six years, telegraph said it was probably coming back in December.

And in the end, who are you discussing it with? Bob the builder from the pubs third xv is not a useful voice in this discussion in reality. It's one of those where you have to tell people what they have to do and live with the complaints.

Just look at the recent coach comments about the red cards in Europe etc.

SaintK wrote: ↑Sat Jan 21, 2023 3:25 pm

Raggs wrote: ↑Sat Jan 21, 2023 2:09 pm How many people have actually gone looking for the info though?

Loads saying there's nothing, but those same people are claiming it's below the waist, which is straight up wrong.

It's been coming for six years, telegraph said it was probably coming back in December.

And in the end, who are you discussing it with? Bob the builder from the pubs third xv is not a useful voice in this discussion in reality. It's one of those where you have to tell people what they have to do and live with the complaints.

Just look at the recent coach comments about the red cards in Europe etc.

One of my best friends and fellow club member is on the Herts CB and had no idea anything was coming though had heard there was a "review" happening. Secretary to the county referee's society is also a club member and knows nothing about it either
Why on earth should anyone have to go looking for the info when it should be presented in plain sight to all that are affected?

JM2K6 wrote: ↑Sat Jan 21, 2023 3:35 pm

SaintK wrote: ↑Sat Jan 21, 2023 3:25 pm

Raggs wrote: ↑Sat Jan 21, 2023 2:09 pm How many people have actually gone looking for the info though?

Loads saying there's nothing, but those same people are claiming it's below the waist, which is straight up wrong.

It's been coming for six years, telegraph said it was probably coming back in December.

And in the end, who are you discussing it with? Bob the builder from the pubs third xv is not a useful voice in this discussion in reality. It's one of those where you have to tell people what they have to do and live with the complaints.

Just look at the recent coach comments about the red cards in Europe etc.

One of my best friends and fellow club member is on the Herts CB and had no idea anything was coming though had heard there was a "review" happening. Secretary to the county referee's society is also a club member and knows nothing about it either
Why on earth should anyone have to go looking for the info when it should be presented in plain sight to all that are affected?

To be clear, it's been known for a long time they've been looking at this. The Championship Cup trial should've been a pretty big clue. Other trials have been happening worldwide.

I'm fairly sure the research was published. And the law change has been agreed and announced now, a long long time before the start of next season. What is the complaint here - that Herts CB should've been consulted? Why? Do they have any unique expertise to offer?

SaintK wrote: ↑Sat Jan 21, 2023 4:11 pmDon't be an arse JM
You'd have thought all CB's and Societies would have been briefed that this was coming sooner rather than later if not just for RFU presentational reasons.
The Championship Cup trial was halted half way through the competition
I think I'm probably as avid a rugby fan as you are and I've not seen any published research that the RFU haave used
The main complaint is this is another RFU public relations fuck up

RFU Medical Services Director Dr Simon Kemp added: “It’s an evidence-based, game-led approach. This is about head impact and concussion prevention. We know that the most effective control measures are law changes and coaching behaviour. What we’re doing here is taking five or six years of data analysis to develop and implement a law change supported by coach input that we anticipate will have a positive effect on injury risk.”

“Interim outcomes from the evaluation of a waist height tackle law variation in French community rugby show that a tackle at waist height or below together with the prohibition of the ball carrier bending into contact are having a positive impact on reducing the number of serious head impacts, are viewed positively by players, coaches and referees and from the video examples provided appeared to show a change in the shape of the game, with fewer rucks and more offloads.

“We are very excited to be evaluating a waist height tackle law variation of our own next season to see what we can learn from the data and player and coach feedback.”

There was a further festival played with the waist height tackle law variation, with three club teams: Whitchurch, Newport and Oswestry hosted at Whitchurch RFC in Shropshire and further festivals are planned, initially in Cornwall and the West Midlands. These will also be filmed and analysed by the University of Bath.

JM2K6 wrote: ↑Sat Jan 21, 2023 4:43 pm

SaintK wrote: ↑Sat Jan 21, 2023 4:11 pmDon't be an arse JM
You'd have thought all CB's and Societies would have been briefed that this was coming sooner rather than later if not just for RFU presentational reasons.
The Championship Cup trial was halted half way through the competition
I think I'm probably as avid a rugby fan as you are and I've not seen any published research that the RFU haave used
The main complaint is this is another RFU public relations fuck up

Apologies, it wasn't intentionally antagonistic although it certainly reads that way. I do want to make the point that while these groups deserve to be kept informed, and I am keeping an open mind about how much they were told, they do not actually need to be consulted on decisions like this. Additionally, is it important that they get the raw data from the research vs being told the results?

I don't know how feasible it would be to brief all these groups - of which there must be hundreds that would claim to be relevant - without the information being leaked and dissected in the media before the RFU gets to put their side of the story out there.

The timeline looks a bit like this:

- World Rugby talk about waist high tackles in 2019 (https://www.world.rugby/news/438857), and claim if successful further trials would happen before France 2023 [obviously Covid put the brakes on a bit]

- RFU trial "below the shoulders" in that absolute shit-show of a trial in the Championship Cup

- World Rugby announce trials in 2020, having discussed with players, coaches, and unions worldwide. Feedback from the French in particular is hugely positive. France, Fiji, NZ mentioned, presumably others too.

- RFU announce armpit-level law change for age grade in summer 2021. Here's some direct quotes from their own press releases at the time:

RFU Medical Services Director Dr Simon Kemp added: “It’s an evidence-based, game-led approach. This is about head impact and concussion prevention. We know that the most effective control measures are law changes and coaching behaviour. What we’re doing here is taking five or six years of data analysis to develop and implement a law change supported by coach input that we anticipate will have a positive effect on injury risk.”

“Interim outcomes from the evaluation of a waist height tackle law variation in French community rugby show that a tackle at waist height or below together with the prohibition of the ball carrier bending into contact are having a positive impact on reducing the number of serious head impacts, are viewed positively by players, coaches and referees and from the video examples provided appeared to show a change in the shape of the game, with fewer rucks and more offloads.

“We are very excited to be evaluating a waist height tackle law variation of our own next season to see what we can learn from the data and player and coach feedback.”

- RFU announce a further study for changing the tackle height to waist-level for U18s in October 2022. They also included some clubs:

There was a further festival played with the waist height tackle law variation, with three club teams: Whitchurch, Newport and Oswestry hosted at Whitchurch RFC in Shropshire and further festivals are planned, initially in Cornwall and the West Midlands. These will also be filmed and analysed by the University of Bath.

- In December, the media start talking about a mooted trial in the community game in England where waist high tackles will be enforced.

- This week: the RFU announce it and say further details and guidance will be provided soon for next season.


Anyone who sits on any kind of rugby board or has any sort of responsibility for anything in junior or community rugby is not doing their job if this all came as a huge surprise to them. It's not exactly out of the blue: it's a logical pattern of events and something that both World Rugby and the RFU have been working on for years.

This is separate to the complaint about the total lack of feedback or communication from the RFU, which I can believe but I can also understand it. Some things you don't ask everybody's permission for, and getting too many people involved can make it an absolute shitshow. Best to get all your ducks in a row before doing things.

sockwithaticket wrote: ↑Sat Jan 21, 2023 11:40 am

Slick wrote: ↑Sat Jan 21, 2023 11:36 am

SaintK wrote: ↑Sat Jan 21, 2023 11:22 am Papers reporting serious backlash on this
https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2023 ... le-rules
https://12ft.io/proxy?ref=&q=https://w ... k-knee/
https://12ft.io/proxy?ref=&q=https:// ... es-need/

It does seem a little rushed and not fully thought out but I’m finding the backlash a bit weird. Without repeating ourselves, it’s just going back to how it used to be. Folk screaming that they don’t want to play any longer because of it just sounds a bit silly

The vast majority of them will lump it and within a few months all the garment rending and teeth ganishing will be forgotten as they just get on with tackling as they've been instructed.

Hal Jordan wrote: ↑Fri Jan 20, 2023 1:32 pm Unlike our cowardly Sale supporting weed, I was good at tackling. I was taught the old "wrap the legs and their arse can cushion your head" technique. If I wanted to tackle hard, aim for the stomach and tackle like your shoulder is aiming at someone behind them. Stood me well enough without having to go high in a "Big Hit" to dominate the collisions.

If attempting to wrap the arms or hit someone so hard they can offload due to the impact but you continually risk going high accidentally is the loss to the game, so be it.

Kawazaki wrote: ↑Sat Jan 21, 2023 7:51 pm

sockwithaticket wrote: ↑Sat Jan 21, 2023 11:40 am

Slick wrote: ↑Sat Jan 21, 2023 11:36 am

It does seem a little rushed and not fully thought out but I’m finding the backlash a bit weird. Without repeating ourselves, it’s just going back to how it used to be. Folk screaming that they don’t want to play any longer because of it just sounds a bit silly

The vast majority of them will lump it and within a few months all the garment rending and teeth ganishing will be forgotten as they just get on with tackling as they've been instructed.

That's an incredibly arrogant point of view.

sockwithaticket wrote: ↑Sat Jan 21, 2023 8:32 pm

Kawazaki wrote: ↑Sat Jan 21, 2023 7:51 pm

sockwithaticket wrote: ↑Sat Jan 21, 2023 11:40 am

The vast majority of them will lump it and within a few months all the garment rending and teeth ganishing will be forgotten as they just get on with tackling as they've been instructed.

That's an incredibly arrogant point of view.

Nah, I don't think many care enough to actually drop playing rugby even if they're having a bit of a moan now. If they show up to play, they'll have to adapt to what the refs are policing or they'll be whistled off the park.

Paddington Bear wrote: ↑Mon Jan 23, 2023 9:30 am

sockwithaticket wrote: ↑Sat Jan 21, 2023 8:32 pm

Kawazaki wrote: ↑Sat Jan 21, 2023 7:51 pm

That's an incredibly arrogant point of view.

Nah, I don't think many care enough to actually drop playing rugby even if they're having a bit of a moan now. If they show up to play, they'll have to adapt to what the refs are policing or they'll be whistled off the park.

A few people on here will have played club cricket and so will know that the discussions within that about tinkering with league rules & regulations/start times/regionalisation is endless even compared to rugby, and given the leagues are run by the member clubs rather than the ECB there's more scope to actually effect a lot of these changes.
My experience is that no one has ever quit the sport because of the league rules that they hate. However, and it is quite a big caveat, it provides a very handy excuse for people who have been considering throwing in the towel/have had enough of getting it in the neck at home/believe they are 1s players and can't convince a club of that case etc to then stop playing. My suspicion is that these rules will provide that excuse for slightly older players who put the body through a lot.

Oxbow wrote: ↑Mon Jan 23, 2023 9:31 am Ribbans called up to the England squad to cover for Lawes, who went off at the weekend with a calf injury. Pleased for Ribbans, shame it's at his teammate's expense. Presumably Isiekwe will now become the hybrid lock/6.

sockwithaticket wrote: ↑Mon Jan 23, 2023 9:59 am Good point, Pads.

Oxbow wrote: ↑Mon Jan 23, 2023 9:31 am Ribbans called up to the England squad to cover for Lawes, who went off at the weekend with a calf injury. Pleased for Ribbans, shame it's at his teammate's expense. Presumably Isiekwe will now become the hybrid lock/6.

McGuigan also withdrawn from the squad due to injury, replaced by Dunn.

Presumably George will come through return to play protocols with the couple of weeks we have left 'til the 6N begins, but we are looking very thin at hooker.

JM2K6 wrote: ↑Mon Jan 23, 2023 10:52 am I can see why a steady player like Dunn (well... steady ish) is the go-to here but I would love to have seen someone like Curtis Langdon get a shot. He was going toe to toe with another excellent hooker in Ewan Ashman who is the next big thing for Scotland and has a much wider skill set than guys like Dunn or Walker. I'm sure there's other players like that too, but I'm a little under informed on the forward options at some clubs.

What are Dan Frost and Alfie Barbeary up to at the mo?

Oxbow wrote: ↑Mon Jan 23, 2023 11:30 am With Langdon coming to Saints next season hopefully he'll be in the frame, particularly as LCD is going the other way.

Kawazaki wrote: ↑Mon Jan 23, 2023 11:57 am Dunn is miles off international class. I can barely believe he's Premiership level.

Oxbow wrote: ↑Mon Jan 23, 2023 9:31 am Ribbans called up to the England squad to cover for Lawes, who went off at the weekend with a calf injury. Pleased for Ribbans, shame it's at his teammate's expense. Presumably Isiekwe will now become the hybrid lock/6.

Hal Jordan wrote: ↑Mon Jan 23, 2023 12:11 pm

Oxbow wrote: ↑Mon Jan 23, 2023 9:31 am Ribbans called up to the England squad to cover for Lawes, who went off at the weekend with a calf injury. Pleased for Ribbans, shame it's at his teammate's expense. Presumably Isiekwe will now become the hybrid lock/6.

I think Chessum is earmarked for that role unless Borthwick is mad and thinks Itoje can play 6 at Test level.

Or maybe, just maybe, we'll see three backrow players who are actually full time backrow players.