The Roar
The Roar

Advertisement

Opinion

Let's not pretend that avoiding head injuries in rugby is simple

Roar Rookie
28th July, 2022
Advertisement
Autoplay in... 6 (Cancel)
Up Next No more videos! Playlist is empty -
Replay
Cancel
Next
Roar Rookie
28th July, 2022
18

During the recent Australia vs England series Allan Alaalatoa, Jordan Petaia and Scott Sio all injured themselves executing tackles.

All three went in low, got their aim off a little and ended up injured.

About 25 minutes into Test 1, Alaalatoa tried to tackle Freddie Steward and knocked himself out on Steward’s leg.

About three minutes into Test 2, Petaia lined up Tommy Freeman who, unpredictably, stopped his run; Petaia kept his line and barrelled into him and, like Alaalatoa, knocked himself out on his opponents legs.

Scott Sio, about 50 minutes into Test 2, injured his shoulder trying to tackle Will Stuart and then accidentally copped Sam Underhill’s leg in the head as he fell.

In all three cases the players went in low to tackle and injured themselves. In my opinion, Petaia’s was the only one of the three that was clearly very poorly executed.

The two props made marginal errors that could probably happen to (even) most first-grade rugby players.

We all know that injuries have also happened recently where the tackles weren’t low enough.

Advertisement

In the New Zealand vs Ireland series, Angus Ta’avao and Andrew Porter were both carded for not going low enough. Ta’avao also suffered a concussion, as did Garry Ringrose, who he was in a split-second response, trying to tackle. Brodie Retallick’s jaw was broken as a result of Porter’s poorly executed tackle.

Going back to this year’s Six Nations, Charlie Ewel got a red for his tackle on James Ryan, and Rob Valetini got one for his shot on James Beard. Both made high impact, too-high contact to their opponents.

You may or may not agree with me that Ewel and Valetini were correctly given reds and Ta’avao was incorrectly given one. And you may think that Porter should have got a red too. I don’t. But the ins and outs of those aren’t my main point.

Why did I mention Alaalatoa’s, Sio’s and Petaia’s poorly executed tackles first, when no cards were given in either case? Because they illustrate that lowering your shoulders and tackling low isn’t always that easy.

As mentioned, in only one case – Petaia’s – was there a sudden change of direction from their opponent that caused them to get it wrong (though, yes, I think he should have been able to adjust).

The two props just lined themselves up a bit wrongly, even though they had time to do it right.

Advertisement

On the other hand Ta’avao’s and Porter’s cases were very different because neither of them was in a position to even try to get their tackle right.

Ta’avao’s happened very fast. In test 2, at 30 minutes in Ireland were moving the play right off a scrum. On second phase they move left about 25 metres.

The NZ forwards were trying to keep aligned and keep up. Watch Ta’avao hesitating and changing direction slightly as he tries to adjust.

James Lowe’s line is shut down very well by Cody Taylor and Sam Cane who’ve moved up well to help the backs. So a cornered Lowe makes about a two-foot pass to a more or less stationary Garry Ringrose, who decided to go back against the sense of the play, Ta’avao tried to react but couldn’t quickly enough.

There’s a sense in which Ta’avao was a victim of how good Taylor and Cane’s defensive coverage was. He wouldn’t have expected Ringrose to need to run it back right so quickly.

Sports opinion delivered daily 

   

Advertisement

Unlike Ewels and Valetini, Ta’avao didn’t line up his opponent at all. He just suddenly had a centre running right past him in the opposite direction to the general play, so he tried to grab him. He wasn’t in any position to duck in and execute a good tackle. If had ducked in he probably would have got his head smashed sideways; he’d have been putting himself at risk of serious injury in order to stop Ringrose.

I don’t think we can expect that kind of speed and agility from a prop (and a tall prop at that), as Sam Cane tried to point out to the referee as a barely conscious Ta’avao was being sent off.

Porter’s was quite different. Retallick wasn’t trying to run around or past anyone. He was leading with his shoulder, trying to battering-ram his way in for an extra metre or two and make the contact as risk/pain-free for himself as possible.

Brodie Retallick

Brodie Retallick. (Photo by Amilcar Orfali/Getty Images)

What is similar to the Ta’avao case is that if Porter had ducked into the tackle he’d probably have copped the shoulder or forearm into his own head, or, if he was lucky between the neck and the shoulder, which could be pretty harmful too.

Again, there was a pretty good chance he would have had to sacrifice his own well-being in order to execute the tackle. Unlike Ta’avao, Porter had time, but with that time a very reasonable self-preservation instinct kicked in.

On review, this was correctly identified as ‘an absorbing tackle’. If Porter had tried to tackle with force of his own he would probably have injured himself.

Advertisement

I think there’s a clear differentiating line that needs to be maintained here.

Whereas Ewels and Valetini lined up their opponents and put on a hard shot, Porter and Ta’avao didn’t. The former two were fully responsible for the damage they did. Porter and Ta’avao were responsible to a lesser degree for the damage they did.

Some might argue that red cards aren’t a question of intent. But what we’re dealing with in the Porter and Ta’avao cases isn’t a question of intent or otherwise, but of ability: what each was really capable of doing.

The broader point is that it’s easy to say that players should always bend low into tackles and if they did we wouldn’t have concussions and neck injuries, but it’s not always as simple as that.

We – the rugby public and referees and players – care about the number of concussions and we care about the damage that it does to players long term. In order to make that concern matter we want to take a no-tolerance view on these head-high hits.

But at times it’s going to be the tackler who’s going to take the dangerous head-contact by going low.

I have no solutions to argue for, I only want to argue that the problem is complex and refereeing needs to take this into account.

Advertisement
close