Rugby not safe for children.....time to ban scrums...

toomevara

....according to this boffin at Edinburgh uni...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/10501327.stm

Arrant nonsense.

Micky Dolenz

What next, take the sticks out of hockey or hurls out of hurling.

Here's an idea, better coaching.

durkadurka

Wouldn't do Irish rugby any harm!!!

buck65

We might win a game!

shoutman

Thats just funny, "High tackles should be banned". Obviously this person has not done her research...

toomevara

shoutman wrote: »

Thats just funny, "High tackles should be banned". Obviously this person has not done her research...

Exactly, and also where's the comparison with other sports, what qualifies as an injury etc...How about the figures for eventing (an absolutely lethal sport and one of the most dangerous things you can do this side of the IOM TT) but because its posh folk lolloping about on horses, somehow exempt from all criticism, or football (terrible for leg/ankle injuries)? Really, really poor piece of research. Never ceases to amaze me how every now and then a crank with an obvious axe to grind against rugby, and no understanding of the game or its culture/laws and rules emerges from the woodwork to denounce the game. I know its the silly season and all, but this is utter, utter dogs-bollix by any objective yardstick

outwest

this is a just some parent who is wooried there child might get injured,
i say let the ejit play wnedyball, instead of being a functional member of society he can be learn how to cheat.

drunk me does not like this women

Depp

This woman is a gob****e...Fact!

bigfeller

outwest wrote: »

drunk me does not like this women

11:47am - I salute you sir!

wixfjord

outwest wrote: »

this is a just some parent who is wooried there child might get injured,
i say let the ejit play wnedyball, instead of being a functional member of society he can be learn how to cheat.

drunk me does not like this women

Before 12 on a monday! Well done!

Peter B

This is what is ruining sport these days.

Yes there is a danger, but there is a danger with most sports. Caught parts of Joe Duffy today and they were discussing whether motorbike racing should be banned (not sure if it was an overall ban or just for this track in Skerries) after an unfortunate fatality at the weekend.

People with no experience in the sport were calling for the race to be axed due to the danger.

Whats next? Ban skydiving, mountain climbing, all field sports, driving after dark, deep swimming pools etc?

Junior

Peter B wrote: »

This is what is ruining sport these days.

Yes there is a danger, but there is a danger with most sports. Caught parts of Joe Duffy today and they were discussing whether motorbike racing should be banned (not sure if it was an overall ban or just for this track in Skerries) after an unfortunate fatality at the weekend.

People with no experience in the sport were calling for the race to be axed due to the danger.

Whats next? Ban skydiving, mountain climbing, all field sports, driving after dark, deep swimming pools etc?

That track in Skerries isn't a track, it's a road, thats where the high risk factor comes into it with motorbike racing, sure rally drivers race on the similar/same roads, but they have multi point harnesses and full roll cages around them and they still get killed, a motorbike rider has nowt but a helmet and leather.

pappyodaniel

Peter B wrote: »

This is what is ruining sport these days.

Yes there is a danger, but there is a danger with most sports. Caught parts of Joe Duffy today and they were discussing whether motorbike racing should be banned (not sure if it was an overall ban or just for this track in Skerries) after an unfortunate fatality at the weekend.

People with no experience in the sport were calling for the race to be axed due to the danger.

Whats next? Ban skydiving, mountain climbing, all field sports, driving after dark, deep swimming pools etc?

You're in danger when Joe Duffy and his listeners get their teeth into something.

And to 'Outwest' you have just earned 1 million MAN points!

rockman15

ive been playing rugby since i was 4. thats 20 years. the worst that ever happened to me was being knocked out after being tackled into an uncovered post at U-9s. then i broke my little finger a week after. just bad luck.

to be fair there could be a series of methodology issues with her study that the bbc article doesnt go into...skill level of the participants and weather conditions/time of year. it may seem trivial but poor weather will cause the gournd to be loose under foot and your more likely to have injuries later on in the season than september.

im calling spurious on this one.

Peter B

Junior wrote: »

That track in Skerries isn't a track, it's a road, thats where the high risk factor comes into it with motorbike racing, sure rally drivers race on the similar/same roads, but they have multi point harnesses and full roll cages around them and they still get killed, a motorbike rider has nowt but a helmet and leather.

True, but I'm in no position to comment about motorbike racing. I don't partake in it and have never owned a motor bike.

We do not live in an ultra-safe world. There is danger everywhere. We just have to accept it.

I also think having a child grow up learning to play rugby and all the benefits it brings far outweighs the chances of injury. You learn important life lessions like control of aggression, respect for authority (coach, ref), and importance of playing as a team.

outwest

pappyodaniel wrote: »

You're in danger when Joe Duffy and his listeners get their teeth into something.

And to 'Outwest' you have just earned 1 million MAN points!

why, it called not stopping, not feeling the best tho, bad weekend for galway sport.

RuggieBear

scrums are potentially dangerous...played prop, i've been knocked out a few times from collapsing scrums, dislocated both shoulders, developed sciatica and had finger poked deep into my eye (accidentally by the opposition prop).

imo there just needs to be much much better coaching of scrummaging. i didn't really get proper scrum coaching till u/16 by which stage i had suffered most of the above.

as for the tackle, mistiming is ever present...i've broken my arm making a balls of a tackle.

Better coaching is a necessity at all levels imo.

(of course being a better player would probably have saved me a lot trouble!)

Junior

Peter B wrote: »

True, but I'm in no position to comment about motorbike racing. I don't partake in it and have never owned a motor bike.

We do not live in an ultra-safe world. There is danger everywhere. We just have to accept it.

I also think having a child grow up learning to play rugby and all the benefits it brings far outweighs the chances of injury. You learn important life lessions like control of aggression, respect for authority (coach, ref), and importance of playing as a team.

I come from a rally background and even to us, road racing like that seems to have a lot of unnecessary danger that's well beyond the control of the bike rider. And I agree it's a bit mental to be comparing rugby to it.

Goodluck2me

Maybe go uncontested scrums until u16, or stick to 3-man until them, so coaches are qualified by then (enforce u16 qualification obv).

chupacabra

Have to say i stopped reading that article after the "High tackles should be banned" comment. Utter rubbish. I cant disagree with how dangerous the game can be tho. I started my rugby playing days in the backrow and in my first ever match i fractured my ankle after getting trapped at the bottom of a "ruck" (more of a pile up in those days). I returned to rugby and yet again after a few games dislocated my shoulder. Peanuts to what i was about to experience after i switched to the front row. I used to alternate between hooker and tight head and i dreaded scrummaging in the hooking position, its easily the most dangerous place to be on a rugby field.
The lack of support when a scrum collapses is incredibly dangerous, unlike a prop you dont have your elbows or forearms to lessen the impact or protect yourself and more often than not you better prepare to have your head driven into the ground. Back then as Ruggie said there was little to no scrum coaching. Only thing we were coached on is to get low and get your timing right. I had so many injuries during this period that i eventually had to give up rugby altogether after i blew out both knees within the space of 4 months. But thats only my experience and i honestly dont regret a minute of it.

My biggest issue with the scrum today is the feckin pause. Why is there a need for it? I miss the "Set!.. ENGAGE!" days, there was less faffing about and the timing of the hit was more consistent because there was less of an anticipation. You just got stuck in. Get rid of the pause at least and perhaps we may get less collapsed scrums due to one side or the other jumping the gun and getting a massive upper hand. Some of the old timers around here even think we should get rid of the hit altogether and go back to making the scrum a pure arm wrestle where it was set and engaged before any pushing began. I dunno, its 6:30am and im making no sense, time to sleep i think.

Eoin

Goodluck2me wrote: »

Maybe go uncontested scrums until u16, or stick to 3-man until them, so coaches are qualified by then (enforce u16 qualification obv).

Not uncontested - just keep the rule that you can only push for x amount of yards.

gbee

She is right, or rather correct, but let's not stop at rugby.

Every newborn must be put inside and air-conditioned, bacteria free, titanium bubble and never let out. when he died at age 351, just bury him in the bubble ...

Absolute tripe IMO, not taking from the fact that the Dr. is correct, like!

d'Oracle

My friend had a serious neck injury when he was 16 in a scrum collapse.
He was put in prop against some absurdly huge kid who played for Wicklow, with no prior experience at propping.

So naturally I agree with the article.

I also think that all school yards should be made out of water-resistant fluff, that children should never be allowed move faster than a slow plod UNDER ANY CIRUMSTANCES and all sporting activities should be eliminated in favour of ZORB-ball and watching interactive DVD's about sharing and ones own vulnerability.

profitius

She obviously isn't a rugby fan. Maybe she should not drive to work because theres a possibility she could be killed or seriously injured in a car accident. :rolleyes:

Conas

She should NOT be criticised for offering her opinion. If any of you folks had a son, brother, father crippled in a wheelchair because of a scrumming innocent then maybe you would agree with her so don't be so harsh and ignorant. Players need to be probaly protected...look at hurling everyone has to wear a helmet now!! it would have taken someone to lose an eyeball before it would have came into force. Foresite is better than hindsight. I agree that proper coaching is essential but out there in a tough physical scrum anything can happen. Have a think about all the possibilities before you rush to stone someone.

d'Oracle

Conas wrote: »

She should NOT be criticised for offering her opinion. If any of you folks had a son, brother, father crippled in a wheelchair because of a scrumming innocent then maybe you would agree with her so don't be so harsh and ignorant. Players need to be probaly protected...look at hurling everyone has to wear a helmet now!! it would have taken someone to lose an eyeball before it would have came into force. Foresite is better than hindsight. I agree that proper coaching is essential but out there in a tough physical scrum anything can happen. Have a think about all the possibilities before you rush to stone someone.

She is talking about banning scrums.

Speaking as someone who never went near the front row,I presume the most dangerous thing is the hit that is now part of the scrum.Reducing the distance between the players would lessen the hit impact and would probably be safer?

Eoin

That's one part of it.

One other big problem is when there's a massive mismatch in packs, and a scrum gets pushed back very far and very quickly. Once when I was playing hooker, I was on the receiving end of this, and the front row got pushed back over our second row. That remains the time I was most afraid of a serious injury.

PhatPiggins

Arthur Nutritious Sleepwear wrote: »

Speaking as someone who never went near the front row,I presume the most dangerous thing is the hit that is now part of the scrum.Reducing the distance between the players would lessen the hit impact and would probably be safer?

Without doubt bad refereeing is the single most dangerous element of the scrums. I dont what to have this decend into an anti ref rant as its a difficult area to adjudicate but the number of time I've seen refs change the rules from scrum to scrum is infuriating. The crouch pause engage is alright but taking 10 seconds plus to implent it is nuts, Roman Poite springs to mind.

d'Oracle

PhatPiggins wrote: »

Without doubt bad refereeing is the single most dangerous element of the scrums. I dont what to have this decend into an anti ref rant as its a difficult area to adjudicate but the number of time I've seen refs change the rules from scrum to scrum is infuriating. The crouch pause engage is alright but taking 10 seconds plus to implent it is nuts, Roman Poite springs to mind.

I think its retarded.

I don't see the point in having front rows hanging around in set position. The longer you spend crouched the more energy it takes. The more energy taken the more likely you will drop under the pressure from the opposite prop.

Couple that with the crooked feed making the hookers into middle head props and the scrum becoming a smash up followed by a big unstable mess.

I think there should be a straight feed and a quick set up & engage.
Smashing hits between front rows is not helping anything.

Now I'm not sure how its handled at kids level, but I think that a soft engage like you had in the old days would be far superior to banning scrums. Get them engaged, bound and then feed, no push or smash or any aggro untill the ball is in.

Peter B

Not sure it would help that much but I understand that in NZ they play rugby at underage level based on weight and not on age. Therefore such different weight front rows would not be colliding with each other.

Would this help reduce injuries?

Corkladddd!!

As a front row, TH or LH depending on the occasion....the single most dangerous part of Scrumming is........bad coaching!!! I've played with many coach's that will almost run you to the ground before a match to "warm you up" but will for the most part be happy with a shake of your shoulders and a quick side to side on your neck....If players (and those instructing them) were told and shown how to do a proper warm up and warm down on these vital areas it might just start to reduce the apparent masses of injuries we have:) * I have been playing front row for well over 12 years now and the only scrumming injury i was unlucky enough to recieve was when me and my buddy decided we were better props than each other and decided to resolve the issue by having a scrumming session in the middle of the pub car park:D:D:D

nice_guy80

I think ye all have to agree that the tackles, body hits and hits in the scrum are becoming stronger and harder, as coaching in these areas have improved so much.

as well as players becoming stronger and faster in most areas

a doctor will be concerned with the damage and injuries they are seeing as part of their work.

so you have to take them at their word.

d'Oracle

nice_guy80 wrote: »

I think ye all have to agree that the tackles, body hits and hits in the scrum are becoming stronger and harder, as coaching in these areas have improved so much.

as well as players becoming stronger and faster in most areas

a doctor will be concerned with the damage and injuries they are seeing as part of their work.

so you have to take them at their word.

Your point stands up for pros but, We aren't talking about pros here.
We are talking about kids.

nice_guy80

d'Oracle wrote: »

Your point stands up for pros but, We aren't talking about pros here.
We are talking about kids.

kids? some of the teenagers who play schools rugby are far more adult than kids
that is what this is about - huge 17/18 year olds doing each ther damage in the scrum and tackle
in fact, most of them are far better built than the majority of the adult population

Depp

RuggieBear wrote: »

scrums are potentially dangerous...played prop, i've been knocked out a few times from collapsing scrums, dislocated both shoulders, developed sciatica and had finger poked deep into my eye (accidentally by the opposition prop).

imo there just needs to be much much better coaching of scrummaging. i didn't really get proper scrum coaching till u/16 by which stage i had suffered most of the above.

as for the tackle, mistiming is ever present...i've broken my arm making a balls of a tackle.

Better coaching is a necessity at all levels imo.

(of course being a better player would probably have saved me a lot trouble!)

That is hardcore man...you are now my hero xD

d'Oracle

nice_guy80 wrote: »

kids? some of the teenagers who play schools rugby are far more adult than kids
that is what this is about - huge 17/18 year olds doing each ther damage in the scrum and tackle
in fact, most of them are far better built than the majority of the adult population

Look I don't want to hurt your feelings, but that isn't what this is about.

17/18 is still a kid, in my book, but that is irrelevant, we are talking about the research by way of the article. The stated ranges are 11 - 13 and 14 - 17. School kids as it is put. School kids get injured playing rugby, in scrums and tackles. This happens, not because they are all weight crushing monsters but cos they are playing rugby. I have seen kids get smashed in u-14 games in high tackles or dumps or just being unlucky in a ruck. Normal sized kids getting smashed up with other normal sized kids

I don't see many kids playing schools rugby, even senior schools who are "better built than the majority of the adult population" I think you just made that up. Some of them are big for kids of their age, sure, but more often than not, not that[i/] big.

Frankly your post is hyperbole.

Blut2

d'Oracle wrote: »

I don't see many kids playing schools rugby, even senior schools who are "better built than the majority of the adult population" I think you just made that up. Some of them are big for kids of their age, sure, but more often than not, not that[i/] big.

Frankly your post is hyperbole.

Have you been to a semi-final or final of the Leinster Senior Cup in recent years? Some of the forwards these days are indeed better built than the majority of the adult population. Cian Healy (I know hes a bit of a genetic freak but its the most obvious example I can think of) was lifting rediculous numbers when he was in 6th year, benching in the region of 300lbs and squatting 450lbs if I remember correctly from talking to his team mates. I know personally from being on the sidelines at some of the games I wouldnt want to be getting tackled by some of these lads now, after a few years of serious weight training, nevermind what they'd do to a 17 year old sized me.

Granted the backs are mostly average (but fit) teenage sized but I think quite a few of the top level forwards at schools level are a fair bit stronger/larger than most adult males in Ireland.

lion_bar

Straight feeds with both hookers competing for the ball could depower the scrum and help abit.

While there are injuries in scrum's and it's an obviously area to look at, I can think of two very serious spinal injuries in ruck/tackle situations.

NZ is only done on weight because of the size of the island kids, It's not really an option for the playing population in Ireland.

d'Oracle

Blut2 wrote: »

Have you been to a semi-final or final of the Leinster Senior Cup in recent years? Some of the forwards these days are indeed better built than the majority of the adult population. Cian Healy (I know hes a bit of a genetic freak but its the most obvious example I can think of) was lifting rediculous numbers when he was in 6th year, benching in the region of 300lbs and squatting 450lbs if I remember correctly from talking to his team mates. I know personally from being on the sidelines at some of the games I wouldnt want to be getting tackled by some of these lads now, after a few years of serious weight training, nevermind what they'd do to a 17 year old sized me.

Granted the backs are mostly average (but fit) teenage sized but I think quite a few of the top level forwards at schools level are a fair bit stronger/larger than most adult males in Ireland.

Cian Healy or Des Dillon or what have you are exceptional. There are also exceptionally large adults along the same lines.
And we aren't talking about seniors mostly here. The big lads are often the older extreme or out of the age range we are talking about.

amacachi

To be perfectly honest the scrum is the one thing that's put me off playing Rugby. I'm too big (read: fat) to be anywhere other than somewhere in the front 2 rows and maybe it's overcautious but I've seen a few people injured there, none seriously but it easily could've been. In open play there's probably more chance of slight injuries but at least if anything happens you can defend yourself.
Even if the scrums were uncontested up to a certain age I may well have played in school, as it turns out I didn't.