Northern Edition

Select Edition

Northern Northern
Southern Southern
Global Global
New Zealand New Zealand
France France

'Rugby is not an evasion sport' - SBW weighs in on tackle height controversy

Sonny Bill Williams

Former All Blacks centre Sonny Bill Williams has become the latest heavyweight star to weigh in on the RFU’s controversial decision to lower tackle height in amateur rugby in England.

ADVERTISEMENT

The radical move has been unanimously approved by RFU Council members in an attempt to support player welfare, notably reducing head impact exposure.

It will apply across the community game – clubs, schools, colleges and universities at both age-grade and adult levels – covering the National One division and below in the men’s game and Championship One and below in the women’s game.

Video Spacer

Video Spacer

The decision has been greeted with an uproar from angry fans who believe the law change comes at the detriment of the sport.

Williams weighed in on the decision, saying that rugby was not a collision sport as implied by the RFU statement on the matter.

“Rugby is not an “evasion sport”,” wrote Sonny Bill. “Rugby is about creating space through manipulating and moving defenses, contact is part of the game. We must be careful thinking one rule will work for all. I know I’m not one to talk, but trust me this wont fix rugby’s concussion problems.”

Alluding to his world-renowned offloading skills, Williams joked that the new rules would suit his game: “On the bright side – guaranteed to get your arms free in every tackle… Anyone in England looking for a recently retired off-loader?”

ADVERTISEMENT

Williams is just the latest big-name player to lend his voice to outrage over the law change which will be implemented in July.

Former Namibia and Saracens back row Jacques Burger wrote on Twitter: “Trials on compulsory waist down tackles is crazy. Ball carriers being protected but who is looking after the tackler? There will be so many neck and head injuries during this. Abandon.”

Though data from France suggests a modest reduction in concussions from waist-high tackling, former Harlequins CEO and now Fijian Drua boss Mark Evans noted that another trial in the RFU Championship have shown the opposite. “So what has altered in 3 years to lead to the changes recently announced?

He then went on to write: “Call me old fashioned but I still believe in evidence-based decision making. So if the game I love is making fundamental changes, which might possibly have huge repercussions, I’d like to see the evidence laid out. Particularly since most of the research I have read on this subject seems to point to most of the concern being around multiple sub-concussive collisions, which leads an emphasis on the importance of a reduction in the number & time spent on contact in training rather than tackle height. Yet I can find no reference to the evidence the RFU is basing their decision on. At the very least they need to make the research they are convinced by publicly known and available.”

ADVERTISEMENT

England prop Joe Marler questioned how the RFU came to the conclusion, noting: “Who the hell did they get to advise on this?”

Even big names in other sports took exception, with England cricketer Ben Stokes writing: “Let’s lower the tackle height but bring in a higher chance of the attackers knees hitting defenders in the head. And also let’s take out any consideration for instinctive athleticism in the heat of sport.”

Stokes also pointed out that his father’s career ended after sustained a broken neck care of a head to knee contact. “Small sample. My Dad’s professional career got ended earlier due to a broken neck from a knee to the head whilst tackling. Would you rather concussion or broken neck?”

Not everyone is against the ruling, with sports scientist Ross Tucker saying that the decision is evidence based and will reduce concussions. “Legal tackle height is being lowered to the waist in Eng. A decision 6 years in the making, & justified by evidence of risk, but criticized as unnecessary & unevidenced. I wrote this to explain how we got here, & to commend France for leading the way,” wrote Tucker, with a link to an article on the matter.

A petition against the law change on Change.org has garnered over 30,000 signatures in the space of under 24 hours.

ADVERTISEMENT

LIVE

{{item.title}}

Trending on RugbyPass

Comments

2 Comments
G
Geoff 701 days ago

Also, Ross Tucker, show us the evidence then, don't just say there's evidence without specifying.

G
Geoff 701 days ago

I've heard of well-known former players advocating for lowering the tackle height to nipples and below. I tend to agree with this. There is still that instinctiveness of grabbing a player by the front of the shirt to pull them down close to the try line in order to defend the line. With the offloading ability of some players, it will make it very difficult to retrieve possession. Too much emphasis has been placed on protecting the ball carrier, when they are deliberately leading with the head or forearm which can cause the tackler to get concussed. Not to mention, ball carriers will now be encouraged to use high knee-lift tactics when approaching a tackler, and could cause serious injury. Are we going to ban that too. At least, if a tackler can aim for the nipples (around about where the actual ball is mostly carried, they can avoid the knee-lift and still effect a tackle.

Join free and tell us what you really think!

Sign up for free
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest Features

Comments on RugbyPass

J
JW 5 hours ago
Does South Africa have a future in European competition?

I rated Lowe well enough to be an AB. Remember we were picking the likes of George Bridge above such players so theres no disputing a lot of bad decisions have been made by those last two coaches. Does a team like the ABs need a finicky winger who you have to adapt and change a lot of your style with to get benefit from? No, not really. But he still would have been a basic improvement on players like even Savea at the tail of his career, Bridge, and could even have converted into the answer of replacing Beauden at the back. Instead we persisted with NMS, Naholo, Havili, Reece, all players we would have cared even less about losing and all because Rieko had Lowe's number 11 jersey nailed down.


He was of course only 23 when he decided to leave, it was back in the beggining of the period they had started retaining players (from 2018 onwards I think, they came out saying theyre going to be more aggressive at some point). So he might, all of them, only just missed out.


The main point that Ed made is that situations like Lowe's, Aki's, JGP's, aren't going to happen in future. That's a bit of a "NZ" only problem, because those players need to reach such a high standard to be chosen by the All Blacks, were as a country like Ireland wants them a lot earlier like that. This is basically the 'ready in 3 years' concept Ireland relied on, versus the '5 years and they've left' concept' were that player is now ready to be chosen by the All Blacks (given a contract to play Super, ala SBW, and hopefully Manu).


The 'mercenary' thing that will take longer to expire, and which I was referring to, is the grandparents rule. The new kids coming through now aren't going to have as many gp born overseas, so the amount of players that can leave with a prospect of International rugby offer are going to drop dramatically at some point. All these kiwi fellas playing for a PI, is going to stop sadly.


The new era problem that will replace those old concerns is now French and Japanese clubs (doing the same as NRL teams have done for decades by) picking kids out of school. The problem here is not so much a national identity one, than it is a farm system where 9 in 10 players are left with nothing. A stunted education and no support in a foreign country (well they'll get kicked out of those countries were they don't in Australia).


It's the same sort of situation were NZ would be the big guy, but there weren't many downsides with it. The only one I can think was brought up but a poster on this site, I can't recall who it was, but he seemed to know a lot of kids coming from the Islands weren't really given the capability to fly back home during school xms holidays etc. That is probably something that should be fixed by the union. Otherwise getting someone like Fakatava over here for his last year of school definitely results in NZ being able to pick the cherries off the top but it also allows that player to develop and be able to represent Tonga and under age and possibly even later in his career. Where as a kid being taken from NZ is arguably going to be worse off in every respect other than perhaps money. Not going to develop as a person, not going to develop as a player as much, so I have a lotof sympathy for NZs case that I don't include them in that group but I certainly see where you're coming from and it encourages other countries to think they can do the same while not realising they're making a much worse experience/situation.

144 Go to comments
LONG READ
LONG READ Return of 30-something brigade provides welcome tonic for Wales Return of 30-something brigade provides welcome tonic for Wales
Search