The Rugby Thread

[Sus]

As an Aussie watching that game, that was the most outplayed I've seen the All Blacks in a first half that I can remember. Dominant up front, aggressive in defence, and clever and structured in the backs.

I know the ABs didn't help themselves with their errors, but at least some of those were from Ireland's aggression

That was seriously impressive.

[Buzzo]

Can’t help but feel (and am in awe of Irelands achievement) that this is the biggest Rugby story of the weekend.

With the way the game has moved on there will need to be fundamental change. Early onset dementia at 41. ****ing hell. There are bound to be loads more out there. Fundamental change is required, the physicality and volume of collisions in the game now is frightening.

[ame]https://twitter.com/bbcsport/status/1548424736572674048[/ame]

[Sus]

100% agreed...something needs to change, just not sure exactly what

Maybe the breakdowns need to have more restrictions in terms of clean outs

[Buzzo]

100% agreed...something needs to change, just not sure exactly what

Maybe the breakdowns need to have more restrictions in terms of clean outs

Breakdown for sure, and also tackle height. The amount of hefty upper body collision is staggering now, and at the speed these guys move at.

The flip side is, that these collisions are exactly what people want to see...

I think this is an indication of long term effects from specifically the pro era. These cases we hear about now will be the first of many.

[Zapater]

I think we need to accept that participating in contact sport represents risk and it's upto the participant if they want to play. Yes, rules can be changed and training methods reviewed but at the end of the day, there will always be risks involved. The pioneers of the pro era are now old enough to tell us this. The physical effects are known in combat sport and NFL and people still willingly participate and spectate, I can't see rugby having another outcome.

[Buzzo]

I think we need to accept that participating in contact sport represents risk and it's upto the participant if they want to play. Yes, rules can be changed and training methods reviewed but at the end of the day, there will always be risks involved. The pioneers of the pro era are now old enough to tell us this. The physical effects are known in combat sport and NFL and people still willingly participate and spectate, I can't see rugby having another outcome.

I think thats fair, and where the sport is heading. I would say boxing is quite different than Rugby and NFL though with the goal of Boxing being to not get hit in the head - Rugby and NFL it an actual part of the game. Boxers dont train by having someone repeatedly smash then in the face over and over again but in Rugby they do (or did).

But increasingly the feed back seems to be that loads of these guys from that generation were totally uninformed. And the lasting physical effects are only known for a relatively short time, look at the struggles with proving CTE in NFL was only officially diagnosed about 5 years ago (post mortem). For so many years the warning signs and expertise has been ignored.

Look at what Joe Marler has come out with, these guys understand the beauty of the sport and what makes it great, but want to be going into it with a full understanding of the risks.

That previous generation who were uninformed and over trained are going to end up seeing many more people like Steve Thomson and Ryan Jones. Dementia is a cruel illness at any age, but to be facing up to it in your early 40's is horrendous.

I've mentioned it in the dementia in football thread, my mates Dad used to play for Hearts in the 70's and he has dementia now, probably about 5 years in and the deterioration is pretty bad. He was out with my Mum and Dad a few weeks ago and whilst my Mum and his wife were getting coffee he said to my Dad, "I've no idea who you are, but I think I recognise her" pointing at my Mum. He went to school with my Mum and has known my Dad for nearly 60 years.

Nobody is signing up for that future. This story wont go away, and it is easy for us as fans to say "they knew the risks".

The good news though is that all of the conversations are continually about player wellfare and the good of the game, and Rugby though not perfect, is amazing at making failry seismic changes to the Laws without a moments hesitation so long as the changes serve the sport.

[Cormack74]

On the same theme here are two recent articles - the NZ one deals with a few themes but the head injury perspective seems rooted in a different era:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/rugby-union/2022/07/22/high-tackles-card-confusion-contribute-existential-crisis-new/


Melodramatic meltdowns and even national mourning are expected biproducts of poor results for the All Blacks. In that respect, the fall-out from New Zealand’s current run of four losses in five Test matches is delivering. This time, though, it feels like a more serious malaise has descended.

At least from 19,000km away, the situation appears to be nearing an existential crisis for rugby union. And the pervading attitude towards high tackles among New Zealanders, which amounts to a disconnect with most of the rest of the world, is a contributing factor. We must begin with a glance across codes. Israel Dagg, who won 66 caps for the All Blacks between 2010 and 2017, summarises things nicely.

“We’ve got a real situation at the moment where rugby league and rugby union are competing and rugby league is absolutely dominating,” he said this week during a guest appearance on The 42.ie’s Rugby Weekly Extra podcast.

“If you want to go and watch sport for entertainment, you go and watch league at the moment. They’re ticking all the boxes and one of the biggest factors is that they have got clarity in how the game is being played. The game [union] is just… the rules, the officiating – it’s confusing. It’s so stop-start and there’s no ball in play.”

Elaborating on a general sense of disenfranchisement, Dagg hailed this year’s State of Origin series as the holy grail for drama and intensity. An annual best-of-three bash between the states of New South Wales an***d Queensland in Australia, Origin is one of world sport’s most precious jewels.

It has always held a mystical allure for union fans. But the start of this year’s decider on July 13 was a tough watch for 15-a-side aficionados, particularly given the heightened awareness of concussion issues with which they are learning to live.

Before the clock had ticked to four minutes, a trio of players had left the field. Cameron Murray, the New South Wales back-rower, was the first after clashing heads with opponent Corey Oates in an upright tackle. In modern union, the incident would have yielded at least a spell in the sin bin for Murray. Here, there was no penalty.

Selwyn Cobbo and Lindsay Collins of Queensland were the next victims. Both of these concussions were caused by lower tackles as defenders smashed into a hip and an elbow, respectively. Unfortunate and unavoidable accidents, whatever the sport. Sound-bites from the commentary box, however, betrayed different outlooks.

“Queensland claims an early scalp” was the call as Murray staggered across the Suncorp Stadium turf. Cobbo was then described as being “in Disneyland”. Language is important here. “Bell-ringer”, another common phrase to describe a smack to the head, sounds glorifying. “Brain injury”, a more sinister and stark term, is closer to reality.

The early chaos ended up as a footnote on a thrilling evening in Brisbane that saw Queensland triumph 22-12 to take the series. An epic showdown also featured a full-scale punch-up between Dane Gagai and Matt Burton that only yielded two yellow cards and was sealed by a 70-metre try from Ben Hunt.

Dagg’s praise was not an attempt to trivialise concussion. Rather, it recognised the action-packed nature of a gladiatorial contest in which the balance between spectacle and safety contrasted sharply with New Zealand’s loss to Ireland in Dunedin three days previously. The first period of that second Test was punctuated by three yellow cards and a red. Multiple trips to the television match official (TMO) meant around 57 minutes elapsed between kick-off and half-time.

In the scramble for attention across Australia and New Zealand, where rugby union is in fierce competition with league and other sports like Australian rules football as well as soccer, delays are not much of a draw.

“You want to see the ball in play,” Dagg added in his interview with The 42. “You don’t want to be watching players get ready for a line-out or a scrum going down or the ref going up to the TMO. The TMO is p----- me off.

“I just think the game of rugby is too confusing and there’s too much of it on our TVs and people are getting bored. It’s in dire need of change. How we go about it I am unsure but a good start would be to get some common sense in the officiating.”

The trouble is that most onlookers from the northern hemisphere probably thought that the referee, Jaco Peyper, had been lenient at Forsyth Barr Stadium. Few eyebrows would have been raised among that demographic if Leicester Fainga’anuku had been permanently dismissed rather than sin-binned.

To them – well, those of us accustomed to how rugby union has been refereed everywhere except the Antipodes over recent years – Angus Ta’avao’s head-on-head collision with Garry Ringrose merited a clear-cut red card.
And yet, it prompted a column from Gregor Paul in the New Zealand Herald that decried a “yellow and red card fixation” that is “killing” rugby. Paul argued that the further roll-out of a 20-minute replacement law, used on a trial basis instead of red cards in Super Rugby and The Rugby Championship, would mitigate against such incidents.

Ta’avao, he said, was merely “trundling around doing his job”. In truth, because of the way that Super Rugby Pacific was officiated, with Jack Goodhue escaping censure in the final between the Crusaders and the Blues, Ta’avao’s plight was entirely predictable.

Paul also proposed that northern hemisphere compliance with strict sanctions would only loosen when empty seats begin to open up at Twickenham and the Aviva Stadium in Dublin. Well, why not explore this further?

Back in March, England hosted Ireland and were reduced to 14 men within two minutes when Charlie Ewels was sent off for clumping into James Ryan – a challenge reasonably similar to Ta’avao’s on Ringrose. Spectators accepted Mathieu Raynal’s decision to eject Ewels.

The match remained compelling and competitive and Twickenham was probably the loudest it has been since 2015 as a crackling atmosphere enhanced it.

It should be said that Kiwis do not hold a monopoly on scepticism towards harsh punishments. Someone who has worked closely with World Rugby, collecting data on sending-offs, asked “is something [a red card] that a team gets every 14th match going to change behaviour?” They answered their own question: “I’m not sure it will.”

That said, there does appear to be a firm and lingering belief in New Zealand that red cards ruin matches. Could that sentiment be borne out of paranoia over rugby union’s sliding popularity? Participation numbers are certainly dropping, so rage against high-tackle reprimands might just be displaced anger. We have a chicken-and-egg scenario, in any case.

The next strand is the shift between the more stringent high tackle sanction framework (HTSF) and head contact protocol (HCP), which was finalised in 2021 while Joe Schmidt – now ensconced with the All Blacks – was World Rugby’s director of rugby performance. Devised in conjunction with referees such as Peyper and Wayne Barnes and coaches like Dave Rennie and Gregor Townsend, it has granted licence for referees to be more lenient in cases of unintentional head contact.

Privately, though, there has been a feeling among referees – the pawns thrust into the spotlight to carry out these directives – that World Rugby figureheads had become “freaked out” by a number of “soft” red cards that ticked each box of the HTSF and that something had to be done so that a World Cup match in 2023 was not decided by a controversial, process-driven red card.

Other insiders are convinced that Schmidt had his sights set on changing or eradicating the HTSF, which was introduced in 2019, upon his arrival at World Rugby because southern hemisphere nations resented its perceived rigidity.

Resistance to the HTSF was partly why New Zealand and Australia pushed for, and were granted, a 20-minute red card trial. The split has since been consolidated by the rejection of its wider use. Meanwhile, a legacy of the friction between HTSF and HCP systems are decisions such as the yellow card issued to Ireland prop Andrew Porter in the third Test against New Zealand.

The loosehead prop started high, but absorbed the impact of Brodie Retallick. This did not help Retallick too much. He fractured his cheekbone. But the yellow card given by Barnes was upheld by a citing committee to leave New Zealanders perplexed.

One final, yet unavoidable thread is the harrowing trickle of ex-players revealing diagnoses of early on-set dementia and probable chronic traumatic encephalopathy (CTE). They have, in the main, been from the United Kingdom.

Ryan Jones was the latest, just this weekend. The sickening news, reported by The Sunday Times, hit so hard because the former back-rower was often irrepressible on the pitch. He is a modern great. And now his life has been turned upside down. At the age of 41.

Jones, his former Wales team-mate Alix Popham and World Cup-winner Steve Thompson have joined the class action law suit against World Rugby and other governing bodies.

Carl Hayman, the former All Blacks prop, is among the group of around 150 former professionals involved. His affliction, though, has been strongly linked to an eight-year stint in Europe playing for Newcastle Falcons and Toulon rather than any health setbacks at home.

That provides distance. And, anyway, New Zealand Rugby is protected from a class action because of the country’s accident compensation claims act. This inhibits people from suing for damages in the event of personal injury.

Nobody is saying that New Zealand is in denial about concussion, yet nobody denies the disconnect between them and the prevailing philosophy of the northern hemisphere. The very notion is morbid, but more than one source suggested that it might take an earth-shattering announcement from an icon like Richie McCaw or Dan Carter to bring the two into line. We must hope it does not come to that.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/rugby-un...dies-dementia/

Rugby union has been warned it must change to protect its players “otherwise the sport will die” after more than 185 players launched legal proceedings against World Rugby, the Rugby Football Union and Welsh Rugby Union.

Telegraph Sport can reveal new details of the lawsuit that was due to be filed at court on Monday on behalf of a group of professional and semi-professional players including Alix Popham, the former Wales international, as part of the biggest 'class action' lawsuit outside of the United States.

Popham, who was diagnosed with early onset dementia aged just 40 years old, has urged governing bodies to take immediate action to protect players from debilitating brain injuries after claiming they were negligent for failing to protect players.

Telegraph Sport can also reveal that the proceedings issued to the court by Rylands Law, representing the players, include:

Players ranging from as young as their 20s to their 60s
Another 50 players are going through testing or waiting for results with around two joining the legal proceedings every week
Fears players will take their own lives if not supported
Female players are now confirmed as part of the claimants
As many as "a few dozen" amateur rugby players are also involved
Fears include how the NHS will cope with taking care of high numbers of retired professional athletes in middle age suffering from early onset dementia
Twenty players contacted brain charity Head For Change after former Wales captain Ryan Jones revealed last week that he is suffering from early onset dementia, aged 41.

Health conditions among the group of claimants range from those suffering with more extreme cases of Motor Neurone Disease, Parkinson's and probably moderate Chronic Traumatic Encephalopathy (CTE), with the latter only confirmed following post-mortem.

The least extreme cases include players suffering from mild post-concussion syndrome, which can last for weeks, months or longer, while others in between suffer from epilepsy and the start of progressive neurodegenerative disease such as early onset dementia.

Symptoms include chronic depression, suicidal thoughts and attempts, aggression, addiction to alcohol and drugs as a result of their brain injuries, and a worsening memory and inability to concentrate.

"It's all pretty grim, to be honest, and quite consistent across the board," said Richard Boardman, of Rylands Law.

"From our point of view, the ideal outcome is to get damages for the players and their young families to make sure they are looked after, and then ensure they have that clinical support in place. At the moment there is a considerable vacuum once a player has been diagnosed.

"The poor NHS is not set up for hundreds if not thousands of otherwise fit sportsmen in their 30s and 40s with dementia, in terms of how to deal with them.

"We're trying to work with foundations and charities and some kind clinicians who are helping us to ensure that we catch particularly the guys in the worst conditions, because they are in a bad way and they do need support. We don't want any of them to kill themselves.

"For this great sport to continue for another 100 years-plus, we have to accept that the brain is a delicate organ which needs heightened protection, and as a sport we have to err on the side of caution. Otherwise all brains, no matter what level you play at, are going to be impacted."

Popham, now 42, won 33 caps for Wales but was diagnosed with early onset dementia 10 years after his retirement, when doctors estimated his brain had suffered up to 100,000 sub-concussions during 14 years of playing professionally. He now runs the brain charity Head For Change.

"There have been cases where I have spoken to family members of players who have taken their lives because of this," Popham told Telegraph Sport, citing Wales' recent intense training sessions before their tour of South Africa and Johnny Sexton's return from a concussion to play the following week in New Zealand as examples of how player welfare can improve.

"Rugby really needs to be reset and needs to be Rugby 2.0. The seasons need to be half what they are," Popham added.

"There is a hell of a lot of evidence that contact sport has caused damage to players' brains. It's a terrible image for the sport, for mums and dads who are thinking of sending their kids to rugby there is a huge amount that needs to be changed to make it as safe as possible."

Progressive Rugby, the rugby union lobby group, also announced on Monday that they are in the process of "finalising a comprehensive list of player welfare critical requirements which will be submitted to World Rugby".

"We believe delay is no longer an option and that radical action must be taken as a matter of urgency to ensure rugby union's reputation isn't damaged beyond repair," the group added. Those proposed changes include a mandatory limit on contact in training, improving pitchside diagnostic tools, reducing the number of non-injury substitutions, and extending the return-to-play for a concussion.

World Rugby, the RFU and WRU responded on Monday by saying: “We care deeply about all our players, including former players, and never stand still when it comes to welfare. Our strategies to prevent, identify and manage head injuries are driven by a passion to safeguard our players and founded on the latest science, evidence and independent expert guidance.”

[Buzzo]

Good to see you back posting mate

Grim reading though, and a real watersshed moment for RU. Interesting to see the differing approaches in northern and southern hem I tend to agree with the article, and having been to, approx 20 RU games last season didnt for one moment feel that TMO ruined a single match.

This is also heartbreaking this.

He said: "My partner was explaining, 'I want the kids to see you as much as possible, as often as possible and do as many memorable things as possible because there is a chance in 10 years, 15 years time you're not even going to know who they are.'

His nine-year-old son, Leo, overheard the conversation.

"He burst into tears, ran into the room, hugged me and would not let go of me for a few minutes," he said.

Pontypridd-born Mr Woodard, who was diagnosed last year, said he was aware of others in the game in a similar situation to himself.

He said: "The reason they haven't gone public with it is because they're struggling to tell their children, wives, family."

When speaking to other players he has assured them they are not alone.

And he warned: "There's going to be more."

[bacon]

They are right to be concerned about the threat of RL to RU - I'm Welsh - a Union supporter from way back but these days I only attend RL matches here in Sydney. Its better supported, most games are of a really high-quality, there isn't the always stop-stopness of union and there is actually a decent atmosphere at the games. That State of Origin game last week was probably the best one yet and every year the series delivers brilliant matches.

Contrast that with the union games - when I 1st got over here the Super 10s was starting out, the SA teams were just back in play and in those days the matches were all really exciting to watch – much better than equivalent Northern Hemisphere club games at the time - but over the years its just become a soulless drab corporate affair - the last Waratahs game I watched was a final v Crusaders - 5/6 yrs ago can’t remember really. So RU have a big problem with losing out fans to other codes over here for sure – I’m becoming one of them!

As for the treatment of head injuries – I think all the codes have to address it somehow – there are high shots every game – its not being ignored by the people in charge but its certainly not been addressed yet either - I don’t know what the answer is but all these stories of brain related life-destroying injuries is very disturbing for sure.

[Cormack74]

Good to see you back posting mate

Grim reading though, and a real watersshed moment for RU. Interesting to see the differing approaches in northern and southern hem I tend to agree with the article, and having been to, approx 20 RU games last season didnt for one moment feel that TMO ruined a single match.

This is also heartbreaking this.

Cheers although C and P ing articles is an easy win!

I find the NZ attitude very strange even though I would always rather see 15 v 15 (well except maybe in the Calcutta Cup if the blue shirts are down to 14 ).

Player safety is pretty much the first thing you coach kids (well it is here) and there have been loads of rule changes in the youngest tiers of rugby to try and minimise head contact. But despite that I'm not sure that the big boys try hard enough to lower their tackle height even though by and large there has been a significant decrease in dangerous ruck entries in the past year or two.

However . . . it does annoy me when there have been head clashes which are truly rugby 'incidents' where players have been adjudged at fault and sent off which does seem to be becoming a bit of a 'thing'. I think there are refs who find fault where there is none because they aren't brave enough to make decisions which might be more likely to be criticised for not being firm enough and I'm pretty sure that this is going to get worse in every future season.

[Cormack74]

Oh dear, more of the same . . . prioritising the spectator experience over player safety:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/rugby-union/2022/07/28/rugby-championship-fire-persisting-20-minute-red-card-trial/

The Rugby Championship has been criticised by concussion campaigners after they extended the 20-minute red-card trial to this season's competition.

Southern hemisphere bosses said their decision was part of a bid to protect “the integrity of international matches” by keeping “a contest of 15 versus 15 ” wherever possible.

But within hours of the announcement on Thursday, the move was branded as a “staggeringly bad look” by concussion campaign group Progressive Rugby, who tweeted that Sanzaar - the umbrella body overseeing these unions - had put “two fingers up to World Rugby” amid the backdrop of brain-damaged players bringing a class action against the sport.

Sanctions over high tackles, particularly where collisions have been deemed accidental, have split the game since the last World Cup and it is clear that this friction is not subsiding. Southern hemisphere nations, and particularly Australia and New Zealand, have generally appeared to be bigger supporters of the law that allows a player that has been sent off to be replaced after 20 minutes.

But there is also a concern that the 20-minute red card could lessen the deterrent effect of a sending-off, particularly at a time when World Rugby is determined to keep lowering tackle heights. The Super Rugby trial proved inconclusive which is why global governing body chief executive Alan Gilpin told the Telegraph that the organisation is only weighing up whether to extend the trail globally.

The 20-minute red card has been in operation for Super Rugby competitions in 2020, 2021 and 2022 and this will be its second consecutive Rugby Championship campaign. There were 20-minute red cards in the Rainbow Cup, effectively a United Rugby Championship spin-off, last year. Wider roll-out, though, has been resisted in the northern hemisphere. A global trial, for instance, has not been forthcoming yet.

One major argument against the 20-minute red card is that high tackles often lead to the permanent removal of their victims, even if they can be replaced. This was the case for the red cards shown to England’s Charlie Ewels during the Six Nations and to Angus Ta’avao of New Zealand earlier this month.

Neither James Ryan nor Garry Ringrose, coincidentally both of Ireland, returned following those incidents because they each suffered concussions. Under a 20-minute red card, the offending team is restored to 15 players 20 minutes after the offence.

August 6 sees the start of the new Rugby Championship competition as South Africa host New Zealand and Argentina face Australia. Brendan Morris, the chief executive of Sanzaar, suggested that “broadcasters and fans” had influenced the decision to keep 20-minute red cards.

“This is a great decision for The Rugby Championship (TRC) and follows on from its application in Super Rugby,” he said. “All the Sanzaar national unions - Argentina, Australia, New Zealand and South Africa - are fully behind the extension of the red-card law trail. As a group we firmly believe the integrity of international matches is very important and that wherever possible matches must be a contest of fifteen versus fifteen.”

“Within the context of the games' laws, Sanzaar believes that a 20-minute red card allows for a significant deterrent to deliberate acts of foul play, while it also protects the contest of fifteen on fifteen, which is what our unions, broadcasters and fans are telling us is important.”

“Sanzaar stands alongside World Rugby’s important work on managing foul play and player welfare and will conduct a formal research project across the 2022 TRC period with all comparative findings to be shared with World Rugby at the end of the season. The aim is to gather the necessary information that allows the 20-minute red-card trial to be accepted into the full laws of the game in the future.

[Irishnev]

[ame="https://twitter.com/irishrugby/status/1553017505601540099"]https://twitter.com/irishrugby/status/1553017505601540099[/ame]

[Buzzo]

Are we STILL talking about that

[Irishnev]

Are we STILL talking about that

100%

[Irishnev]

NZ well beaten by SA - I watched it, they looked clueless. They are in the worst place they’ve been certainly in my lifetime. Something needs to change there