Contact Above the Armpit

[PJC]

Having read the bbc report covering the changes am I correct in thinking that backs and forwards will need differing lengths of rest periods from the game. What happens to players like Willie Isa ?

[Mike]

Having read the bbc report covering the changes am I correct in thinking that backs and forwards will need differing lengths of rest periods from the game. What happens to players like Willie Isa ?

Pro-rata it?

Ideally all this should be driven from the data from those little packs they wear. There should be a measure of upper body impact that affects the rest time they need to take. If a winger takes several heavy head knocks over a couple of matches they should be rested more than normal. And frankly the players responsible for the knock should also be "rested".


There's a lot of focus here on the ex player lawsuits driving this. And I'm sure that plays into the situation, but, as I understand it, it's really insurance situation thats the main immediate problem. If the sport becomes uninsurable, it stops bascially. I don't know the details, but a lot of this is likely to be related to the requirements of obtaining insurance.

IMO concussion protocol should be implemented by independent medics at each game and driven by the impact data they see as well as visible symptoms they observe. This would go a long way to creating an insurable sport I think. Insurance companies like data.

[josie andrews]

Having read the bbc report covering the changes am I correct in thinking that backs and forwards will need differing lengths of rest periods from the game. What happens to players like Willie Isa ?

Pro-rata it?

Ideally all this should be driven from the data from those little packs they wear. There should be a measure of upper body impact that affects the rest time they need to take. If a winger takes several heavy head knocks over a couple of matches they should be rested more than normal. And frankly the players responsible for the knock should also be "rested".


There's a lot of focus here on the ex player lawsuits driving this. And I'm sure that plays into the situation, but, as I understand it, it's really insurance situation thats the main immediate problem. If the sport becomes uninsurable, it stops bascially. I don't know the details, but a lot of this is likely to be related to the requirements of obtaining insurance.

IMO concussion protocol should be implemented by independent medics at each game and driven by the impact data they see as well as visible symptoms they observe. This would go a long way to creating an insurable sport I think. Insurance companies like data.

Spot on Mike

[WarriorWinger]

Rest in Peace Rugby League” – Super League stars furious about new tackle rule

The RFL have confirmed some huge rule changes heading into 2024 and beyond which will change the sport of rugby league forever.

At lower levels of the game, contact rugby will be outlawed until the age of 10 whilst in Super League tackles above the armpit will be outlawed from 2025 onwards in keeping with the rest of the sport which will move to this rule in 2024.

The RFL say that this is done to achieve the following: “To increase the appeal and accessibility of Rugby League, especially at junior and community levels.”

To me the highlighted bit is the worst part of the guidance, I used to coach junior rugby league and one of the attractions for a lot of the kids is that they could tackle players, they were not intersted in playing Union as they had a minimum age before starting contact so they played league instead.

Also with the above armpits for SL, looking at the video of 'illegal' tackles, I could hardly see anything above armpits other than the defender stood up square to the attacker, they all made a play for and grabbed the attackers arms below the armpits, so how is it a tackle above the armpits

[archiekeith]

Latest player to post his objection to the implementation of the below armpit tackle, is Jackson Hastings, he like me says that it might as well be touch rugby, if they go ahead with the changes.

YesAnd none the worse for that?Fast open games,no bish and bash. No place for "hardmen ".Meds playing darts. Sounds like fun. 180'ty. "501" Poblem! Who's going to do the maths. Second thoughts. Stick with the bish And bAsh outlaw Any dangerous play referees final decision after screen replay

[fozzieskem]

Having read the bbc report covering the changes am I correct in thinking that backs and forwards will need differing lengths of rest periods from the game. What happens to players like Willie Isa ?

Pro-rata it?

Ideally all this should be driven from the data from those little packs they wear. There should be a measure of upper body impact that affects the rest time they need to take. If a winger takes several heavy head knocks over a couple of matches they should be rested more than normal. And frankly the players responsible for the knock should also be "rested".


There's a lot of focus here on the ex player lawsuits driving this. And I'm sure that plays into the situation, but, as I understand it, it's really insurance situation thats the main immediate problem. If the sport becomes uninsurable, it stops bascially. I don't know the details, but a lot of this is likely to be related to the requirements of obtaining insurance.

IMO concussion protocol should be implemented by independent medics at each game and driven by the impact data they see as well as visible symptoms they observe. This would go a long way to creating an insurable sport I think. Insurance companies like data.

I must admit Mike you're right about the insurance side of things didn't it go up a couple of years ago by a silly amount,then add a potential law suit do nothing you've got no game,at all.

Spot on with other points too.

[Raging Penguin]

add to the incompetent refereeing that seems in place, it feels like agonising will become an understatement. Hopefully some positives transpire...

[the pieman]

i know i'm taking this slightly off topic, but still relates to rules and how stupid / interpretation they can be

i've literally just seen a short clip from a RU game at the weekend, no idea who the 2 sides are

there is a line out, and the blue team lifts their player, who comes down and lands on top of a white team player. The lifted player is penalised and sent to the sin bin

if this is the case, will RU be looking at line outs and removing them from the game (i know its unlikely that this happens every line out / every game) but you could hear the ref saying its not intentional (what being 10ft in the air and just dropping on top of an opponent

surely the 2 guys lifting him, should have been spoken to as they are the ones in control of the "jump"

[Ipinwigan]

i know i'm taking this slightly off topic, but still relates to rules and how stupid / interpretation they can be

i've literally just seen a short clip from a RU game at the weekend, no idea who the 2 sides are

there is a line out, and the blue team lifts their player, who comes down and lands on top of a white team player. The lifted player is penalised and sent to the sin bin

if this is the case, will RU be looking at line outs and removing them from the game (i know its unlikely that this happens every line out / every game) but you could hear the ref saying its not intentional (what being 10ft in the air and just dropping on top of an opponent

surely the 2 guys lifting him, should have been spoken to as they are the ones in control of the "jump"

Both codes will be able to join up and play the same game of tick rugby in future

[Raging Penguin]

https://www.leedsbeckett.ac.uk/news/202 ... in%202024.

the above may help for further reading, however having access to the actual study would be more useful. has anybody found it or got a copy of it?