Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email Niamh on [email protected] for help. Thanks :)
New AMA with a US police officer (he's back!). You can ask your questions here

Doctors call for ban of tackling in Schools Rugby

  • 02-03-2016 10:15am
    #1
    Registered Users Posts: 16,618 ✭✭✭✭ 2smiggy


    so doctors are calling for tackling in schools rugby to be banned, in the UK and Ireland. I would not be for it, but concussions do happen, as they do in other sports. Surely they are taking this a bit too far ?

    BBC link


«13456

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 16,618 ✭✭✭✭ 2smiggy


    Johnny Sexton on todayfm now talking to Anton ..


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 323 ✭✭ sfbdqc


    If some doctors had there way, contact sports would be banned.


  • Registered Users Posts: 37,978 irishbucsfan


    The figures are completely out of context amongst the other sports available. How likely are kids to get injured playing rugby rather than football, soccer or hurling? Should we ban the contact element of those as well? Should kids be banned from riding horses, I've played rugby all my life and by far my most serious injuries came on horseback and I don't believe I'm an outlier. Seems like a bit of a hatchet job, there is a risk to any sport, it's completely outweighed by the benefits in my opinion.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,536 former total


    I'm going to go ahead and assume no-one will actually read the letter, but it's here if anyone wishes to do so:

    http://www.theguardian.com/education/2016/mar/02/uk-health-experts-call-for-ban-on-tackling-in-school-rugby

    It's not just about concussion, it's about injuries in general. And the risk of it is much higher than other school sports, that's not in question.

    It's never going to happen but that doesn't mean it's a terrible idea.


  • Registered Users Posts: 16,618 ✭✭✭✭ 2smiggy


    played plenty of rugby, along with GAA , only serious injuries and broken bones came from playing hurling. Think all of this is coming from the concussion issue in American Football. Ex players suing/dying young/suicide, and this new film about concussion.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 37,978 irishbucsfan


    I'm going to go ahead and assume no-one will actually read the letter, but it's here if anyone wishes to do so:

    Actually, some of us already read the letter :rolleyes:

    http://www.theguardian.com/education/2016/mar/02/uk-health-experts-call-for-ban-on-tackling-in-school-rugby

    It's not just about concussion, it's about injuries in general. And the risk of it is much higher than other school sports, that's not in question.

    It's never going to happen but that doesn't mean it's a terrible idea.

    This claim is not made in the letter whatsoever.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,536 former total



    This claim is not made in the letter whatsoever.

    I didn't say it was, that's my own statement.


  • Registered Users Posts: 37,978 irishbucsfan


    I didn't say it was, that's my own statement.

    I haven't seen any evidence to say that rugby is a much higher risk sport at underage level than football or hurling.

    This letter also completely ignores how dangerous rugby would become at u19 level when you have very powerful developing young adults suddenly learning to tackle, lineout and scrummage rather than being slowly introduced to these concepts individually over time as they are currently


  • Registered Users Posts: 12,553 ✭✭✭✭ errlloyd


    Dunno why the doctors went for the all out ban on rugby. That was something was always going to be rubbished. Policies could come in to make it safer without banning tackling completely, they should be aiming to do these things in phases.

    For example.

    U13s Tag Rugby
    U14s Rugby League style Tackle area (no Ruck)
    Juniors No Tackling above waist.

    TY: Sevens
    Fifth and Sixth year: Full Contact but zero tolerance for dangerous play.


  • Registered Users Posts: 287 ✭✭ ArnieSilvia


    Can't figure out myself how a responsible parent would put a game over health of their own child. My son was playing hurling but as soon as I saw that there's a risk of injury I took him out and organised some other activities instead. He didn't suffer from not playing it. Never played rugby but it's crazy sport. Not a sport really as it brings injuries rather than good health effects, it's just an organized fight


  • Advertisement
  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 689 Straight Edge Punk


    Can't figure out myself how a responsible parent would put a game over health of their own child. My son was playing hurling but as soon as I saw that there's a risk of injury I took him out and organised some other activities instead. He didn't suffer from not playing it. Never played rugby but it's crazy sport. Not a sport really as it brings injuries rather than good health effects, it's just an organized fight

    Not a sport? Oh wow.


  • Registered Users Posts: 37,978 irishbucsfan


    Can't figure out myself how a responsible parent would put a game over health of their own child. My son was playing hurling but as soon as I saw that there's a risk of injury I took him out and organised some other activities instead. He didn't suffer from not playing it. Never played rugby but it's crazy sport. Not a sport really as it brings injuries rather than good health effects, it's just an organized fight

    Well obviously you don't really know anything about rugby so there won't be much that will change your mind on that one.


  • Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 9,994 Mod ✭✭✭✭ sullivlo


    Can't figure out myself how a responsible parent would put a game over health of their own child. My son was playing hurling but as soon as I saw that there's a risk of injury I took him out and organised some other activities instead. He didn't suffer from not playing it. Never played rugby but it's crazy sport. Not a sport really as it brings injuries rather than good health effects, it's just an organized fight

    :rolleyes:

    It's actually your son that I feel sorry for in this situation.

    I'm not a parent, but I do (have) played rugby. The worst injuries I endured were from tag rugby or my most recent one - needing surgery after falling in my kitchen. I would have no qualms about my future kids playing.

    As for no health benefits? I lost 5 stone after taking it up.

    From a point of view of playing women's rugby. I took it up at 19. Most other females were the same. However when I was 25, I played with 18 year olds who had come thru the minis and underage levels and their skill was far superior. The younger you learn, the better. IMO.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,883 shuffol


    I haven't seen any evidence to say that rugby is a much higher risk sport at underage level than football or hurling.

    This letter also completely ignores how dangerous rugby would become at u19 level when you have very powerful developing young adults suddenly learning to tackle, lineout and scrummage rather than being slowly introduced to these concepts individually over time as they are currently

    Yes, a lot of concussions are caused by poor tackle technique. I think it's an area where Irish players don't excel and better education and training is needed.


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,737 ✭✭✭ jacothelad


    Ulster have already introduced this in the Pro 12.


  • Registered Users Posts: 19,231 ✭✭✭✭ Venjur


    Learning to tackle and be tackled before players start getting into the gym is possibly a good thing.

    The one point I would however make is that my SCT year the lads on the 1st team were marginally bigger than the other normal lads in the year and this isn't that long ago (99). Plenty of lads who played in the Leinster schools final that year would however look no different than someone playing GAA or Soccer at the same age bracket.

    Now not only are many of the SCT lads noticeably and substantially larger than an average 5th / 6th year student but the JCT guys are starting to stand out also.

    This has corresponded to a perceived increase in injury across schools rugby. I don't have any facts or figures to back this up, but of the one or two SCT schools coaches that I have spoken with it's a much bigger issue for them now than it was even a decade ago.

    Supporting this further I know a couple of physio's that work with schools rugby teams and they can't believe the level of churn these days and feel that far too much pressure is being put on young frames in a punishing sport.

    Again, I've nothing but opinion to back up these ideas but I do believe the sources of those opinions are informed.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,536 former total


    I haven't seen any evidence to say that rugby is a much higher risk sport at underage level than football or hurling.

    This letter also completely ignores how dangerous rugby would become at u19 level when you have very powerful developing young adults suddenly learning to tackle, lineout and scrummage rather than being slowly introduced to these concepts individually over time as they are currently

    But see this is why I was so keen for people to actually read the letter.

    It's NOT advocating removing the tackle from UNDERAGE rugby, it's advocating removing the tackle from SCHOOL rugby. It specifically raises concerns about schools where rugby is a mandatory part of the PE curriculum.

    So, if you want to send your kid off down the local rugby club on a Sunday morning, then that's a free choice, and he/she can learn about tackling, scrummaging etc down there.

    It's a different thing having a full-on contact sport as a mandatory part of a school curriculum.

    It is not the remit of PE in schools to be churning out athletes capable of making the step up to u19 rugby.


  • Registered Users Posts: 37,978 irishbucsfan


    But see this is why I was so keen for people to actually read the letter.

    It's NOT advocating removing the tackle from UNDERAGE rugby, it's advocating removing the tackle from SCHOOL rugby. It specifically raises concerns about schools where rugby is a mandatory part of the PE curriculum.

    So, if you want to send your kid off down the local rugby club on a Sunday morning, then that's a free choice, and he/she can learn about tackling, scrummaging etc down there.

    It's a different thing having a full-on contact sport as a mandatory part of a school curriculum.

    It is not the remit of PE in schools to be churning out athletes capable of making the step up to u19 rugby.

    These doctors (the lady in charge specifically, I've forgotten her name now and I'm on my phone) are out to remove contact from underage rugby altogether and I believe certain of these have a previous for similar suggestions.

    If the problem was the mandatory element of the contact in PE classes then why not just call for the removal of contact in PE classes? It would be a much more realistic proposal and I don't think that would have been nearly as controversial, which coincidentally is also why I think the suggestion wasn't made.

    Also a lot of kids cannot play schools and clubs rugby simultaneously, and a lot more wouldn't have the time. I'd also suggest playing more than one sport is a lot more beneficial than playing rugby for two teams.


  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Music Moderators, Politics Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 22,303 CMod ✭✭✭✭ Dravokivich


    sfbdqc wrote: »
    If some doctors had there way, contact sports would be banned.

    Turkeys voting for Christmas. Surely that'd give them less business no?


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,272 ✭✭✭ racso1975


    I coach mini rugby and Juvenile GAA. I coach primarily cause my son plays at these sports and the same age group I coach.

    1) At under 7 there is no contact it is tag only in rugby. This is not the case in GAA football or hurling and he has got hurt a lot more in these then he has in Rugby

    2)This year under 8's rugby. New rules. No player is allowed tackle above the waist. First time is a warning and second time they are to be taken out for 5 mins (don't really agree with this part as don't think any child should be excluded). I try to keep pitches tight as it does not allow anybody to build up a big head of steam meaning its easier to tackle. To date nobody has been hurt. (i do exclude children from contact who turn up without gumshields.....parents who do this are crazy).

    This is a change I would consider implementing if one was to be. Playing based upon size and not age. My son is big for his age I have seen him cover a ridiculous amount of ground with 4 kids hanging out of him. However when he meets a kid his own size he is stopped in his tracks. Also children like my own think they can just run through everybody they dont try to look for space or side step etc they would have to develop these skills if they were playing kids the same size.

    Children grow and develop at such a huge variance that there is and element of craziness about putting a 5ft 10 10 stone 11 year old up against and 5ft 8 stone 11 year old.

    We also have to consider in some cases these children can also spend a huge amount of time stuck in front of screens. The days of spending hours out horsing around in the back garden and fields seem to be mostly gone. This was where children developed physically in massive ways.

    Also just to consider outside of concussion the any physio will tell you the amount of damage being done to kids through Irish dancing is horrific in comparison to any field sport.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 2,530 ✭✭✭ dub_skav


    Can't figure out myself how a responsible parent would put a game over health of their own child. My son was playing hurling but as soon as I saw that there's a risk of injury I took him out and organised some other activities instead. He didn't suffer from not playing it. Never played rugby but it's crazy sport. Not a sport really as it brings injuries rather than good health effects, it's just an organized fight

    I have no knowledge of these "other activities" that you mention and I may in fact have no experience of them whatsoever.
    However, I have no hesitation in calling them crazy and decrying them as having no benefits at all.

    :D


  • Registered Users Posts: 12,536 ✭✭✭✭ thebaz


    more nanny statism - give up rugby and ban tackling in soccer , and the same doctors moaning our children are not getting eneogh exercise - sure , make rugby safer where possible , but life is also about living , thats my mantra


  • Subscribers Posts: 36,277 ✭✭✭✭ sydthebeat


    I'm going to go ahead and assume no-one will actually read the letter, but it's here if anyone wishes to do so:

    http://www.theguardian.com/education/2016/mar/02/uk-health-experts-call-for-ban-on-tackling-in-school-rugby

    It's not just about concussion, it's about injuries in general. And the risk of it is much higher than other school sports, that's not in question.

    It's never going to happen but that doesn't mean it's a terrible idea.

    if the crux of the argument is that schools who promote compulsory playing of rugby at PE are putting kids unnecessarily at risk of injuries, then where is the study to show why they are at higher or greater risk than general club rugby?
    is it because kids dont want to play and are forced to so?
    is it because the standard of coaching isnt good enough to ensure proper techniques?

    the letter reads like the 'compulsory' factor is an addendum to the other reasons to be honest.. and not the main factor.


  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 49,443 CMod ✭✭✭✭ awec


    Venjur wrote: »
    Learning to tackle and be tackled before players start getting into the gym is possibly a good thing.

    The one point I would however make is that my SCT year the lads on the 1st team were marginally bigger than the other normal lads in the year and this isn't that long ago (99). Plenty of lads who played in the Leinster schools final that year would however look no different than someone playing GAA or Soccer at the same age bracket.

    Now not only are many of the SCT lads noticeably and substantially larger than an average 5th / 6th year student but the JCT guys are starting to stand out also.

    This has corresponded to a perceived increase in injury across schools rugby. I don't have any facts or figures to back this up, but of the one or two SCT schools coaches that I have spoken with it's a much bigger issue for them now than it was even a decade ago.

    Supporting this further I know a couple of physio's that work with schools rugby teams and they can't believe the level of churn these days and feel that far too much pressure is being put on young frames in a punishing sport.

    Again, I've nothing but opinion to back up these ideas but I do believe the sources of those opinions are informed.

    It was on UAFC that someone's child was sent home from rugby practice at one of the big rugby schools with instructions to start taking creatine when he was only about 15.

    This is crazy, and I am sure not isolated.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,315 ✭✭✭ ChippingSodbury


    I wouldn't agree with the "no tackle" suggestion as, as other posters have pointed out, if you don't learn early, it's very difficult to learn how to properly tackle later on.
    The biggest issue I see is that the opinion in most possible head injury scenarios is "(s)he's probably not concussed, let's leave them on in case we take them off when they're not concussed and risk weakening the team"
    instead of "(s)he's possibly concussed, let's take them off to avoid a potential catastrophe. If we get it wrong, it's not the end of the world."

    I coach GAA and I know it's very difficult to change the mindset (often including my own!) of "sure they'll be OK and we'll keep and eye on them" but I'd never forgive myself if a person under my charge came to serious harm because of something I did (or didn't) do.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,476 ✭✭✭ Jump_In_Jack


    IMO, parents should have the right to make the decision over whether or not their child should play full-contact rugby in school. It should not be a compulsory part of PE.

    IMO, the state should have guidelines for how rugby is taught in schools, all the ideas so far from other posters seem perfectly reasonable and should be there to protect children.

    A few examples off the top of my head would be:
    The coach should have sufficient coaching experience to teach rugby safely,
    The progression from non-contact to full-contact rugby should be gradual,
    There should be a big emphasis on learning the correct technique and body positions for full-contact rugby as early as possible, and should be well-practiced before being allowed play full-contact rugby.
    The idea of considering the size of children as well as their age when putting them into groups is a very good suggestion also.


  • Subscribers Posts: 36,277 ✭✭✭✭ sydthebeat


    A few examples off the top of my head would be:
    The coach should have sufficient coaching experience to teach rugby safely,
    The progression from non-contact to full-contact rugby should be gradual,
    There should be a big emphasis on learning the correct technique and body positions for full-contact rugby as early as possible, and should be well-practiced before being allowed play full-contact rugby.

    The idea of considering the size of children as well as their age when putting them into groups is a very good suggestion also.

    im not involved in schools rugby but i would be flabbergasted to find out that the bolded above is NOT already in place.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,476 ✭✭✭ Jump_In_Jack


    sydthebeat wrote: »
    im not involved in schools rugby but i would be flabbergasted to find out that the bolded above is NOT already in place.

    It may be in place in individual schools, but I mean as a guideline from the Board of Education, if it is being introduced as part of the curriculum, there should be guidelines, hopefully there are already guidelines, but I'm not sure what's there now.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,536 former total


    sydthebeat wrote: »
    if the crux of the argument is that schools who promote compulsory playing of rugby at PE are putting kids unnecessarily at risk of injuries, then where is the study to show why they are at higher or greater risk than general club rugby?
    is it because kids dont want to play and are forced to so?
    is it because the standard of coaching isnt good enough to ensure proper techniques?

    the letter reads like the 'compulsory' factor is an addendum to the other reasons to be honest.. and not the main factor.

    I don't think I get your point. There is no claim by anyone that rugby at school is any higher risk than club rugby. My point is that engaging in a high-risk activity of your own volition in your spare time is very different to having to do it in a school-mandated activity.


  • Advertisement
  • Subscribers Posts: 36,277 ✭✭✭✭ sydthebeat


    It may be in place in individual schools, but I mean as a guideline from the Board of Education, if it is being introduced as part of the curriculum, there should be guidelines, hopefully there are already guidelines, but I'm not sure what's there now.

    if they are "rugby schools" that compete in schools competitions then those competitions are under the auspices of the IRFU, and child welfare insists that all coaches are ticketed, players registered etc.

    however if we're talking about non rugby schools using rugby as a physical exercise then it would simply be nonsensical to play anything other than touch / tag.

    I know that our club CCRO, when introducing rugby to schools, promote tag only


Advertisement