World Rugby, the sport’s governing body, has been proactive in trying to develop ways to make rugby safer in light of many cases of neurological injuries linked to the sport. Whether they will be successful, without changing the fundamental nature of the game, is still open to debate.

This week World Rugby recommended that its member unions participate in an opt-in global trial of lowering the tackle height in the community game to below the sternum (also known as a “belly tackle”).

SA Rugby (Saru) said it would first consult with its member unions and the South African Schools Rugby Association on their views on the proposal prior to a potential roll-out of the trial in SA.

If the trial were to be deployed in South Africa it would only apply to the school and club game.

“The tackler’s body position during the tackle has been shown to influence head injury assessment propensity,” a South African study used by World Rugby noted.

“Head injuries sustained during the tackle were found to be 4.5 times more likely when the tackle height is above the armpit (the tackler makes contact with the ball carrier above the line of the armpit), 40% more likely for an upright tackler and 72% more frequent in the tackler than in the tackled player.

“Other risk factors with a high propensity to cause sport-related concussion are an accelerating tackler, high tackler speed, head contact type and tackle type. Therefore, the tackle has been targeted for intervention to reduce concussion incidence.”

World Rugby confirmed that trials conducted since 2019 in the community game in France, South Africa, Georgia and Fiji had delivered positive advances in player safety.

It had done this by reducing the number of head impacts and concussions, and the overall game experience by supporting increased ball in play flow.

“The community game is the lifeblood of our sport, representing 99 per cent of our participants, and the proposed tackle height adjustment has already delivered positive game shape and playing experience outcomes,” said Sir Bill Beaumont, World Rugby chairman.

“This is essential to the sport’s future. The evidence we have, from France in particular, shows that not only does reducing the tackle height make the game safer but it increases numbers playing as well. That has to be the aim for everyone involved in our game.”

World Rugby said that rigorous independent research had shown that the tackle was responsible for 74 per cent of all concussions. Reducing the height of the tackle protected both players.

This tackle by England’s Owen Farrell on France’s Yoram Moefana would be deemed too high under the new trial. (Photo: Gaspafotos/MB Media/Getty Images)

“The ball carrier is protected directly because head contact leading to injury can be significantly reduced, while the tackler is protected because their head will be in what is known to be a safer proximity with the ball carrier’s torso/upper body,” World Rugby said in a statement.

“Tackles where the tackler’s head is in proximity to the ball carrier’s body above the sternum are more than four times more likely to result in a head injury, and so bringing tackle height down will benefit both players.”

Existential crisis

There is little doubt that rugby is facing an existential crisis over head injuries and particularly concussions.

World Rugby along with the Rugby Football Union (RFU), the controlling body for English rugby and the Wales Rugby Union (WRU), are respondents in a class action lawsuit by a large group of professional, amateur and semi-professional players.

The basis of the legal proceedings by these former players is that World Rugby, the RFU and the WRU failed to protect them from brain injuries due to negligence.

Former Wales captain and British & Irish Lion Ryan Jones and England’s 2003 Rugby World Cup winning hooker Steve Thompson are among the claimants, along with more than 220 other former professional players who are suffering from early-onset dementia and other irreversible neurological impairments.

The original claim against rugby authorities, filed in 2022, listed nine claimants against rugby authorities. In January 2023, another 55 people filed a separate suit. This group consists mostly of amateur players but also several former elite women players and the family of a player who died after a post-mortem diagnosed the degenerative brain disease, chronic traumatic encephalopathy (CTE).

“The players we represent love the game,” law firm Rylands Garth, who are representing the claimants in both cases, said in a statement.

“We aim to challenge the current perceptions of the governing bodies, to reach a point where they accept the connection between repetitive blows to the head and permanent neurological injury and to take steps to protect players and support those who are injured.”

Visit Daily Maverick’s home page for more news, analysis and investigations

Law trials

Although rugby authorities cannot openly agree that the sport is responsible for degenerative brain diseases given the legal proceedings, the fact that more and more resources are being directed at making the game safer, implies that there could be a link. Which is hardly a revelation.

Rugby is a contact sport played, in most cases, at high velocity with very little protective gear. In any given professional game at the highest level, there can be between 100 and 250 tackles and numerous breakdowns, scrums and other contact points.

It comes with inherent risks that are going to be almost impossible to completely alter without changing the sport into something vastly different. But that doesn’t mean the threat of concussion should not be taken seriously and dismissed because “rugby is a dangerous game”.

In something resembling its current form, rugby will always remain an inherently dangerous sport. But improvements can, and frankly must, be made.

Already, players cannot be taken out in the air, which has spared us from many more horrendous “tackles” where a defender, catching a high ball, lands heavily on his neck.

It still happens occasionally, usually by accident rather than malice, and the consequences (red cards and suspensions) are much more severe. Ditto high tackles, or no arms tackles. They are being weeded out, but there is still a long way to go.

All trials should be welcomed. Initially, the lowering of tackles data has already shown a reduction in concussions at a lower level of the game.

Which is why it’s essential that the next stage of the trial goes ahead in South Africa. More data means more accuracy in safeguarding the game while trying to maintain its core principles.

If after the next proposed stage of the pilot trial, the data shows that lowering tackle heights to the waist or lower is ineffectual, then it’s unlikely it will become law. But at least it will be a decision based on data collation in an attempt to build a picture of actions and outcomes. DM

Supporting research

• Initial data from the Otago Community Head Impact Detection Study (ORCHID) was presented to the 2022 World Rugby Player Welfare and Laws Symposium by Prof Melanie Bussey of the University of Otago (ORCHID). That data shows:
• The tackle leads to more head accelerations than rucks or mauls
• High tackles and head on head contact leads to higher forces on the head
• The session titled “medical” can be viewed in full here. The first papers from this study are currently in peer review and are expected to be published later this year
• World Rugby regularly publishes injury surveillance data for both the elite and community games which can be accessed here
• This data shows that concussion is the most frequent injury in the game
• The peer reviewed study resulting from trials lowering the tackle height in South Africa can be found here
• This paper sets out how a lower tackle height led to a 31% reduction in concussions
• The presentation given by the FFR to Community Rugby committee can be accessed here