Rugby addicted to big hits
OPINION: On Wednesday last week All Blacks second-rower Patrick Tuipulotu hit Marco Tauleigne so hard in a tackle that the French XV No 8 was knocked out and had to be removed from the game.
After the match Tuipulotu was cited by independent citing commissioner John Byett of England, indicating that he saw the incident as worthy of a red card.
In Edinburgh on Friday Tuipulotu fronted a disciplinary hearing and was cleared.
The incident flew under the radar somewhat but it was the most important event in the game over the past week.
It tells us where the game really is when it comes to head injuries. It shows, despite all the talk about player welfare, that rugby is still equivocal when it comes to concussion. You can still line a player up, knock him out, and be free to play on.
This is not a retrial of Tuipulotu. He went through a fair process and is not a dirty player.
Indeed, the hearing - chaired by Welshman Roger Morris - accepted evidence given by the player that ‘‘he bent – as he had been coached, at the knee and not from the waist – to get low enough to perform a tackle’’ and ‘‘the video played at real time showed that the arm never lost the momentum needed to perform the grasping of the opponent requisite for a legal tackle’’.
What is on trial here are the laws as they stand, specifically in relation to the height of the tackle.
One key part of Tuipulotu’s defence, in support of the video evidence, was from All Blacks doctor Tony Page.
It stated that ‘‘that concussion is caused not by an impact of itself but by the whiplash-like consequence of that impact. An impact that causes concussion need not be directly to the head’’.
In other words, the massive impact from a heavy chest-high tackle such as Tuipulotu’s has the potential to rattle an opponent’s brain around his skull and it is all within the laws of the game.
If brain doctors were to read the full judicial hearing - and it can be found here - they would probably weep. And that is World Rugby’s dilemma. It can parrot the words player welfare as often as it wants but it presides over a game that puts participants at risk.
But it is not just the governing body that has to own that, we all do. We may not like to admit it and World Rugby certainly won’t but the sight of big athletes smashing each other to bits is one of the reasons why people watch the game.
We can dress it up with as many nice words as possible ‘‘gladiatorial, adversarial’’ - but when you get down to it a tackle like the Tuipulotu speaks directly to that little devil on our shoulder who enjoys watching someone get physically dominated.
Indeed, there is no doubt the Tuipulotu tackle would have warmed the hearts of his coaches, lots of former players and lots of All Blacks fans. That’s what they want to see from the big Blues man.
So rugby is at as fascinating crossroads. As more and more evidence is pieced together hinting at a possible terrible toll for players at a later date due to head injuries, do we want to lower the tackle or keep the big, brutal hits that, while legal, still destroy opponents?
As the Tuipulotu case shows, as 2017 nears to an end we’re still voting for the latter.