Rugby at school level

[MacB]

I've debated this before and I still don't really know where I stand, I played from age 8 to about 27 and injury never crossed my mind. But looking at the OP this isn't about banning rugby just reducing risks within schools where groupings will have a huge variety in size and strength. Better coaching would mitigate but schools don't have the resources to implement the sort of programs that club youth sections do. My sons only flirted briefly with the game and I remember a distinct sense of relief when they each lost interest.

But this conversation seems to be stuck in an either or rut and only a few are paying attention to the wider implications, big TMN here, within society. Not just rugby but any and all combatitive competitive sports being used as a sort of role model to teach you about life and instill the correct sort of values.

As others have said there is nothing to stop us teaching things minus the additional brutality, you have non school clubs for that sort of thing.

 

[rugby bloke]

The challenge with sevens is the slightly daft aspect of playing it on a full-size pitch. And, as an aside, school children's sevens scrums are even more unstable when contested than 15's.

This is where we need to be imaginative - play on a smaller pitch for starters - either across one half or between the 5 and 10 m lines. The sort of modifications that any coach would make to enable to game to be suitable for the context. As for the scrums, go uncontested if that is more appropriate. What I dislike is the insistence of playing the full game when this may not be appropriate.

 

[rugby bloke]

I'm not sure there's any evidence that a gum shield will protect a player from a broken jaw...

Perhaps our resident maxfax surgeon can enlighten us?

Ok, perhaps not broken, but my son managed to fracture his upper jaw when he made a tackle without his gumshield. He had removed it to call teammates over to his side of the ruck then did not have time to put it back in ... life lesson - learn to shout whilst wearing your gumshield. Would he still have sustained the fracture if he had being wearing his gumshield ? Who knows but I suspect not. As he was still in his first month at University we had an interesting txt message along the lines of "How do I register for an emergency dentist ? My mouth is full of blood and it really hurts ..." !

 

[green1]

as someone who loves combat sports and has boxed, boxing in schools is a terrible outdated idea, its not an inclusive sport for all to do and even if there is no sparring its not something most kids would benefit from, I believe activities such as pilates, yoga, tai chi would be better than competitive sports, kids don't go to school to play competitive sports, the kids that already play competitive sport do so in their own time, so lets get rid of it from schools and bring in activities that are inclusive for all.

While it would certainly be good to have noncompetive options for people who want them it wouldnt work for everyone. It certainly wouldnt have worked for me, the only thing I do that doesn't isn't competitive is cycling (indeed I've never gone for a ride with anyone) and the only reason I don't mind that is the scenery. It doesn't matter if I'm good at it (I love playing racquetball but am shite at it), it just has to have a competative edge.

 

[MacB]

But this inevitably leads to the nature vs nurture debate and, even if there are natural inclinations present, are we wise to encourage them?

I don't have any wisdom to drop in here but any sort of ideal or Utopia I can imagine isn't centered on a dog eat dog ethos. Nor could it be created overnight but baby steps and all that. Maybe not training kids to batter each other, and win at all costs, might be a baby step in the right direction.

For those that say it's only rugby or it's only a game, you are quite correct and it is just one of the myriad ways in which young people are formed. Unless someone is about to tell me that all young people are suddenly turning out perfect then I would put forward that our approach to the formative years should always be under review and improvement. Certainly avoiding repeated blows to the head and body could be considered progress.

 

[smutchin]

Certainly avoiding repeated blows to the head and body could be considered progress.

We stopped teachers doing it to the kids some years ago. It's probably about time we stopped the kids doing it to each other as well.

 

[Brains]

As has been said it's all about training.

Our school was a serious Rugby playing school, however around the time I joined most of the sports staff had left to be replaced by the rest of the academic staff who knew nothing about the game.

The one external game that I remember against another school was stopped before half time once the score reached 50 - Nil.
I believe our school was then excluded from the local rugby derby for many years on the basis we no longer had the skills to compete.

For example I only had one rugby move, in the changing room you wrapped a towel around your middle under the shirt, you then can do the 'suicide tackle', You basically throw yourself in front of the large bloke with the ball steaming down the wing at 30 mph and trip him up. You took a kick in the ribs every time, but it was effective, I have no idea whether it's a valid move or not, no one was there to correct it. I did it every game, usually once on each wing.

 

[Bollo]

[QUOTE 4976151, member: 259"]We enjoyed school rugby at the time, but looking back, the two teachers who ran it were total control freaks and bullies, but as it was a grammar school transitioning into a comp, they were left to their own devices as long as we kept winning matches. One of them was locked up for domestic violence a couple of years after I'd left.[/QUOTE]
On a slightly lighter note, on my last year at school I was playing in the staff-student rugby match and I sold one of the PE teachers such a dummy that he needed his credit card to get back in. The next week's PE lesson was hockey. He broke my finger 'by accident'.

 

[GrumpyGregry]

In the Guardian today, an interesting take on the reasons why some sportsmen persist in taking part in what the article calls "collision sports", even when they know that their health has already been compromised. That's adults, by the way, not schoolboys.
https://www.theguardian.com/sport/b...ame-sport-concussion-muhammad-ali-kevin-doyle

Thousands of amateurs risk it every week on the rugby pitch, both codes, and most are fully aware of the risks.

 

[nickyboy]

I don't doubt that they do risk it every week, but I do seriously doubt that schoolboys and many of their parents really understand the true extent of the risk, which also applies to heading the ball in football.

I have to agree. The long-term detriment to health is still not well understood as can be evidenced by what is happening in NFL which is well ahead on the curve compared to UK sports. I also question how well those playing the game are appraised of the long-term health risks

 

[GrumpyGregry]

I don't doubt that they do risk it every week, but I do seriously doubt that schoolboys and many of their parents really understand the true extent of the risk, which also applies to heading the ball in football.

A fair point. I would imagine there is a hierarchy of awareness amongst parents in schools rugby, from low awareness when their loved one is taking part in PE lessons to high awareness, as a result of collecting young Gregry from A&E or after overnight hospital stays, by the time he starts playing regularly for the 1st XV.

At 18 you can play adult rugby on a Saturday but still be at school. I've seen 19/20 year old Uni students in a club changing room in tears when the intensity of club rugby has hit them head on.

I struggle to see equivalence between heading the ball and heading someone's head/hip/knee, the ground, a goalpost. I wonder whether the damage in soccer is really done by head clashes rather than the ball itself.. but I'm no physiologist.

 

[GrumpyGregry]

I have to agree. The long-term detriment to health is still not well understood as can be evidenced by what is happening in NFL which is well ahead on the curve compared to UK sports. I also question how well those playing the game are appraised of the long-term health risks

Can they be appraised of the long-term risks when the long-term risks aren't well understood?

 

[srw]

Can they be appraised of the long-term risks when the long-term risks aren't well understood?

"There are long-term risks, but we don't know what they are".

It's a bit like anthropogenic climate change - everyone knows it's happening, everyone knows it's not good, but no-one really knows quite how bad or how the badness will manifest.

 

[GrumpyGregry]

"There are long-term risks, but we don't know what they are".

It's a bit like anthropogenic climate change - everyone knows it's happening, everyone knows it's not good, but no-one really knows quite how bad or how the badness will manifest.

Everyone? Maybe I attract loons but I know plenty who deny the anthropogenic element.

If the long term risks of playing rugby can't be clearly quantified and articulated then folk will dismiss them as a boogeyman created by the namby-pamby brigade. If they can, but are shown to be marginal "one-in-a-million" risks, folk will disregard them on a "greater good" basis.

 

[GrumpyGregry]

The old-fashioned leather footballs were worse, but the problem is still a thing. https://www.theguardian.com/football/2016/oct/24/study-finds-heading-football-immediate-effect-brain
.

The study only looked at immediate effects and concluded the effects normalised within 24 hours.