Australian Rugby / RA

[The Ghost of Raelene]

Might be wrong but a lot of the head clashes seem to be team mates colliding heads as they make a tackle and the attacking played moves forwards through the tackle.

I don't mind the changes. If Rugby is proactive about player safety it will help perception and involvement.

 

[Pfitzy]

the tackle height will be lowered to below the base of the sternum for all competitions below Super Rugby that commence on or after February 10, 2024. This change in law will include all Premier Grades, School Competitions, and Pathway Competitions.

Subbies is below Super Rugby but is NOT a Premier Grade comp.

 

[Braveheart81]

Subbies is below Super Rugby but is NOT a Premier Grade comp.

It will include those competitions specifically listed giving clarity that they are part of community rugby. It doesn't mean that's a complete list.

 

[LeCheese]

Might be wrong but a lot of the head clashes seem to be team mates colliding heads as they make a tackle and the attacking played moves forwards through the tackle.

I don't mind the changes. If Rugby is proactive about player safety it will help perception and involvement.

I feel like tackler-on-tackler head clashes now being the (seemingly) most prevalent/notable is a direct result of the reduction in tackler-on-ballcarrier thanks to the recent law changes.

Obviously can't remove all risk of head clashes, but lowering the risk of higher-impact clashes - such as tackler-on-ballcarrier - is a definite step forward.

 

[RemainingInTheGame]

Community Rugby letter that went out this morning.

Good morning,

In March this year Rugby Australia committed to participate in a two-year global law trial, facilitated by World Rugby, which will result in the legal tackle height being reduced from below the line of the shoulders to the sternum at Community level.

Following consultation with our Member Unions as well as coaches, match officials, administrators and medical professionals, the tackle height will be lowered to below the base of the sternum for all competitions below Super Rugby that commence on or after February 10, 2024. This change in law will include all Premier Grades, School Competitions, and Pathway Competitions.

In all stakeholder engagement, key consideration was given to:

• enhancing player safety.
• the experience for the players, including professional players.
• additional challenges that could be encountered by match officials.
• possible changes to tactics and tackle technique currently being coached.
• perception of the game by people not currently involved in rugby.

Changing the legal tackle height to the base of the sternum ensures the tackler's head is lower relative to the ball carrier's body, minimising the risk of head-to-head, and head-to-shoulder contact, and reducing the risk of head injury to both players. Initial trials and research findings over the last six years have indicated that the risk of concussion is 4.2 times higher when a tackler's head is positioned above the sternum of the ball carrier and the safest place to tackle is between the waist and sternum. The global law trial includes major Unions around the world such as England, France, Ireland, New Zealand, Scotland, South Africa, and Wales, and early indications are very positive with significant reduction in head impacts and suspected concussion being reported.

As part of the research select competitions around the world are being filmed and then analysed by World Rugby to undertake a comparison between significant head impacts and concussion under the previous law and the variation, as well as tracking the variation year to year. This assessment will review the positioning of tackler and ball carrier, their head proximity, point of contact, tackle type, direction of players, evasion techniques, number of passes preceding tackle etc. Game metric outcomes such as ball in play time, passing rate and offloads will also be captured as part of the trial evaluation.

To support your coaches and match officials with this transition to the new tackle height we have produced a range of resources and training materials. Match officials will be asked to place greater emphasis on the existing law preventing a ball carrier from “dipping” into a tackle and placing themselves, and potentially the defender, in an unsafe position for contact. The new law will not change the ability for an attacking player to "pick-and-go" where the ball carrier typically starts and continues at a low body height. The defender will still be required to avoid contact with the head and neck of the ball carrier as stipulated in the existing World Rugby Head Contact framework.

It is important to note there may be an adjustment period for players and match officials so please be patient through this time. For more information and ongoing updates, please visit our website.

We will continue to ensure that any decisions impacting the game are informed by research and evidence that prioritise player safety and welfare.

Thank you for your involvement in Rugby.

Kind Regards,


Phil Waugh - CEO, Rugby Australia

Does anyone have know when this will be generally public?

I can't see it on Rugby Explorer, Rugby Australia Website etc...

 

[Wallaby Man]

I feel like tackler-on-tackler head clashes now being the (seemingly) most prevalent/notable is a direct result of the reduction in tackler-on-ballcarrier thanks to the recent law changes.

Obviously can't remove all risk of head clashes, but lowering the risk of higher-impact clashes - such as tackler-on-ballcarrier - is a definite step forward.

I’d like to see the data on this in 12months. I’m pro the change as if it creates positive change then that’s great. However from reading some existing research there is 2 red zones for contact and concussion. Head to knee and head to head. I just hope this doesn’t push the current incidence lower and we see extremely limited change in concussion occurrence, while the smaller window for accuracy creates fundamental issues to the game. From what I hear, the new rules in the uk and France are essentially ignored when the whistle blows as it’s difficult to officiate with accuracy.

 

[Pfitzy]

It will include those competitions specifically listed giving clarity that they are part of community rugby. It doesn't mean that's a complete list.

Peak rugby.

 

[Pfitzy]

I’d like to see the data on this in 12months. I’m pro the change as if it creates positive change then that’s great. However from reading some existing research there is 2 red zones for contact and concussion. Head to knee and head to head. I just hope this doesn’t push the current incidence lower and we see extremely limited change in concussion occurrence, while the smaller window for accuracy creates fundamental issues to the game. From what I hear, the new rules in the uk and France are essentially ignored when the whistle blows as it’s difficult to officiate with accuracy.

There are two parties I most feel the most concern for here:

1) Park footy refs*, who already have it tought adjudicating in a split-second

2) Third and Fourth Grade players who lack the flexibility to bend that low


*Of which I am one

 

[Derpus]

There are two parties I most feel the most concern for here:

1) Park footy refs*, who already have it tought adjudicating in a split-second

2) Third and Fourth Grade players who lack the flexibility to bend that low


*Of which I am one

Learn how to play on all fours.

 

[LeCheese]

I’d like to see the data on this in 12months. I’m pro the change as if it creates positive change then that’s great. However from reading some existing research there is 2 red zones for contact and concussion. Head to knee and head to head. I just hope this doesn’t push the current incidence lower and we see extremely limited change in concussion occurrence, while the smaller window for accuracy creates fundamental issues to the game.

Definitely agree - my hunch, however, is that head-on-head was the more likely of the two red zones given a player is more likely to go too high in a tackle, rather than too low. If we're changing the definition of what 'too high' looks like, hopefully that leads to improvement even in lazier tackles. You'd hope that it improves tackle technique and coaching overall too.

From what I hear, the new rules in the uk and France are essentially ignored when the whistle blows as it’s difficult to officiate with accuracy.

Yeah officiating is going to be very tricky - 'sternum' is pretty vague, and realistically will change from player-to-player with different proportions. Speaking to a QPR-level ref mate this morning, he's already preparing for the torrent of abuse that'll likely result. Haven't heard the same about it essentially being ignored over in the UK and France though.

 

[Wallaby Man]

Definitely agree - my hunch, however, is that head-on-head was the more likely of the two red zones given a player is more likely to go too high in a tackle, rather than too low. If we're changing the definition of what 'too high' looks like, hopefully that leads to improvement even in lazier tackles. You'd hope that it improves tackle technique and coaching overall too.

Yeah officiating is going to be very tricky - 'sternum' is pretty vague, and realistically will change from player-to-player with different proportions. Speaking to a QPR-level ref mate this morning, he's already preparing for the torrent of abuse that'll likely result. Haven't heard the same about it essentially being ignored over in the UK and France though.

My understanding is that the head is actually safer than head to knee for the tackler. But because you are bringing in another variable of someone’s head then the risk increases as there is concussion risk there as well. I suspect we will find incidence of tacklers getting more concussed but they will try and eliminate the ball carrier risk, therefore hopefully dropping the overall incidence. There is also the fundamental issue that you just can’t eliminate the riskiest place as players have to make contact somewhere. It’s all very interesting.

Who knows, perhaps current protocols might already be sufficient, however we won’t know the results of that for years to come.

 

[LeCheese]

My understanding is that the head is actually safer than head to knee for the tackler. But because you are bringing in another variable of someone’s head then the risk increases as there is concussion risk there as well. I suspect we will find incidence of tacklers getting more concussed but they will try and eliminate the ball carrier risk, therefore potentially dropping hopefully dropping the overall incidence. There is also the fundamental issue that you just can’t eliminate the riskiest place as players have to make contact somewhere. It’s all very interesting.

Who knows, perhaps current protocols might already be sufficient, however we won’t know the results of that for years to come.

Yeah that's my understanding of potential severity as well, but my hunch was more around the frequency of head-to-head contact vs head-to-knee. Again, not based on any stats, but I feel lazy tackles and attempts at big shots (resulting in head-to-head) are more common than the low positioning usually needed for knee-to-head.

As you say, it'll be interesting to see how it pans out.

 

[RugbyReg]

Peak rugby.

Yeah. They should have listed every single competition in the country. How elite of them

 

[D-Box]

Yeah that's my understanding of potential severity as well, but my hunch was more around the frequency of head-to-head contact vs head-to-knee. Again, not based on any stats, but I feel lazy tackles and attempts at big shots (resulting in head-to-head) are more common than the low positioning usually needed for knee-to-head.

As you say, it'll be interesting to see how it pans out.

As someone who does research in this area - that's it. Tackler is in a bit more control normally. Heads to hips and knees will still happen but unless contact looks like AFL you wont stop those happening.

It will be interesting to see implementation. I have a hunch that there will be very few refs blowing a penalty for hitting half way up a sternum, but what you achieve is moving the currently blurry boundary lower. Currently the high on the chest and slide up will be debatable as to if that's a penalty. In the new rule that's clear as day.

 

[D-Box]

For anyone interested in the latest paper on looking at a reduced tackle height. Pretty sure it is Open Access

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S144024402300453X

Tackling the tackle 1: A descriptive analysis of 14,679 tackles and risk factors for high tackles in a community-level male amateur rugby union competition during a lowered tackle height law variation trial

Abstract​

Objectives​

In rugby union (rugby), the tackle is the most frequent cause of concussion and thus a target for intervention to reduce concussion incidence. The aim of this study is to describe tackle characteristics and factors associated with illegal high tackles in amateur community-level rugby during a lowered (armpit level) tackle height law variation trial.

Design​

Prospective observational cohort study.

Methods​

Video surveillance of a single season, four-league competition with coding of video data according to a predefined coding framework. Descriptive statistics of tackle detail and logistic regression was performed to analyse factors associated with high tackles.

Results​

One hundred and eight matches with 14,679 tackles and a mean of 137 (± 30) tackles per match were analysed. High tackles (above armpit level) had significantly greater odds of occurring in the lower (2nd–4th) leagues (OR: 1.95; 95 % CI: 1.6–2.4; p < 0.001), front-on tackles (OR: 1.61; 95 % CI: 1.3–2.0; p < 0.001), arm tackles (OR: 1.65; 95 % CI: 1.3–2.1; p < 0.001), bent-at-waist ball carrier (OR: 1.93; 95 % CI: 1.6–2.4; p < 0.001), falling/diving ball carrier (OR: 2.21; 95 % CI: 1.6–3.1; p < 0.001), and an upright tackler (OR: 3.38; 95 % CI: 2.7–4.2; p < 0.001). A falling/diving tackler had significantly lower odds of being associated with a high tackle (OR: 0.44; 95 % CI: 0.3–0.6; p < 0.001).

Conclusions​

Overall mean tackles per match were similar to those of senior amateur and elite rugby. League, tackle type, tackle aspect, and player body positions were associated with high tackles. These findings reiterate the need for ongoing efforts to identify and implement mitigating strategies to reduce tackle-related injury risk.

Keywords​

Tackle descriptors
Rugby
Amateur
Community level
Injury risk
Concussion

Practical implications​

• •
  Mean match tackles in this community amateur cohort were similar to those of senior male amateur and elite rugby, in a cohort that is likely less well conditioned than senior and elite cohorts.
• •
  Lower league, tackle type (arm), tackle aspect (front-on), and player body positions (upright tackler; low ball carrier) were associated with high tackles.
• •
  These findings reiterate the need to address injury and concussion risk in the tackle.
• •
  Safe tackle technique training interventions may provide valuable additional benefits, particularly in less well conditioned community level cohorts.

 

[LeCheese]

For anyone interested in the latest paper on looking at a reduced tackle height. Pretty sure it is Open Access

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S144024402300453X

Tackling the tackle 1: A descriptive analysis of 14,679 tackles and risk factors for high tackles in a community-level male amateur rugby union competition during a lowered tackle height law variation trial

Abstract​

Objectives​

In rugby union (rugby), the tackle is the most frequent cause of concussion and thus a target for intervention to reduce concussion incidence. The aim of this study is to describe tackle characteristics and factors associated with illegal high tackles in amateur community-level rugby during a lowered (armpit level) tackle height law variation trial.

Design​

Prospective observational cohort study.

Methods​

Video surveillance of a single season, four-league competition with coding of video data according to a predefined coding framework. Descriptive statistics of tackle detail and logistic regression was performed to analyse factors associated with high tackles.

Results​

One hundred and eight matches with 14,679 tackles and a mean of 137 (± 30) tackles per match were analysed. High tackles (above armpit level) had significantly greater odds of occurring in the lower (2nd–4th) leagues (OR: 1.95; 95 % CI: 1.6–2.4; p < 0.001), front-on tackles (OR: 1.61; 95 % CI: 1.3–2.0; p < 0.001), arm tackles (OR: 1.65; 95 % CI: 1.3–2.1; p < 0.001), bent-at-waist ball carrier (OR: 1.93; 95 % CI: 1.6–2.4; p < 0.001), falling/diving ball carrier (OR: 2.21; 95 % CI: 1.6–3.1; p < 0.001), and an upright tackler (OR: 3.38; 95 % CI: 2.7–4.2; p < 0.001). A falling/diving tackler had significantly lower odds of being associated with a high tackle (OR: 0.44; 95 % CI: 0.3–0.6; p < 0.001).

Conclusions​

Overall mean tackles per match were similar to those of senior amateur and elite rugby. League, tackle type, tackle aspect, and player body positions were associated with high tackles. These findings reiterate the need for ongoing efforts to identify and implement mitigating strategies to reduce tackle-related injury risk.

Keywords​

Tackle descriptors
Rugby
Amateur
Community level
Injury risk
Concussion

Practical implications​

• •
  Mean match tackles in this community amateur cohort were similar to those of senior male amateur and elite rugby, in a cohort that is likely less well conditioned than senior and elite cohorts.
• •
  Lower league, tackle type (arm), tackle aspect (front-on), and player body positions (upright tackler; low ball carrier) were associated with high tackles.
• •
  These findings reiterate the need to address injury and concussion risk in the tackle.
• •
  Safe tackle technique training interventions may provide valuable additional benefits, particularly in less well conditioned community level cohorts.

Thanks for sharing, great insights. Looking at the tackle descriptives table, it's pretty encouraging to see that >85% of tackles analysed were acceptable across all grades, given that this was the first year of a considerable change. Obviously some ways to go, but that'll come with time, coaching, and normalcy.

Although, I'm assuming tackle height/type would be a significant moderator for Grade. It does raise an interesting question of how to best approach implementation of this across people with differing skill levels and physical characteristics.

 

[Alex Sharpe]

Im sorry but the timing of this is completely insane.

Does Rugby Australia seriously think that the few months between now and trial games next year is enough time to calibrate referees and players as well as clear up the ample amount of questions.

Tackle below the sternum sounds good in theory - but how often do ball carriers run bolt upright? How do you tackle a ball carrier with any kind of reduction in body height?

I am concerned that players are going to be try to learn new ways of tackling in on a limited number of Tuesday and Thursday nights before round 1 or trial 1.

Having guys going into tackles hesitantly or with confusion is genuinely going to cause more injuries.

There is also limited time for genuine calibration among referees. The first few rounds next year could be chaos.

 

[D-Box]

Im sorry but the timing of this is completely insane.

Does Rugby Australia seriously think that the few months between now and trial games next year is enough time to calibrate referees and players as well as clear up the ample amount of questions.

Tackle below the sternum sounds good in theory - but how often do ball carriers run bolt upright? How do you tackle a ball carrier with any kind of reduction in body height?

I am concerned that players are going to be try to learn new ways of tackling in on a limited number of Tuesday and Thursday nights before round 1 or trial 1.

Having guys going into tackles hesitantly or with confusion is genuinely going to cause more injuries.

There is also limited time for genuine calibration among referees. The first few rounds next year could be chaos.

Most clubs are just starting to head into pre-season so from a timing perspective, it's pretty good. With RA's planning I would have expected it about a month out

 

[Alex Sharpe]

If they had announced It at the end of the season we could already have referees calibrated and ready to go to club trainings to explain it to players and coaches.

between World Rugby and Rugby Australia, we are talking about two of the most incompetent organisations going around. Therecis a lot to do before the start of the season

 

[Goosestep]

Im sorry but the timing of this is completely insane.

Does Rugby Australia seriously think that the few months between now and trial games next year is enough time to calibrate referees and players as well as clear up the ample amount of questions.

Tackle below the sternum sounds good in theory - but how often do ball carriers run bolt upright? How do you tackle a ball carrier with any kind of reduction in body height?

I am concerned that players are going to be try to learn new ways of tackling in on a limited number of Tuesday and Thursday nights before round 1 or trial 1.

Having guys going into tackles hesitantly or with confusion is genuinely going to cause more injuries.

There is also limited time for genuine calibration among referees. The first few rounds next year could be chaos.

This -
worrying about going for a “textbook” old school tackle when you’ve got some 120kg guy steamrolling towards you upright is going to create more injuries..

Contrary to the refs and rule book, sometimes the most effective and (safest for you) his a higher up wrestling style takedown ..

I feel these new laws could result in more injuries especially neck & shoulders.