Anyone who saw England versus Ireland at the weekend now knows what a properly intense, top-level game of rugby union looks like. Fierce, physical, lung-bursting, aggressive and bruising, not to mention fast, skilful and athletic. It is impossible to understate just how fit and committed the players have to be simply to survive until half-time, let alone the end of the season.
So how many injuries were there in this ridiculously tough, insanely competitive arena populated by mad men constructed entirely of granite? Well, Billy Vunipola hurt an ankle trying to pull away from a tackle, and Peter O’Mahony reported a slight hamstring strain. Brian O’Driscoll and Tom Wood both suffered a touch of cramp. And, er, that’s it. You might expect worse after a game of friendly five-a-side football played anywhere around the country this evening.
Where does that leave the suggestion from a prominent expert last week that rugby union is a game too dangerous, in its present form, for teenagers to play safely? Allyson Pollock, professor of public health research and policy at Queen Mary, University of London, argues that people need “to think fundamentally about changing the game for children”. If that means outlawing tackling and scrums and changing the face of a “very brutal” game, so be it.
It is true that young bones and joints can take a pounding on a rugby pitch. Speaking as someone who suffered over half a dozen shoulder dislocations – which eventually required two operations – two broken wrists, a broken ankle, torn knee ligaments and plenty of damaged pride prior to a premature retirement at the age of 19, I feel vaguely qualified on the subject.
My final game, on a windswept park pitch in Edinburgh, ended predictably with yet another fracture. As the opposition were a bunch of medical students, I decided to ask for an early diagnosis before making the grim trudge to the Western General to have the bone reset. They went into a quick huddle before their captain emerged, looking slightly shame-faced. “Sorry, mate,” he muttered. “None of us have done that part of the course yet.”
As it happens, I also spent part of the weekend on another touchline watching a decent-standard under-13s game. The height differential between some of the participants was akin to comparing the Himalayas with Muswell Hill. Sure enough, the bigger blokes crashed through the majority of the tackles while the smaller ones, still awaiting their growth spurts, did their best to act as speed bumps. By the final whistle there was one tweaked hamstring but everyone else left beaming, desperate to play again next week.
These, clearly, are mere snapshots, but they collectively form a very different picture to the one Pollock – author of a tome provocatively entitled Should We Ban Rugby? – has been promoting for some time. This is an unscientific survey but in watching and playing age-grade rugby up and down the country for the best part of 40 years I can count the bad injuries I have personally witnessed on a rugby field on the fingers of one, admittedly slightly gnarled, hand. I’ve seen worse on cricket fields and as for winter sports, no one seemed to turn a hair watching all those skiers, snowboarders and skaters crashing in Sochi.
If there is a concern in rugby, my suggested focus would be on those kids aged between 15 and 17 playing with youths slightly older, bigger and stronger than themselves. Some of them – when you factor in school, club and representative commitments, not to mention playing other sports and going to the gym – do appear to be placing an awful lot of strain on their developing bodies and already have the medical notes to prove it. With the average participant getting bigger and faster, the more upright nature of the hits in the modern game is also a definite issue. It is no coincidence that concussion is now a higher-profile issue than it used to be.
What to do? Tag and touch-rugby are ideal for promoting the game to new audiences and can continue to develop handling skills at an older age.
In New Zealand, they have weight categories for club and schoolboy rugby union teams from eight to under-13. Up to the age of 11 they make perfectly good sense; beyond that it gets trickier. If a 12-year-old child is 85kg but can barely run and lacks self-confidence, it makes little sense to unilaterally insist he has to play with older, even bigger boys. Part of rugby’s appeal is based around finding ways to maximise your particular body shape, whether that be soaring high in the lineout or nipping around the field at ankle height.
I do, even so, wonder about the ‘jackal’ position at the breakdown, where youngsters not built on the same Popeye lines as David Pocock are exposing their necks and backs to potentially heavy punishment. Big shoulder-height tackles can also do a lot of damage and should be carefully policed. It goes without saying, too, that concussion protocols at age-grade level have to be taken more seriously by those in charge. Coaching and player management need to be good and the participants have to want to be there.
But, please, let’s not ignore the benefits. Rugby helps to build character as well as fitness, is among the best of bonding activities and fosters a set of core values – teamwork, respect, enjoyment, discipline and sportsmanship – which will benefit its participants for life. The pleasure it gives to millions is indisputable, the sense of self-worth and belonging it gives kids of all backgrounds invaluable. The occasional fractured bone should not render all that invalid.
Sound of the crowd
The subject of the ideal pre-match atmosphere, and how to create it, is certain to become a major topic heading into next year’s World Cup. Those who don’t particularly care for over-the-top anthem singers, booming PA announcers and choreographed walks through the car park are currently being drowned out by the increasing top-level imperative to turn Twickenham into a fortress with a capital F.
There is now even a painfully unnecessary 10-second countdown to kick-off, with a montage of English images played on the big screen after the referee has indicated his desire to get the show on the road.
The trouble is this: if you manufacture an atmosphere it is never as satisfying as something that develops naturally or organically. The dark, dimly lit Millennium Stadium on Friday night (and that’s another whole story) looked like it was preparing to welcome Take That on stage rather than host a game of rugby. What was so wrong with playing a couple of decent guitar-band tracks – the Manic Street Preachers might be an appropriate choice next week – before studying the players’ faces as they belt out the anthems and then leaving the fans to cheer for the side they want to win?
On Saturday, one of the umpteen slogans on the rolling electronic displays around Twickenham made reference to players who had ‘warn’ the jersey.
Enough is enough. The more people try and manipulate a memorable atmosphere, the less effective it is.
Prediction of the week
Following Saturday’s debacle, our hutch-based expert has once again been suspended from duty. Could it be that, all along, he has actually been nominating the losing team? Top-level investigations are continuing but, in the meantime, will Bath beat Saracens at the Recreation Ground on Friday?
Bath are pressing hard for a top-four finish but the intensity of Sarries’ weekend defence against Exeter suggested the visitors will not easily be pushed around.
Benefits of rugby union outweigh knee-jerk reaction to its dangers
No comments:
Post a Comment