It’s perhaps what you’ve come to expect from the haughtily named the RFU (Rugby Football Union). Without properly consulting their constituents, they are set to make a change so fundamental to the game on their shores, it is likely to shake it to its foundations.
Last week the RFU announced that from next season the permissible height at which tackles can be performed will be lowered as part of long-term player-protection plans to reduce concussions in the sport. It will apply to National One and below in the men’s game and Championship One and below in the women’s game.
The move has been unanimously approved by RFU council members in an attempt to support player welfare, notably reducing head impact exposure across the community game.
Simply put, tackles will now have to be performed at waist height or lower.
The RFU tried to justify their decision saying “a large body of scientific evidence strongly indicates that it will reduce the incidence of head injuries in the community game”.
This body of evidence is thought to be World Rugby’s 2016 paper anatomising 611 incidents that led to head injury assessments in the elite game.
Ironically perhaps, those affected are up in arms.
The RFU is of course as keenly aware how future lawsuits may affect their bottom line, as they are the importance of winning the PR battle. They know the jury is out on whether little Johnny, or Mary, will be allowed near an oval ball for fear of a life-changing event on a nearby field.
Of course winning the hearts and minds of the game’s future practitioners, and their parents, would be only half the battle won. They still need to pacify and convince the game’s most enduring rank and file that their changes are a good idea.
You can get a knee in the head. You can get a hip in the head. Most concussions they come from those.
— Ireland's Johnny Sexton
Those with a suspicious disposition can easily draw the conclusion what happens in England may very well be a test case for what is likely to happen elsewhere. A lot of convincing, however, needs to be done.
Some of the game’s apex operators are more than sceptical. They are not convinced the new measures will move the tackle needle into the safe zone.
Ireland captain Johnny Sexton, who is perhaps more familiar with rugby’s infirmary than most, expressed reservations. “You can get a knee in the head. You can get a hip in the head. Most concussions they come from those,” he told reporters matter of factly this week. “There was a study done a few years ago, and there were a lot of red cards given for high tackles, and 100% we need to get them out the game, but none of them resulted in concussions, whereas a lot of them came from knees to the head and hips to the head.
“I am not sure who puts these rules in place, but I don’t agree with them, especially for a taller man like myself who likes to tackle hard.”
Indeed, it begs the question how would Brodie Retallick legally flatten Faf de Klerk?
Ireland coach Andy Farrell warned lowering the tackle height can be as dangerous. Of course Sexton and Farrell are involved at a level where the stakes are higher, and peril greater.
While the change will not affect the game at its highest level it will add fuel to the argument that rugby’s major decisions are made by barristers and other members of the legal fraternity. Sure the game needs to be made safer, but soon the game’s lawmakers, if left unchallenged, will be tugging at the soul of the sport.
Rugby’s gladiatorial appeal is gradually being diluted. That of course is not necessarily a bad thing, but a game already entangled in a web of laws and frown-upons is rapidly losing its ability to remain relevant.
Let’s be honest, spectators who are asked to pay vast amounts to witness the sport’s biggest games want bang for their buck. As much as they want to see speed, power, skill, guile, tactical nous, they want to see the thunderous collisions. It is in rugby’s DNA. To suggest that it’s not would be disingenuous.
Today’s top players are conditioned to play the game at breakneck speed which of course brings daily peril to their daily bread. It has brought the game to an unpalatable point where it is at odds with itself.
As a high-ranking official at one of the country’s oldest clubs put it to me: “It’s a crazy law,” he said about the RFU’s plans. “It will kill the game.”
Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.