Jack Burton wrote:The data seems to suggest that head clashes have the highest risk factor to cause a head injury, (which may explains why even accidental head to head contact is punished), and tackles made around the torso have the lowest risk factor. The risk factor is 3 or 4 times lower.
Im sure the data will change again when the lower body tackles are the norm. Big 6ft 4 players will be obsolete because there's no way they can get low enough on smaller players especially when theyre fatigued on a soggy pitch. Either that or they drop out of the defensive line. It's like natural selection, but a really sht version.
Seth wrote:Again, their views are not connected in any way to former players so that's nothing to do with them, theyre not happy with their working conditions so a collective union is the right course of action.
There won't be professional game for them to worry about affording if this is the continued direction of travel. And rules may be more strict but in real terms will that actually affect insurance costs because you cant eliminate risk.
Again, I've no problem with them unionising, go for it. But it won't stop these rules being implemented, and it won't stop former players suing the game. Aren't GMB the player's representatives already anyway?
Jack Burton wrote:Again, I've no problem with them unionising, go for it. But it won't stop these rules being implemented, and it won't stop former players suing the game. Aren't GMB the player's representatives already anyway?
Maybe it won't but what do they do, just stand by and watch it happen without a voice.
Seth wrote:Im sure the data will change again when the lower body tackles are the norm. Big 6ft 4 players will be obsolete because there's no way they can get low enough on smaller players especially when theyre fatigued on a soggy pitch. Either that or they drop out of the defensive line. It's like natural selection, but a really sht version.
To be fair, aren't upright tackles a relatively recent thing in the game? From memory of games when I was younger, most tackles were made around the waist or lower. It's only been the introduction of the wrestling that has seen the initial contact go higher.
The implications of these changes are huge, but the game has gone through bigger law changes over the last 130 years, and it's still here. I share some of the fears around what it will look like, but it will still be here.
Seth wrote:Maybe it won't but what do they do, just stand by and watch it happen without a voice.
They should 100% have a voice, they should have unionised years ago, in fact, I find it odd it's taken this long considering some of the changes that have happened within the game in the last 30 or 40 years, in particular.
Jack Burton wrote:To be fair, aren't upright tackles a relatively recent thing in the game? From memory of games when I was younger, most tackles were made around the waist or lower. It's only been the introduction of the wrestling that has seen the initial contact go higher.
The implications of these changes are huge, but the game has gone through bigger law changes over the last 130 years, and it's still here. I share some of the fears around what it will look like, but it will still be here.
They were certainly less common but players are now much bigger too, would you want to tackle someone like lisone round the hips one on one.
KaeruJim wrote:We need to think more creatively. Players are going to have to disclaim and accept more risk, and insurance needs to be sorted - maybe codes of rugby combine and form their own regulated insurance product which satisfies legals.
Perhaps. Ken Davy is a pretty big player in the UK insurance industry, so no doubt he's been consulted.
It will come down to what the most cost effective option is. Is changing the laws and asking players and coaches to adapt, resulting in a lot of pain and frustration in the short to medium term more cost effective than not making the suggested changes which will result in huge increase in expenses to the game in the medium to long term, but would stop the criticism from fans, coaches, and players in the short term.
Seth wrote:They were certainly less common but players are now much bigger too, would you want to tackle someone like lisone round the hips one on one.
Nope, but I'd probably prefer it to a shot the jaw or the whiplash from a tackle made above the chest.
To be honest, I can see the game going back to 5m defensive lines, as the tacklers won't be able to slow down the play of the ball down sufficiently enough in order to get back onside. But we'll see. As I said, the game has adapted to bigger rule changes and survived. If the players, coaches and governing body work together, I'm sure the game will still be entertaining, in fact, it's an opportunity to make it better. But it is incredibly frustrating at the moment, I accept.
Jack Burton wrote:To be fair, aren't upright tackles a relatively recent thing in the game? From memory of games when I was younger, most tackles were made around the waist or lower. It's only been the introduction of the wrestling that has seen the initial contact go higher.
The implications of these changes are huge, but the game has gone through bigger law changes over the last 130 years, and it's still here. I share some of the fears around what it will look like, but it will still be here.
Disagree mate. Just because something has lasted in the past is zero guarantee of anything in the future.
The rules have not been fully implemented yet but we already have games being decided arbitrarily on BS card decisions. Players train their nadgers off in order to compete; these rules are making a mockery of their effort or of games as a true contest. I don’t think current players or fans can afford to let the administrators ruin the sport without question.
Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 76 guests
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum
