I’m Tom Law, shamelessly bringing you the stories that you don’t care about.
Many things in this world make me angry, from wasps, a bad cup of tea, Piers Morgan, TTIP and so on.
So imagine the furore that I was put in this week when I heard of a possible parliamentary debate to ban tackling from rugby in the British game.
For a bit of background information, some stuck-up housewives with nothing better to do than drink wine at 11 o’clock in the morning and fuss over the possibility of their children combusting for being exposed to an atmosphere containing oxygen have plucked some numbers from some uncreditable scientists.
They then lobbied it to MPs who subsequently ran it through the national press like the Daily Mail, a newspaper that would print a story drawing attention to the health benefits of swimming, while the adjacent page runs an article claiming swimming causes cancer.
But I digress. To clarify, this is not Redfern and league is not dominant. When the press and government call for a tackling ban in rugby, they almost certainly only have union in mind.
League trying to stir up a fuss in this arena is like Mussolini championing the Axis invasion of France.
Nevertheless, in an act of friendship to our rival code and those that choose to follow union over league, I will write this article for both sports. Well, we really should do all we can for the brain dead.
I don’t have time to go into the exact details as to why I am so angry (mainly because in five billion years, the sun will blow up), but how anyone can knock the health effects of rugby when it contributes so much to physical health, as well as mental bonding with other teammates, and tackling, while occasionally yielding negative results, is an integral part of the game.
It would be like introducing a 30mp/h speed limit to Formula One.
Public cases like this only serve to further scare and alienate children from our sport, especially in the UK with such low youth turnout. How can we justify sending them mixed messages that the sport we wish to attract them to is unhealthy?
More Mitchell Pearce
» The official NRL player misdemeanour rate card
» Mitchell Pearce has had his last alcoholic drink
» Pearce cops eight weeks and $125K fine
» The fine is huge, but Pearce is just lucky to be playing footy
» Mitch Pearce’s welfare the priority: RLPA
» WATCH: The original footage; does the punishment fit the crime?
The answer is we’re not, but MPs are. Snobbish, idiotic, out-of-touch legislatures, who would’ve comprehended such a thing?
I particularly feel strongly about trying to involve children in our game not because I’m a BBC employee, but because they’re the future. If I had my way, schools would be provided with free tickets to help fill stadia, boost atmospheres and build a larger future fan-base, with minimal economic effects in the present.
What do you think Roarers? Could they ban the tackle?
mania
Guest
I agree digger. have been debating this with my partner and she has some valid points about rugby scoffing at concussion and head clashes. she's kind of leaning towards the tackle and ruck/maul contact area being sanitised. I point out that with concussions in the tackle area that its almost always because of bad technique, head on wrong side, or going too high. she validly pointed out that the concussions in the ruck/maul area can come from anywhere and is just as often from a team mate than oppsn. we're still debating it and I don't think I'm getting anywhere close to winning it. we have 2 kids that play rugby so she has a vested interest in this.
Digby
Roar Guru
Hi mania, Thanks mate and in principle I agree with you. http://www.theroar.com.au/2015/05/30/a-doctor-for-proctors-knock-no-just-play-on/ http://www.theroar.com.au/2014/08/09/concussions-just-serious-children/ It is a serious issue and one I have had to deal with, both with my own children and myself. Sanitising the sport will not help, education is the answer.
mania
Guest
they can be serious and a lot of this has to do with how badly rugby handles concussions. I don't think rugby as an entity is stringent enough in its concussion strategies. if a kid looks like they got concussed get them off the field and sit them out for a few days then check how they're feeling. but out first reaction shouldn't be are you ok to carry on? it should be you can sit this out its only a game. the worlds watching and rugby has to cleans its act up else all the soccer moms are gonna take there kids else where and rugby will die a slow death it doesn't help that they're citing a lot of gridiron examples of concussion, which isn't fair because gridiron have those full metal helmets which makes a player feel invulnerable and stupid. I played gridiron for 11 years and my first 2 years was spent perfecting how to use my helmet as a weapon. wasn't till I read an article from otago university about the humble mouthguard being your only protection against concussions that I realised I was being a stupid superman so I hope they don't take tackles outta school but we as rugby fans, players , coaches and volunteers need to learn to put concussion before the game. its only a game . a game we love but the players welfare is much more important than our gratificaation
richard islip
Guest
Indeed! When I was playing in Junior school in South Africa, I got the most improved player cup, at age 12. I was furious...because I wanted the tackling cup...the most coveted of them all.
Mike
Guest
Gee the roar is getting hard up for writers these days. There is definately a story in this but not the way this bloke writes it up. Time for new contributors eds.
DaniE
Roar Guru
Interestingly, this was published this week by NY Times: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/02/sports/ncaafootball/ivy-league-moves-to-eliminate-tackling-at-practices.html?_r=2
Breakdown
Guest
We need only make life as safe as necessary... what they are proposing to do is to make life as safe as possible... the later equating to make life so boring it won't be worth living.
Lano
Roar Guru
I've watched this develop through the U.S. with 63 former NFL players setting an out of court settlement for encepha-something. I saw the scientist equating a soccer player heading the ball to 900 strikes to the head at 60kph over a single season. And a soccer coach who banner her players from heading the ball - she was the winning goal scorer in the U.S. World Cup. No doubt there are serious consequences from repeated head clashes, but surely not Rugny Union? I'd like to see the stats broken into NRL, NFL, soccer and Union. Unfortunately, you can't derive any stats until after death!
Onside
Guest
If a tree fell on a rugby players head in a forest , and nobody heard it, would he still get concussion.
Dutski
Roar Guru
They are basing this on data showing that a high proportion of injuries occur in tackles. So are proposing a tackle-free versions of rugby. I think there is a logical extension to this is that most cricket injuries are sustained by being struck by a moving ball, or by sprinting up and down the pitch. Most netball injuries happen when running and jumping on a hard court. I'm sure there are other sports with clear links between components of their sport and injuries, which well designed research would illustrate. There is a clear solution. Tackle-less rugby, cricket with a static ball and a square to run around rather than enforcing the up and down running, and netball moved to a run-free and jump-free soft surface. Or as I like to call these new versions... touch football, tee ball and water polo.
Digby
Roar Guru
They cannot be serious!