The Rugby Thread

[Tredman]

This is a superb idea. Let’s hope it gets fully adopted

This time last year, World Rugby was holding a symposium in Marcoussis, France’s training centre south of Paris, to generate ideas aimed at making rugby safer and more of a spectacle. The three-day forum concluded with a package of law trials that could radically change the way the game is played before the 2023 World Cup.

The headline initiative that emerged from discussions between international coaches, players, referees, club representatives, doctors and sports scientists was the 50-22 kick, an adaptation of rugby league’s 40-20, which has since been trialled in Australia’s National Rugby Championship (NRC). More on that later.

The most emotive of the agreed innovations — and potentially the most significant to the fabric of the game as we know it — were those lowering the height of a legal tackle from the armpit to the waist and prohibiting double tackles.

The French Rugby Federation (FFR), rocked by four deaths from on-field incidents over the previous year, proposed that the new tackle laws be tested in Federale 2, the fourth tier of French club rugby. Twelve months on and the initial analysis suggests that the trial has been delivering on World Rugby’s aims, delivering a positive impact on player safety and a more expansive game.

The key findings from the first half of the season were a 60 per cent drop in the number of head impacts and a threefold reduction in match injuries plus a 31 per cent increase in line breaks and a 67 per cent decrease in the amount of kicking.


World Rugby described the early results as “compelling” but that was not an immediate green light for change. The sport’s governing body has also made a commitment to preserve rugby’s DNA as a game of skill and physicality for all shapes and sizes. Where, though, is the line?

First, the rationale behind the FFR’s tackle proposal 12 months ago. There was an urgency in France to take action. Roxana Maracineanu, the French minister for sport, addressed the conference and called for change.

Her message reinforced what Bernard Laporte, president of the FFR, said after the death of Nicolas Chauvin, the 18-year-old Stade Francais flanker. “Our game has to fundamentally evolve so that rugby becomes a game of movement and avoiding collisions,” Laporte said. “With that it’s important to change the mentality of players and change the laws, most notably to do with tackling.”

The trial aimed to encourage safer tackling by making anything above the waist illegal
The trial aimed to encourage safer tackling by making anything above the waist illegal
ADAM DAVY/PA
World Rugby’s research shows that the tackle is responsible for 50 per cent of all injuries and 76 per cent of all concussions, with the defender the most at risk by a ratio of 3:1.

Statistically, the tackle with the greatest risk of injury is when the defender hits the ball-carrier upright, front on and with force. The intention of the FFR’s proposal was to remove the players’ heads from the same airspace.

One other key element of the trial was that the ball-carrier would be penalised for ducking into contact or leading with the head. It was considered near impossible for a defender to tackle a bent ball-carrier below the waist without going for the knees.

As one expert described it, if tackles above the sternum were red on the danger scale in terms of head injury risk for the defender, tackles below the upper thigh were orange. Forcing tacklers to target knees would also increase the risk of serious injury to the ball carrier. The FFR trial therefore focused on keeping the ball carrier upright and the defender bent at the waist, opening up the green zone around the midriff for the tackler to aim at.

Those measures led to a 60 per cent drop in the number of head impacts in Federale 2, down from an average of 9.8 per game in 2018-19 to four this season. The clubs also reported a stark reduction in match injuries, from an average of one per game in 2018-19 to one every three games.

Seventy per cent of clubs adapted to the new trials by introducing specific training. There was an initial spike in the number of penalties being awarded for high tackles but that began to fall in December and January.

At the same time, teams began to recognise the attacking opportunities open to them, given how hard it had become for defenders to prevent the offload.

There has been a 31 per cent increase in line breaks, a 16 per cent increase in passing and a 67 per cent decrease in the amount of kicking.

The number of offloads from a tackle increased from 6.7 per cent in September-October 2018 to 8.7 per cent over the same months in 2019. It then leapt to 11.2 per cent in December and January as teams began to recognise the value of keeping the ball alive.

While the number of offloads tracked upwards over those three windows, the number of kicks decreased from 16 in September-October 2018 to 14 last autumn and then down to just six in December and January.

The number of scrums remained stable but with fewer kicks there were fewer lineouts, down 21 per cent. One observer felt the ruck had improved as a contest because the tackler was not able to interfere with the ball placement.

There are doubts in some quarters whether these innovations will make it to the adult elite game. The required combination of waist-high tackles and upright carriers would endanger some fundamental elements of the game, such as the pick-and-go and a low drive for the line.

Nicolas Chauvin, 18, died after a tackle in an academy match
Nicolas Chauvin, 18, died after a tackle in an academy match
World Rugby is keeping an open mind. It described the early statistical feedback as positive but more research is required. The trials would likely need to be run in an elite competition before they could be considered for introduction into full law.

 

[Newbridge Wolf]

Bill Beaumont reelected to the top job in Rugby Union. Interesting to see if he pushes forward with his change on scrums, would be a big change to the game and not sure how popular that would be.

 

[Tredman]

Bill Beaumont reelected to the top job in Rugby Union. Interesting to see if he pushes forward with his change on scrums, would be a big change to the game and not sure how popular that would be.

He could hardly make them worse.

 

[Newbridge Wolf]

Uncontested below Elite level will be very unpopular by some. I'm certainly not a fan of scrums but they are part of the game and how you foster players coming through without having the experience of being in a contested scrum is a difficult one.

His comments about limiting subs is an interesting one, think that has the potential to open up the game a bit more and help realign the games balance of size and athleticism.

 

[Paddingtonwolf]

Uncontested scrums is a rubbish idea.

 

[Deutsch Wolf]

It's refereeing of the scrum that needs to change, not whether we have them or not.

Now the subs thing I do like. Too many games are decided now by who has the stronger bench, too many players are developed and conditioned knowing that they'll never go past 50-55 minutes. Especially forwards. Just benefits the top nations (including England).

Imagine if in cricket you could keep subbing fast bowlers off after they'd done 10 overs in a day. Those with the biggest budgets who were able to process hundreds of players through their Academies a year would clean up constantly, the little guys who only had their best players and that's it would be screwed. But no, bowling all day is part of the game. Playing 80 minutes of rugby should be the norm, not the exception. What's the point in gradually wearing your opposite number down only for him to bugger off not long into the second half and on trots some other monster, fresh as a daisy?

 

[Johnny75]

At the top level the subs rule kind of makes sense but not at lower levels where more subs means more people get games. The same rules exist for amateur football at Sunday level where the game is dying.

At the top level control is key and Beaumont is right the players are too big, uncontested scrims are not a good idea though as that just turns the game into rugby league and all you have is big strong runners crashing into one another.

Ref it properly and make sure the bloody ball goes in straight.

 

[Tredman]

Scrums can’t go on as they are, it’s terrible. So much time wasted every game.

Uncontested scrums are not ideal, but if that’s the simplest option then that’s better than continuing with a random shit show. Safer too.

 

[Deutsch Wolf]

Like I say, it's refereeing. Collapse it once deliberately and you say "Next time it's a penalty, the time after it's a penalty try (regardless of where it is) and the time after it's a yellow card, the time after it's a red card even if it's not the same offender. You've had your warning". As it is, they get 4-5 or even more free goes at it.

Watching Stoke play for throws and take an eternity over them was painful to watch. You don't ban throws though.

 

[Newbridge Wolf]

It's refereeing of the scrum that needs to change, not whether we have them or not.

Now the subs thing I do like. Too many games are decided now by who has the stronger bench, too many players are developed and conditioned knowing that they'll never go past 50-55 minutes. Especially forwards. Just benefits the top nations (including England).

Imagine if in cricket you could keep subbing fast bowlers off after they'd done 10 overs in a day. Those with the biggest budgets who were able to process hundreds of players through their Academies a year would clean up constantly, the little guys who only had their best players and that's it would be screwed. But no, bowling all day is part of the game. Playing 80 minutes of rugby should be the norm, not the exception. What's the point in gradually wearing your opposite number down only for him to bugger off not long into the second half and on trots some other monster, fresh as a daisy?

Spot on with the subs, making players last the full 80 reduces the emphasis on size over athletic ability. League has reduced the number of interchanges in a similar effort.

I'm not against uncontested scrums in principle, after all they are just a means to restart the game, they're not meant to BE the game. The difficulty is that if you keep the elite level as contested and all other levels uncontested how do you learn what is a very specialist technical position? It will also upset alot of forwards in the club game who pride themselves on the scrum.

 

[Tredman]

Like I say, it's refereeing. Collapse it once deliberately and you say "Next time it's a penalty, the time after it's a penalty try (regardless of where it is) and the time after it's a yellow card, the time after it's a red card even if it's not the same offender. You've had your warning". As it is, they get 4-5 or even more free goes at it.

Watching Stoke play for throws and take an eternity over them was painful to watch. You don't ban throws though.

Thing is it’s virtually impossible to know who to blame unless you are inside the scrum. My mate is a pretty high level ref and freely admits most of the time it’s pure guesswork.

 

[Deutsch Wolf]

Then some possibly innocent schmuck takes the hit. Act as a pack, if you don't want to lose one of your number, play properly. Otherwise run that risk.

 

[Tredman]

I mean don’t know as in which side is to blame.

 

[Deutsch Wolf]

Ah, perhaps. But then when one side is doing it continually it's pretty obvious and the problem right now - as you correctly identify - is the time it takes out of the game, how it spoils the spectacle and how it goes more or less unpunished for so long. I think that element of it is easy enough to clean up.

Sometimes rule changes have unintended impacts. VAR was there to do many things all at once and it's failed at a lot of them. It's pretty much eliminated penalty box dives at a stroke though...

 

[Tredman]

Take binding on for example, one side will often get pinged repetitively for not binding on - but professional props will work on how to make it difficult for the opposition to bind. It’s just a mess - I don’t agree on just uncontested at lower level, if we are going to do it do it at all levels.

 

[darlowolf64]

England so slow and ponderous against Italy in the Six Nations. Need a big win with 4 tries and only got two at the moment, lead 17-5

 

[Paul]

England so slow and ponderous against Italy in the Six Nations. Need a big win with 4 tries and only got two at the moment, lead 17-5

Better now Paddy was quite earlier on ?

 

[darlowolf64]

Yeah, could do with Italy totally collapsing in the last 27 minutes

 

[Tredman]

Some very variable refereeing today.

 

[BillyDee]

BP secured...