Evidence in support of the call to ban the tackle and harmful contact in school rugby: a response to World Rugby

Abstract

In a paper published in BJSM (June 2016), World Rugby employees Ross Tucker and Martin Raftery and a third coauthor Evert Verhagen took issue with the recent call to ban tackling in school rugby in the UK and Ireland. That call (to ban tackling) was supported by a systematic review published in BJSM. Tucker et al claim that: (1) the mechanisms and risk factors for injury along with the incidence and severity of injury in youth rugby union have not been thoroughly identified or understood; (2) rugby players are at no greater risk of injury than other sports people, (3) this is particularly the case for children under 15 years and (4) removing the opportunity to learn the tackle from school pupils might increase rates of injuries. They conclude that a ban 'may be unnecessary and may also lead to unintended consequences such as an increase in the risk of injury later in participation.' Here we aim to rebut the case by Tucker et al. We share new research that extends the findings of our original systematic review and meta-analysis. A cautionary approach requires the removal of the tackle from school rugby as the quickest and most effective method of reducing high injury rates in youth rugby, a public health priority. BackgroundBeing cautious in order to protect vulnerable people, such as children, from harm is an acknowledged policy approach.1 On 1 March 2016, UK and Ireland Ministers for Sport, Education and Health were sent a letter asking them to remove the tackle and other forms of harmful contact from school rugby.2 In June 2016, two World Rugby employees Ross Tucker and Martin Raftery and a third coauthor Evert Verhagen wrote in BJSM that such action 'may be unnecessary and may also lead to unintended consequences such as an increase in the risk of injury later in participation'.3 Tucker et al make three key statements:1. 'With respect to injury surveillance in Rugby Union, particularly among youth players, it must be recognised that neither the incidence nor severity of injury have been thoroughly identified and understood, and thus nor have the specific mechanisms and risk factors for injury'.2. 'The risk of participation in Rugby Union, while warranting focus and continued efforts for primary injury prevention, does not stand out beyond that of other popular sports' and 'up to the period of adolescence (age 15 years), the risk of injury in Rugby Union is low and to other major sports'.3. Removing the tackle from school rugby may increase injuries later in life when tackling is introduced to the game by denying 'the need and opportunity to many young players to begin learning a skill set which evidence suggests is both effective (for performance) and protective later in their rugby playing careers'. They add such a ban 'may be unnecessary and may also lead to unintended consequences such as an increase in the risk of injury later in participation'."This is an accepted manuscript of an article published by BMJ Publishing Group in British Journal of Sports Medicine, available online at http://dx.doi.or...

Injury Risk in New Zealand Rugby Union: A Nationwide Study of Injury Insurance Claims from 2005 to 2017

“…The injury epidemiology of players at the community level of the sport, and especially of female players, has been investigated in relatively few research studies [6][7][8][9][10][11]. Some researchers and safety advocates have suggested that injury surveillance in youth rugby is not as comprehensive as it ought to be, and the relative lack of research on the risks of injury for community-level players, especially for children, has led to competing claims about whether rugby is an acceptably safe sport [11][12][13][14][15][16][17].…”

The Lack of Age Representation in the Governance of Rugby Union in England

“…Succinctly, children and young people are not able to impact the decisions that affect them in the rugby terrain through structural barriers. Indeed, this is increasingly pertinent given the current social concern around injury and brain trauma within the sporting context (Mez et al 2017, Pollock, White and Kirkwood 2017, White, 2016.…”

Tackling in physical education rugby: an unnecessary risk?

“…Since 2016, we have been strong advocates for the removal of tackling from rugby (League and Union) played in school physical education in the UK 1. This is because (A) tackling is the leading cause of injury in rugby, (B) rugby has a level of risk that is higher than non-contact sports, (C) there is no requirement or need for tackling as part of the school physical education curriculum, and (D) many children are compelled to participate in contact rugby 2.…”