Oval Talk: Is rugby too brutal?

Eurosport - Mon, 19 Oct 14:05:00 2009

Anyone who watched Harlequins go down to Toulouse at the weekend cannot have failed to notice how injuries had caused disruption before the players had even broken out in a sweat.

Denis Hickie - Ireland - 0

Toulouse first lost prop Jean-Baptiste Poux in the second minute after a shuddering tackle by Jim Evans. Next off was Quins skipper Will Skinner, who injured an ankle trying to seal the ball at the breakdown.

A minute later, France flanker Yannick Nyanga suffered a leg injury in a tackle and had to be stretchered off.

All this within the first 11 minutes. No wonder it took Toulouse until the second half to find any rhythm.

Injury is, of course, a risk in any contact sport, and especially in rugby, but OT is fast coming to the conclusion that rugby is too dangerous for its own good, that players have become so fit and powerful they are no longer suited to the fundamentals of the game.

The brutal British and Irish Lions tour to South Africa clearly offers further evidence of the casualty rate at the top end of the game.

The Lions' dressing room after the second Test defeat was compared to a casualty department and it was no surprise when they were unable to field their first-choice props or centres for the final Test.

Already England are struggling with their elite player squad ahead of the November internationals and less than two months into the season.

England manager Martin Johnson is missing Delon Armitage, Riki Flutey, Andy Sheridan, Lee Mears, Tom Rees, Toby Flood and Simon Shaw for the November Tests, while fringe squad members Danny Cipriani, David Wilson, Jordan Turner-Hall and Rob Webber are also sidelined.

Anymore injuries in next weekend's round of Guinness Premiership matches and Johnson could find himself taking on Australia, Argentina and New Zealand without more than half his first-choice starting XV missing.

So is this co-incidence or a growing trend in the increasingly confrontational world of first-class rugby?

Statistics for the current injury rate are not yet available, but certainly OT feels it inevitable that when they are produced they will highlight an increase. Why would the authorities have introduced new substitution rules and limited the number of games elite players can play in one season if they were not worried about the casualty rate?

OT is unable to give empirical evidence that injuries are on the rise at the top level of the game, but developments in the sport since it turned professional would suggest it is an logical outcome.

One only has to compare the size and fitness of today's leading players with those of 10 years ago to see how much greater the potential for injury is.

Far improved and far stricter conditioning regimes have been common place for several seasons now, and it is widely accepted that all players with aspirations in the sport need to carry far greater muscle and bulk.

Added to that are modern tactics that draw contact and confrontation, compared to when it was deemed better to try and avoid the opposition. Taking the ball into contact is now considered the best way to set up overlaps and mismatches later on in a team's attack.

Then there are the greater all-round responsibilities on players from one to 15. Long gone are the days when the responsibility of props and locks lay only in the tight and at set-piece.

The same can be said of the back-line, who are now expected to work at the breakdown with the relish of a back row forward, whether sealing the ball or clearing the opposition out.

But not only is it the intensity of games that increases the likelihood of injury, it is also the greater number of games at the top end of the sport. Players can now go for several seasons without a proper break or proper pre-season - unless enforced by injury.

Rugby's main appeal has always been its confrontational nature, but can it survive - in its present form - the physical developments made by it participants?

American footballers have always marvelled at the way rugby players take to the field without the precautionary padding and helmets they wear.

Clearly such protective gear would not work for rugby, but with greater parity between the size and conditioning of athletes from the two sports, such comments have never been more pertinent.

OT can't help feeling that so-called progress is actually damaging rugby as a spectacle, not to mention the players' well-being.

Is OT full of hot air or is there a need for rugby's authorities to do something about the sport's attrition rate? Let us know your thoughts in the comments section below.

Terence O'RORKE / Eurosport

Comment 1 - 20 of 20

Sort comments by: Most recent | Most rated

  1. Maybe after years of fake blood capsules, the NH­ players can't take proper hits anymore...

    From Marc B, on Thu 22 Oct 9:16PM

  2. It's a contact sport, not the @#$% game of soccer.

    From anmiller, on Tue 20 Oct 9:30PM

  3. Maybe this is just a phase: have there been seasons­ where the injury count has been ridiculously high?­ Anyway, this is just looking at the top level of rugby:­ are injuries as common in junior rugby?

    I can't­ see that we can do too much: some one will always­ tackle hard and get injured, but I find

    if you play to­ avoid injury, it hurts more. If you play to enjoy it­ and throw yourself about to the best of your ability,­ it hurts less. The players don't complain (much!)

    From Christopher, on Tue 20 Oct 2:37PM

  4. I think the point is being missed. Padding seems to­ have a mental affect on players believing they can hit­ harder and not suffer the consequences. In reality the­ opposite is true and medical evidence supports this.­ American Footballers regularly suffer severe contact­ injuries despite the huge padding. Ban the padding and,­ after a few weeks adjusting, the hits will be noticably­ softer and the injuries reduced. The same applies to­ those bloody helmets. Why on earth would a fly half­ want to wear one of those ?

    From BigRich, on Tue 20 Oct 12:00PM

  5. I thought it was Simon Shaw who kneed Fourie Du Preez­ (& was cited), but anyway it gets away from the­ point....rugby is physical & while the injury risks­ are greater for the top players, so are the rewards!­ Professional players know the risks involved & I­ dont think the average player in the amateur game is at­ any more risk, but any rule changes are likely to­ affect them. I think the RFU has done the right thing­ in limiting the number of games a player can be­ involved in & also increasing the number of players­ on the bench, it makes sense.

    From neil_avery, on Tue 20 Oct 8:29AM

  6. Johann. Comment 13. Don't mistake the English­ players with the other lions such as Shane­ 'he'll never be Jason Robinson' Williams. I­ don't recall any complaints from the English­ contingent on the lions tour? And I'm sure there­ were plenty of injuries among the boks, they just­ weren't as well publicised. And we didn't gouge­ bite and kick like the boks either.

    From greenstandard, on Tue 20 Oct 7:23AM

  7. If it weren't rough, it wouldn't be rugby.

    From Corey, on Tue 20 Oct 2:22AM

  8. Funny how the Lions' dressing room was 'like a­ casualy ward' after the second test but the­ Springboks managed to take the hits and carry on. I­ agree with #10, this article is biased and it seems to­ be only the English supporters that are complaining. ­ Yes, I do agree that serious injuries can happen, and­ sometimes do, however as a Bok supporter I can't­ help but wonder why the English can give it (Shane­ Williams kneeing Fourie Du Preez) but are the first to­ complain when they receive a taste of their own­ medicine? Rugby is a contact sport, and as they say,­ if you can't take the heat get out the kitchen.

    From johannahbunn, on Mon 19 Oct 10:52PM

  9. To think that it has gotten rougher is to compare­ apples and oranges.The fact being that it is­ professional now and the players are and expected to be­ bigger and faster than the opponents.Look at lower­ level club sides they are probably the same rate of­ attrition as 10 years ago

    From scott, on Mon 19 Oct 9:50PM

  10. i see where OT is coming from, apart from the­ exceptions such as shane williams you can't really­ tell the position of anyone as they turn up for a­ match. i remember being able to arrive at the ground­ for pre match training and watching as the opposition­ arrive to weigh up who was probably your opposite­ number (quite easy for a front row such as myself)­ nowadays you can quite easily put a back row forward in­ the backs (such as what happened last weekend) or buy a­ winger and play him back row (Apo Satala when he­ transferred from Leeds to Gloucester. the hits are­ getting bigger and some teams just thrive for the big­ hit in midfield, however it is up to the likes of­ williams to outclass a lump such s banahan which will­ always captivate any audience

    From DAMION, on Mon 19 Oct 9:11PM

  11. I feel that this article is very badly written, after­ reading it I have some questions.
    Why is it only­ English players that are being injured?
    Are other­ player targeting members of the English elite squad?
    Of­ course these questions are irrelevant players from all­ countries are being injured but again this article­ shows the one sided biased articles that are produced­ on behalf of yahoo sports by its contributors.

    From fordellman, on Mon 19 Oct 9:06PM

  12. One survey by the RFU stated that at least 2 players­ get injured every game, 25% of a Premier Team squad are­ injured at any one time, shoulder injuries are the most­ common, and "clearing out players" on the­ fringe of the ruck, when they are not in possession on­ the ball should be penalised unless they are bound to­ another player at the point of tackle. Adam Jones was­ injured on the Lions tour with an illegal tackle and in­ the future most of todays current players will be on­ crutches with some form of arthritis.
    When did you last­ see a ball put in straight at a scrum, but no refs­ bother to penalise the scrumhalf.

    From neathguard8 skewen, on Mon 19 Oct 8:13PM

  13. I think rugby will have its own evolutionary cycle in­ terms of what effects added fitness and bulk have on­ the success of the teams that participate in the game.­ What i mean is that whilst these new traits are­ perceived to be beneficial in terms of achieving­ success, they will continue. However, when such a time­ comes that the long term injury list is similar in size­ to the magna carta and more costly than Paris Hiltons­ shoe collection, changes will be inevitable. What­ changes these will be is the question, but I dont think­ we are there yet.

    From Lee R, on Mon 19 Oct 7:15PM

  14. i think you will find that the injury rate in rugby is­ at a similar level to what it has been in the past, its­ just that the game is subject to more exposure than­ before with more & more games being televised. i­ would question the reason for writing an article on­ this subjext without having the figures to back it up.­ one fact is for sure that there are more soft tissue­ injuries in rugby while footballers are more likley to­ sustain a a break, this is due to the nature of both­ games. increases in fitness & conditioning should­ in theory lead to less injuries not more.

    From andywytchard, on Mon 19 Oct 5:59PM

  15. Maybe rugby could allow for bigger pads, but still soft­ ones

    From robmab, on Mon 19 Oct 4:42PM

  16. well said no1# ... that would be touch rugby!

    it goes­ with the malke up of the sport ... the way to expres­ yourself on the pitch be it hitting the advantage line­ with the forwards or decisive back line plays played at­ pace to carve up a defense .. contact is gonna happen­ and in the case of professional rugby with physiques­ they posses now its not surprising someones gonna come­ off worse for wear

    From chris, on Mon 19 Oct 4:35PM

  17. I think this article is a little dramatic! This is the­ nature of contact sports. Many of us wouldn't love­ rugby or American football if there weren't hard­ hits and the chance of injury. Also comparing American­ football with Rugby is a little ridiculous. They­ aren't even close to the same sport. I play both.­ If you're suggesting pads for rugby, then­ you're suggesting an entirely new sport... which­ may not be a bad thing, but it won't be RUGBY and­ it certainly won't be American football. Both­ sports are brutal in different ways, and that's­ precisely why we love them!

    From Lincoln H, on Mon 19 Oct 3:59PM

  18. rugby is a proper sport, Munster also lost 3 players in­ a fairly short time frame on saturday. but here's­ the thing as long as the rules as currently written are­ actually enforced then the risk of serious injury is­ not really any worse than it's always been. I­ stopped watching soccer when it became a competition of­ thespian ability rather than skill. Rugby is still a­ sport played by people with the hearts on their sleeves­ who give it their all.
    The issue in increased bulk etc­ comes about when you've higher level teams playing­ those semi-pro types. e.g. ireland v USA, normally­ Ireland would play a 2nd string team rather than the­ very top players against the USA. but remember at the­ last world cup, the IRB gave those 2nd/3rd tier nations­ extra funding pre-tournament so they could get the­ physical conditions of their players up to a level­ where at least they wouldn't be getting injured in­ the collisions any more than the top rank players.
    Some­ teams have actually pulled back from the heavy­ musculature approach, it was found to slow down their­ players too much, there is a balance to be found in­ bulking up and retaining mobility. That balance­ differs between body types. The polynesians can carry a­ lot more bulk than the irish or scots as the irish­ discovered in that last world cup when they overdid the­ weight training.

    From Eileesh, on Mon 19 Oct 3:35PM

  19. sorry but thats rugby played for 20 years end had my­ fair share of brocken bits but the more physical it­ gets the bigger the players get so its a viscious­ circle and i've been saying it since the game went­ pro. somebody will get seriously hurt live on telly and­ we as players and officials will have to just grin and­ bare the abuse that the game will take (the odd bad­ brake happens in football)Chins up and lets not go­ H&S soft

    From Jon, on Mon 19 Oct 3:21PM

  20. Why dont we stick little tags on all the players hips­ and they can just pull them off instead of tackling.­ Hehe

    From buymydrugs1, on Mon 19 Oct 2:57PM
Sort comments by: Most recent | Most rated

Not already a Yahoo! user ? to get a free Yahoo! Account