Concussion Legal Action Against WR

[Niegs]

Knees to the head are the worst. That and head to head. I just worry dropping the tackle will lead to many more knees and multiple heads at the same heights during collisions

Head to hip as well.



https://sportsscientists.com/2017/07/he ... evel-view/

But it's amazing that players still throw themselves in harm's way in this desperate 'for the boys' mentality to stop an opponent at all costs. I'm trying to remember which player got utterly bounced at the weekend, but I couldn't help but think "It's 20-fucking-20... we've all seen Halfpenny knock himself out a few times doing that, others getting mocked on youtube for being bounced by a bosh, and yet players are still doing this on a cross cover tackle attempt?"

I remember now ... it was Lloyd vs Italy. How are pros still this bad at tackling?

[laurent]

In Lower leagues Here you can't nose dive from a pick and go and tackle above the waist.

It sorts of work

Is there any game footage? I'd love to see how this plays out.

Here is our YouTube channel
https://m.youtube.com/channel/UC2Vzmw8yfAQjSrM7TtfW6Vw

You now have to support us
Ps double tackles are also forbidden

[Blackmac]

I just read the Steve Thompson interview and when it says the RFU is negligent I must admit my first thought is how. Unless there is a clear behaviour of ignoring head injuries, pressuring players into ignoring it then I can’t see what else can be done short of ending rugby as a sport.

He claims he could be knocked unconcious two or three times during a training session and that was considered normal. We need to stop and think about that for a second. How can that ever be considered normal. Hospital A&E's were all over head injury assessments back then, so why were rugby authorities not giving a shit.

[Margin__Walker]

I think training is also a huge part of it. Think I read in one of the articles that the NFL took steps to eliminate or limit full contact training in 2011.

That surely is something that will help as I assume there aren't too many restrictions at the moment and that different coaches will likely have different attitudes to it. I know clubs like Leicester always had a rep for kicking the shit out of each other in training each week.

[Paddington Bear]

Not directly related to compensation claims but I’ve wondered and have never found out how UK H&S legislation deals with professional sport, I’ve never noticed anything that looks like an exemption when I’ve been flicking through it. I imagine a lot of this damage is being caused by actions that are perfectly legal in the context of the game.

IIRC correctly there's quite an interesting precedent around all sports - essentially being that you cannot take action for injuries incurred in sport when it comes within the potential bounds of what you might expect playing the sport.

I.e. for rugby you won't be able to prosecute someone for a stamp to the head, even though it is illegal in the sport and most probably assault, given we all know it can and does happen. If it happened at a cricket match you'd be on safer ground, though a rugby player would have more recourse to the law if someone threw a cricket ball at him than a batsman would.

[Kawazaki]

The lawyers will find a problem with as many sports as they can to make a claim. It'll be repetitive strain injuries for darts players next.

I feel sorry for anyone suffering but negligence is not the fault of the game per se, it surely must be on an individual case-by-case basis to demonstrate where there has been negligence and a lack of due care and attention. To bundle every case together and make it a class-action against the sport itself reeks to me of legal opportunism.

[Lemoentjie]

That article is tough to read. I'm only a little younger than him.

It's good that he says there was a big difference between 2003 and 2011 in terms of the training. Like some others said, this could end up affecting mostly players who played 1995-2011 (I think head injury protocols started after 2011 RWC).

I also agree with the legal opportunism part. It sounds underwhelming to say it on a Wednesday on a niche internet site, but this could genuinely be the end of rugby as a professional sport.

The only way to stop the pick and go style of play now is to throw your head and shoulders at the feet of the attacking team. Sure, maybe training and protocols are better now, but the problem is still there.

[Torquemada 1420]

Hadn't seen that Fritz incident before. That is a shocker.

Yup. Wrote plenty on that one on Planet Jake. Noves had truly lost the plot in all facets by then and nothing mattered, including player safety, as he clung to the reins. Not helped by it being Fritz who was always unhinged and the one player who'd have gone back out with one leg.

[Torquemada 1420]

On the main points.

1) It's clear now that sports which result in repeated head impacts are going to have to change. The NFL has been in denial/cover up for decades. Rugby's awareness more recently. As a kid, I used to get laughed at playing football because I refused to head it. My reason/explanation was that I didn't want brain damage! Later I found a pro who felt the same: David Moss (winger mainly for Luton) also refused to use his head. Scousers even us the term "head the ball" as an insult for thickies.

2) I'm not sure about this retrospective action by Mr Pop and co. They'd have to show that the game was aware of the danger back then and I'm not sure it was. On the other side, if guys like North and Fritz go gaga, I'm confident they'll be taking their former employers to the cleaners.

[Torquemada 1420]

The lawyers will find a problem with as many sports as they can to make a claim. It'll be repetitive strain injuries for darts players next.

yeeb is preparing his case against multiple porn sites as we type.

[sockwithaticket]

On the main points.

1) It's clear now that sports which result in repeated head impacts are going to have to change. The NFL has been in denial/cover up for decades. Rugby's awareness more recently. As a kid, I used to get laughed at playing football because I refused to head it. My reason/explanation was that I didn't want brain damage! Later I found a pro who felt the same: David Moss (winger mainly for Luton) also refused to use his head. Scousers even us the term "head the ball" as an insult for thickies.

2) I'm not sure about this retrospective action by Mr Pop and co. They'd have to show that the game was aware of the danger back then and I'm not sure it was. On the other side, if guys like North and Fritz go gaga, I'm confident they'll be taking their former employers to the cleaners.

Not that I've followed it closely, but I gather that the issue the NFL had with their lawsuits is that they or their franchises suppressed information relating to head trauma and actively put disinformation out there about it's impact.

Like you say, I'm not sure there would be that sort of smoking gun to prove that unions and WR knew better for this earlier cohort of players and thus were negligent, but certainly the likes of Fritz and North had their horrendous, very public, incidents after the point where awareness was widespread and actions were being taken to mitigate head injury likelihood.

The thing that really boggles the mind about Fritz, disregarding his health and purely looking at efficacy, is that he's so fucked, even if he comes back down from wobbling all over the place, is he really going to be of more use on the pitch than whoever would be subbed on for him?

[Torquemada 1420]

The thing that really boggles the mind about Fritz, disregarding his health and purely looking at efficacy, is that he's so fucked, even if he comes back down from wobbling all over the place, is he really going to be of more use on the pitch than whoever would be subbed on for him?

Just showed how barking mad Noves had become. The (most suitable) sub available was.............. Gael Fickou.

[sockwithaticket]

The thing that really boggles the mind about Fritz, disregarding his health and purely looking at efficacy, is that he's so fucked, even if he comes back down from wobbling all over the place, is he really going to be of more use on the pitch than whoever would be subbed on for him?

Just showed how barking mad Noves had become. The (most suitable) sub available was.............. Gael Fickou.

Fucking hell. I didn't re-watch the footage, so completely forgot that's who would've come on. Completely irresponsible, utterly bewildering decision to harangue Fritz back out there. As such a servant to Toulouse, he deserved better from his coach.

[Niegs]

In Lower leagues Here you can't nose dive from a pick and go and tackle above the waist.

It sorts of work

Is there any game footage? I'd love to see how this plays out.

Here is our YouTube channel
https://m.youtube.com/channel/UC2Vzmw8yfAQjSrM7TtfW6Vw

You now have to support us
Ps double tackles are also forbidden

Merci beaucoup! I've bookmarked it for later viewing.

I'm really torn over the state of things... I want change so much and fear for the people I coach. Is it time to walk away until WR makes massive changes? But I have to keep reminding myself that amateur isn't nearly as bad, the majority of refs we have do not tolerate any hint of diving into rucks, and I can help others be more aware and by sharing safe practices.

[Kawazaki]

That article is tough to read. I'm only a little younger than him.

It's good that he says there was a big difference between 2003 and 2011 in terms of the training. Like some others said, this could end up affecting mostly players who played 1995-2011 (I think head injury protocols started after 2011 RWC).

I also agree with the legal opportunism part. It sounds underwhelming to say it on a Wednesday on a niche internet site, but this could genuinely be the end of rugby as a professional sport.

The only way to stop the pick and go style of play now is to throw your head and shoulders at the feet of the attacking team. Sure, maybe training and protocols are better now, but the problem is still there.

Be interesting reading the spin Woodward puts on this so it makes him appear inculpable in any way shape or form.

[Northern Lights]

That article is tough to read. I'm only a little younger than him.

It's good that he says there was a big difference between 2003 and 2011 in terms of the training. Like some others said, this could end up affecting mostly players who played 1995-2011 (I think head injury protocols started after 2011 RWC).

I also agree with the legal opportunism part. It sounds underwhelming to say it on a Wednesday on a niche internet site, but this could genuinely be the end of rugby as a professional sport.

The only way to stop the pick and go style of play now is to throw your head and shoulders at the feet of the attacking team. Sure, maybe training and protocols are better now, but the problem is still there.

Personally think this would be for the best.

Rugby is just not a sport that should be played professionally imho, the toll this has put on the players bodies is ridiculous. Back to amateur and seriously de-power the players.

Let's put it down to a bad experiment gone wrong.

[sockwithaticket]

That article is tough to read. I'm only a little younger than him.

It's good that he says there was a big difference between 2003 and 2011 in terms of the training. Like some others said, this could end up affecting mostly players who played 1995-2011 (I think head injury protocols started after 2011 RWC).

I also agree with the legal opportunism part. It sounds underwhelming to say it on a Wednesday on a niche internet site, but this could genuinely be the end of rugby as a professional sport.

The only way to stop the pick and go style of play now is to throw your head and shoulders at the feet of the attacking team. Sure, maybe training and protocols are better now, but the problem is still there.

Personally think this would be for the best.

Rugby is just not a sport that should be played professionally imho, the toll this has put on the players bodies is ridiculous. Back to amateur and seriously de-power the players.

Let's put it down to a bad experiment gone wrong.

I don't think professionalism is reversible at this point unless lawsuits bankrupt the sport, but something like a team weight limit could be a measure to try and reduce player size/power en masse. Policing players' individual weight wouldn't be practical or desirable, but an overall figure the matchday 23 can't exceed might be workable. here's room within that for some absolute monsters, but they'd have to be offset elsewhere in the team. Alternatively everyone gets dragged down a few tens of kilos.

[Uncle fester]

The thing that really boggles the mind about Fritz, disregarding his health and purely looking at efficacy, is that he's so fucked, even if he comes back down from wobbling all over the place, is he really going to be of more use on the pitch than whoever would be subbed on for him?

Just showed how barking mad Noves had become. The (most suitable) sub available was.............. Gael Fickou.

And he looked thoroughly confused that Noves wanted Fritz back on the pitch.
In fairness to the FFR, they came out in unison in their disbelief that this had happened.

Another player you'd fear for in the future is BOD. He had a number of KO's, some of which he refused to come off for.

[Blackmac]

That article is tough to read. I'm only a little younger than him.

It's good that he says there was a big difference between 2003 and 2011 in terms of the training. Like some others said, this could end up affecting mostly players who played 1995-2011 (I think head injury protocols started after 2011 RWC).

I also agree with the legal opportunism part. It sounds underwhelming to say it on a Wednesday on a niche internet site, but this could genuinely be the end of rugby as a professional sport.

The only way to stop the pick and go style of play now is to throw your head and shoulders at the feet of the attacking team. Sure, maybe training and protocols are better now, but the problem is still there.

Personally think this would be for the best.

Rugby is just not a sport that should be played professionally imho, the toll this has put on the players bodies is ridiculous. Back to amateur and seriously de-power the players.

Let's put it down to a bad experiment gone wrong.

I don't think professionalism is reversible at this point unless lawsuits bankrupt the sport, but something like a team weight limit could be a measure to try and reduce player size/power en masse. Policing players' individual weight wouldn't be practical or desirable, but an overall figure the matchday 23 can't exceed might be workable. here's room within that for some absolute monsters, but they'd have to be offset elsewhere in the team. Alternatively everyone gets dragged down a few tens of kilos.

The increase in size since professionalism is incredible and has without doubt been driven by those in charge of the game with little or no thought to the outcome.

I'm just over 6'4 and 17.5 stone. When I played I was invariably one of the biggest two or three players on the pitch. Even when you came up against experienced internationals you maybe noticed a difference in ability but you were rarely outsized or overpowered.

Nowadays i'm what, a reasonably sized winger??

[robmatic]

Personally think this would be for the best.

Rugby is just not a sport that should be played professionally imho, the toll this has put on the players bodies is ridiculous. Back to amateur and seriously de-power the players.

Let's put it down to a bad experiment gone wrong.

I don't think professionalism is reversible at this point unless lawsuits bankrupt the sport, but something like a team weight limit could be a measure to try and reduce player size/power en masse. Policing players' individual weight wouldn't be practical or desirable, but an overall figure the matchday 23 can't exceed might be workable. here's room within that for some absolute monsters, but they'd have to be offset elsewhere in the team. Alternatively everyone gets dragged down a few tens of kilos.

The increase in size since professionalism is incredible and has without doubt been driven by those in charge of the game with little or no thought to the outcome.

I'm just over 6'4 and 17.5 stone. When I played I was invariably one of the biggest two or three players on the pitch. Even when you came up against experienced internationals you maybe noticed a difference in ability but you were rarely outsized or overpowered.

Nowadays i'm what, a reasonably sized winger??

But considerably slower, I imagine.

[Chrysoprase]

Another player you'd fear for in the future is BOD. He had a number of KO's, some of which he refused to come off for.

Ditto Sam Warburton. In his book he discusses that not being able to remember big parts of a game straight after it was "normal" for him. I wouldn't be surprised to see his name linked to this class action soon enough.

[GogLais]

That article is tough to read. I'm only a little younger than him.

It's good that he says there was a big difference between 2003 and 2011 in terms of the training. Like some others said, this could end up affecting mostly players who played 1995-2011 (I think head injury protocols started after 2011 RWC).

I also agree with the legal opportunism part. It sounds underwhelming to say it on a Wednesday on a niche internet site, but this could genuinely be the end of rugby as a professional sport.

The only way to stop the pick and go style of play now is to throw your head and shoulders at the feet of the attacking team. Sure, maybe training and protocols are better now, but the problem is still there.

Rugby is just not a sport that should be played professionally imho, the toll this has put on the players bodies is ridiculous. Back to amateur and seriously de-power the players.

Let's put it down to a bad experiment gone wrong.

Agreed in theory, if you were designing a game to be played professionally in this day and age I don’t think you’d end up with RU. I love watching the game but I’m now conscious of the fact that I’m probably watching people doing serious long-term harm to themselves.

[Blackmac]

I don't think professionalism is reversible at this point unless lawsuits bankrupt the sport, but something like a team weight limit could be a measure to try and reduce player size/power en masse. Policing players' individual weight wouldn't be practical or desirable, but an overall figure the matchday 23 can't exceed might be workable. here's room within that for some absolute monsters, but they'd have to be offset elsewhere in the team. Alternatively everyone gets dragged down a few tens of kilos.

The increase in size since professionalism is incredible and has without doubt been driven by those in charge of the game with little or no thought to the outcome.

I'm just over 6'4 and 17.5 stone. When I played I was invariably one of the biggest two or three players on the pitch. Even when you came up against experienced internationals you maybe noticed a difference in ability but you were rarely outsized or overpowered.

Nowadays i'm what, a reasonably sized winger??

But considerably slower, I imagine.

Fuck, yeah.

[sockwithaticket]

Personally think this would be for the best.

Rugby is just not a sport that should be played professionally imho, the toll this has put on the players bodies is ridiculous. Back to amateur and seriously de-power the players.

Let's put it down to a bad experiment gone wrong.

I don't think professionalism is reversible at this point unless lawsuits bankrupt the sport, but something like a team weight limit could be a measure to try and reduce player size/power en masse. Policing players' individual weight wouldn't be practical or desirable, but an overall figure the matchday 23 can't exceed might be workable. here's room within that for some absolute monsters, but they'd have to be offset elsewhere in the team. Alternatively everyone gets dragged down a few tens of kilos.

The increase in size since professionalism is incredible and has without doubt been driven by those in charge of the game with little or no thought to the outcome.

I'm just over 6'4 and 17.5 stone. When I played I was invariably one of the biggest two or three players on the pitch. Even when you came up against experienced internationals you maybe noticed a difference in ability but you were rarely outsized or overpowered.

Nowadays i'm what, a reasonably sized winger??

That would certainly be more common in wingers now, but certainly far from the norm. May and Watson, for example, are 6'1 92 kilos and 6'2 95 kilos respectively according to their wiki entries. Both look kind of regular size for wingers.

[sockwithaticket]

This probably won't help Michael Lipman's case and I wonder how many others have done similar?

https://www.smh.com.au/sport/rugby-unio ... 219vu.html

TL:DR - he ignored experts telling him to retire and went on to play for 3 more years, didn't tell his current or future employers about his issues.

[Kawazaki]

I played a decent level throughout the 90s, nowhere close to the top but still a decent standard and back then a big crash-ball centre would have been no heavier than 15st. My playing weight was 13.5st and I was considered a 'chunky' centre!

[GogLais]

I blame the ABs. I have this vague memory of the late 60s when an inside centre instead of passing or trying to beat his opposite number would deliberately run into him to set up second phase possession and it was regarded as a radical new tactic at the time. A centre called McRae maybe? Ring any bells with anyone?

[laurent]

Is there any game footage? I'd love to see how this plays out.

Here is our YouTube channel
https://m.youtube.com/channel/UC2Vzmw8yfAQjSrM7TtfW6Vw

You now have to support us
Ps double tackles are also forbidden

Merci beaucoup! I've bookmarked it for later viewing.

I'm really torn over the state of things... I want change so much and fear for the people I coach. Is it time to walk away until WR makes massive changes? But I have to keep reminding myself that amateur isn't nearly as bad, the majority of refs we have do not tolerate any hint of diving into rucks, and I can help others be more aware and by sharing safe practices.

PS It's rather low level ...

[Niegs]

I blame the ABs. I have this vague memory of the late 60s when an inside centre instead of passing or trying to beat his opposite number would deliberately run into him to set up second phase possession and it was regarded as a radical new tactic at the time. A centre called McRae maybe? Ring any bells with anyone?

There's definitely a macho side to it now as well. All the videos on youtube hyping the times players get bounced or run over or smashed by a tackle.

I remember watching Wuss v Northampton academies (well, AASE schools) play when I was over for RWC 2015 and was shocked by the amount of overlaps wasted because a big lug wanted to run over the player in front of him. I remember one in particular as I was stood behind the dead ball line... full back as last man, facing three attackers. Big centre, I think, runs straight into him and while he DID knock him down, then trips over his body and knocks on. In an instant, his mates on the side went from cheering loudly for the bosh to "awwws" for the knock-on. Didn't sound like anyone was screaming at him for not passing.

[laurent]

I blame the ABs. I have this vague memory of the late 60s when an inside centre instead of passing or trying to beat his opposite number would deliberately run into him to set up second phase possession and it was regarded as a radical new tactic at the time. A centre called McRae maybe? Ring any bells with anyone?

There's definitely a macho side to it now as well. All the videos on youtube hyping the times players get bounced or run over or smashed by a tackle.

I remember watching Wuss v Northampton academies (well, AASE schools) play when I was over for RWC 2015 and was shocked by the amount of overlaps wasted because a big lug wanted to run over the player in front of him. I remember one in particular as I was stood behind the dead ball line... full back as last man, facing three attackers. Big centre, I think, runs straight into him and while he DID knock him down, then trips over his body and knocks on. In an instant, his mates on the side went from cheering loudly for the bosh to "awwws" for the knock-on. Didn't sound like anyone was screaming at him for not passing.

One of our favourite at the club.

Our Prop passing beautifully to gift a try.

[Blackmac]

I blame the ABs. I have this vague memory of the late 60s when an inside centre instead of passing or trying to beat his opposite number would deliberately run into him to set up second phase possession and it was regarded as a radical new tactic at the time. A centre called McRae maybe? Ring any bells with anyone?

There's definitely a macho side to it now as well. All the videos on youtube hyping the times players get bounced or run over or smashed by a tackle.

I remember watching Wuss v Northampton academies (well, AASE schools) play when I was over for RWC 2015 and was shocked by the amount of overlaps wasted because a big lug wanted to run over the player in front of him. I remember one in particular as I was stood behind the dead ball line... full back as last man, facing three attackers. Big centre, I think, runs straight into him and while he DID knock him down, then trips over his body and knocks on. In an instant, his mates on the side went from cheering loudly for the bosh to "awwws" for the knock-on. Didn't sound like anyone was screaming at him for not passing.

The increase in tackles per game is astonishing. 94 per game in 1987 to 257 per game in 2019.

[Niegs]

PS It's rather low level ...

I'm 15 mins into the Stains v Mennecy match. There have been two 'high tackle' penalties so far. The first one kind of looked like a seatbelt, but the second didn't look 'high' at all under normal laws. Are 'above the waist' tackles a penalty as per this new trial?

I've also seen two pick-and-goes where the first man tried for legs and another made a good attempt to hit from the side around the lower torso. The carrier gained ground, however. I can see how this would be difficult to stop if the player was only a metre or two out and the pros might be inclined to do even more.

I had a bit of an inspiring walk this morning thinking about these things. If tackles were lowered and pick-and-goes increased as players sought the cheapest way to gain yards, I'd be fine with saying your 'pick' has to be like an airplane taking off. If you pick and immediately dip before contact is made with the opposition, turnover. (happy to have someone critique that if it'd lead to some other kind of mess).

I think the game will have to shift for both safety reasons and to open things up a bit. I'd like to see the game reffed more to the laws as they're written and maybe instead of penalties and yellow cards, more free kicks (with no scrum option) and another card more like ice hockey's 2min penalty (a 5 min minor misconduct card). I could see teams really putting pedal to the metal in five mins to take advantage of the extra man like power plays in ice hockey. We'd get a lot of see-sawing of possession, but I'd rather see that then 20 phases of one-out plays, penalty, lineout drive try.


'

[Niegs]

The increase in tackles per game is astonishing. 94 per game in 1987 to 257 per game in 2019.

At the start of the year, I watched a LOT of matches from the amateur era. I didn't track ball in play time, but saw similar numbers in terms of tackles/rucks, lot more mauls, a lot more lineouts ... because there was a lot more kicking from hand. It seemed a lot of backs would kick away (mostly watched internationals, a few top club sides like Bath and Leicester and NZ provincial) when it looked like they wouldn't beat their man. And with the lineout lottery back then, why not?

[Uncle fester]

The increase in tackles per game is astonishing. 94 per game in 1987 to 257 per game in 2019.

At the start of the year, I watched a LOT of matches from the amateur era. I didn't track ball in play time, but saw similar numbers in terms of tackles/rucks, lot more mauls, a lot more lineouts ... because there was a lot more kicking from hand. It seemed a lot of backs would kick away (mostly watched internationals, a few top club sides like Bath and Leicester and NZ provincial) when it looked like they wouldn't beat their man. And with the lineout lottery back then, why not?

Need to make players leaner and less massive. Increasing the need for aerobic fitness over power would go some way to achieving that.

Yep, doing away with subs is what I'm suggesting.

[Torquemada 1420]

The increase in size since professionalism is incredible and has without doubt been driven by those in charge of the game with little or no thought to the outcome.

I'm just over 6'4 and 17.5 stone. When I played I was invariably one of the biggest two or three players on the pitch. Even when you came up against experienced internationals you maybe noticed a difference in ability but you were rarely outsized or overpowered.

Nowadays i'm what, a reasonably sized winger??

At 11 stone, I was always light but back then, the game really was one for all sizes. Now wingers are bigger than any locks I recall facing.

The fix, for me, is a ban on substitutes except for injury
1) That will knacker the lumps and fat lads, creating space as the game goes on. Good front rowers will be rewarded for wearing down their opponents = no more Le Rouxs.
2) More tries, entertainment and forcing consideration of different playing styles = variety.
3) Better competition: the teams hoarding or with access to deeper resources means rugby rarely sees upsets unlike most other sports.
4) It's cheaper. Fewer players = lower costs.
5) Bigger gates and fewer parents terrified of little Johnny getting his grey matter mashed.

So, how do we enforce "injury only" subs? Easy. Any player subbed for injury has an automatic and mandatory 3 match break for recovery. There'll still be some fiddling [/Quins] but it will eliminate 99% of it.

[Sandstorm]

So, how do we enforce "injury only" subs? Easy. Any player subbed for injury has an automatic and mandatory 3 match break for recovery. There'll still be some fiddling [/Quins] but it will eliminate 99% of it.

What about HIAs? Automatic 3 match ban for leaving the field will make players want to stay on and continue despite being zonked. Especially if it's an accidental knee on head or similar.
You'll also need various size subs to cover that player for 12 mins while he's off. Can't use a utility back as a lock/prop

[laurent]

PS It's rather low level ...

I'm 15 mins into the Stains v Mennecy match. There have been two 'high tackle' penalties so far. The first one kind of looked like a seatbelt, but the second didn't look 'high' at all under normal laws. Are 'above the waist' tackles a penalty as per this new trial?

I've also seen two pick-and-goes where the first man tried for legs and another made a good attempt to hit from the side around the lower torso. The carrier gained ground, however. I can see how this would be difficult to stop if the player was only a metre or two out and the pros might be inclined to do even more.

I had a bit of an inspiring walk this morning thinking about these things. If tackles were lowered and pick-and-goes increased as players sought the cheapest way to gain yards, I'd be fine with saying your 'pick' has to be like an airplane taking off. If you pick and immediately dip before contact is made with the opposition, turnover. (happy to have someone critique that if it'd lead to some other kind of mess).

I think the game will have to shift for both safety reasons and to open things up a bit. I'd like to see the game reffed more to the laws as they're written and maybe instead of penalties and yellow cards, more free kicks (with no scrum option) and another card more like ice hockey's 2min penalty (a 5 min minor misconduct card). I could see teams really putting pedal to the metal in five mins to take advantage of the extra man like power plays in ice hockey. We'd get a lot of see-sawing of possession, but I'd rather see that then 20 phases of one-out plays, penalty, lineout drive try.


'

Our worse performance this year (draw).

Tackles are only authorised waist high.

we are hoping to play again in January... Covid permitting.

[Uncle fester]

So, how do we enforce "injury only" subs? Easy. Any player subbed for injury has an automatic and mandatory 3 match break for recovery. There'll still be some fiddling [/Quins] but it will eliminate 99% of it.

What about HIAs? Automatic 3 match ban for leaving the field will make players want to stay on and continue despite being zonked. Especially if it's an accidental knee on head or similar.
You'll also need various size subs to cover that player for 12 mins while he's off. Can't use a utility back as a lock/prop

Yeah, you still need specialised front rows. Can't throw backs in there.
Something would have to give.

[Sandstorm]

So, how do we enforce "injury only" subs? Easy. Any player subbed for injury has an automatic and mandatory 3 match break for recovery. There'll still be some fiddling [/Quins] but it will eliminate 99% of it.

What about HIAs? Automatic 3 match ban for leaving the field will make players want to stay on and continue despite being zonked. Especially if it's an accidental knee on head or similar.
You'll also need various size subs to cover that player for 12 mins while he's off. Can't use a utility back as a lock/prop

Yeah, you still need specialised front rows. Can't throw backs in there.
Something would have to give.

Just 2 x 9s allowed in the whole match would be ideal.

[Uncle fester]

Or get teams to commit numbers to breakdowns to create space elsewhere.

But then breakdown will be carnage, even more so than it is now.