Northern Edition

Select Edition

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

World Rugby's Covid law recommendations: 'It's not going to be forced upon people'

(Photo by Alex Davidson/Getty Images)

World Rugby chief medical officer Martin Raftery believes the perception that a contact sport like rugby is more dangerous than others might not be right and that the game’s existing offside line will be a great help in minimising the risk of Covid transmission. 

ADVERTISEMENT

Major recommendations concerning rugby in the Covid-19 era are due before the game’s global governing body this week, with wriggle room for each union to adopt or reject the suggestions depending on where their virus infection rate is.

According to the research, rugby’s physical element is said not to be as big a risk as some may think because Covid-19 is transmitted through cough, respiratory and saliva droplets rather than sweat. It’s believed the research found that front and second players were most at risk, spending an average of 13.4 minutes per game in high-transmission risk situations.

Video Spacer

RugbyPass brings you the latest episode of The Rugby Pod with Shaun Edwards among the guests talking to Andy Goode and Jim Hamilton

Video Spacer

RugbyPass brings you the latest episode of The Rugby Pod with Shaun Edwards among the guests talking to Andy Goode and Jim Hamilton

Abolishing scrum resets, which required 3.6 minutes on average per game, would reduce high-risk transmission exposure time by 30 per cent while limiting head-to-head tackles would result in a 20 per cent reduction rate. Banning spitting and limiting huddles were also among the suggestions, as were regularly disinfecting balls and changing jerseys.

Speaking to the Sydney Morning Herald, World Rugby medical chief Raftery said: “If you tackle someone around the legs and you’re not near any droplets, then you’re not at risk.

“If you sit across the table from someone, even your grandmother who is a metre away from you for 15 minutes, then you are at risk if she has COVID-19. The perception that contact sport is more dangerous may not be exactly right because it’s about proximity to an infected person.

“A protective measure within rugby is the offside line and it keeps people away from each other. In a game of basketball, it’s man on man as opposed to team on team. We’re saying there may be actually a higher risk in that game because they’re in that one metre for a longer period of time.”

ADVERTISEMENT

“It’s not going to be forced upon people,” added Raftery as national unions can adopt or reject the recommendations depending on the rates of COVID-19 in their respective countries. 

“It’s just going to say, ‘Here’s the research we found. If you think you want to trial it, by all means you can trial it’. That doesn’t mean a country who has a low risk can’t adopt it and trial it as well. That’s up to the actual competitions to make that decision.”

The recommendations illustrate how rugby as played in the pre-Covid-19 era won’t be returning in some countries until there is an effective vaccine for the virus. This was something Barry O’Driscoll, a former World Rugby medical advisor, elaborated on to RugbyPass last weekend. 

“Rugby can only come back to what it was if we have a vaccine, an effective vaccine. Until then it won’t be the same game,” he said. “You don’t want to destroy integral parts of the game, but you don’t have to go too far before it isn’t the rugby that we know really.”

ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT

LIVE

{{item.title}}

Trending on RugbyPass

Comments

0 Comments
Be the first to comment...

Join free and tell us what you really think!

Sign up for free
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest Features

Comments on RugbyPass

J
JW 6 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
TRENDING
TRENDING Leinster player ratings vs Connacht | 2024/25 URC Leinster player ratings vs Connacht | 2024/25 URC
Search