This is a watershed moment for rugby
AFTER THE SPORT WAS ROCKED TO ITS CORE THIS WEEK, ENGLAND’S WORLD CUP WINNING COACH HAS A STARK WARNING
THIS week is a watershed moment for rugby. After the stand taken by Steve Thompson, Alix Popham, Michael Lipman and others, rugby must address the issues and take the initiative.
In such a physical game, player welfare is everything and, if rugby is to thrive, we must acknowledge this fully, with a view to making the present and future much safer at every level of the game. The world is changing quickly and rugby needs to keep pace and adapt and consider this as the opportunity to lead world sport in this crucial time.
It has been painful to witness the players’ suffering and I have been surprised by some of the debate that has since ensued. Some have taken a heartless position — that these players knew what they were getting into and should suffer the consequences. I cannot print my response to those people.
Others fear this watershed moment will irreversibly change the very fabric of the game but would
You can’t avoid physicality in training
that really be such a bad thing? And what is the alternative?
Of course the physical nature of rugby is a huge part of its appeal but we have definitely gone so far down that path that ‘physicality’ has overpowered the game.
The wider skill of real athleticism that rugby has always offered has been left behind. England’s physicality — and the question of whether anyone could match it — was the constant theme of the recent Autumn Nations tournament.
The most dangerous thing for rugby to do is to do nothing, go all defensive and stick its head in the sand. If rugby is considered too dangerous, participation will fall, schools will stop playing the game, sponsors will look elsewhere, mums and dads will say no and fans will not turn up or tune in.
Professional rugby has taken welcome steps and is certainly ahead of most sports when it comes to looking after its players and injury prevention. We should applaud the game for that but it must be seen as just the start. The main problem does not seem to be the game itself but how players are prepared for matches — the training on a daily, weekly and monthly basis.
The next frontier has to be training protocols and aligning sessions at the top level better between club and country.
The international game attracts real warriors. You do not become a professional rugby player without relishing the physical challenge and taking enjoyment from that aspect of the game.
It was really interesting reading the words of World Cup winner Lewis Moody in these pages earlier this week: ‘At Leicester, pretty much every session was a contact session. We prided ourselves on that and I enjoyed it.’
But the whole issue is rooted in the club-v- country stand- off that has existed since the game went professional and which I experienced as England’s head coach.
Rugby needs to take on board that being athletically and physically fit is paramount to success on the field. Player welfare is not only fundamental on a humane level, it is an absolute necessity if you ever hope to achieve high performance. They go together.
Preparing a team at an international level is different to club rugby. The priority at the beginning of any match week is to make sure players are fit and rested for the game on Saturday and up to speed with their skills and game plan.
Pre- season blocks and longer tours enable national teams to operate more like a club.
You cannot avoid a degree of physicality in training, it is vital from a safety standpoint. Take tackling. Every week you must have some tackling practice, honing your technique to ensure you execute the skill correctly and safely in full contact sessions. And then there is the breakdown which is currently the key to winning matches and is a ferocious contest for the ball which will involve contact in training.
The key question is: exactly how much are you doing and just how much contact is your head taking on a regular basis?
When it comes to scrummaging, a lack of technique could result in catastrophic injury and your role as a coach is to ensure specialists oversee such technical parts of the game. Again, the key is how much do you do and the ‘less is more’ mantra should guide us.
And this links with the perennial problem for the committed international rugby professional — the requirement to serve two masters. Firstly his club coach and secondly his national coach.
His club contract pays the bills while the honour of representing your country is the dream and can lead to greater financial rewards. Every professional wants both. The result is too much training and too much contact in training. Ultimately, you cannot have two bosses.
The workload needs to be controlled and quantified and aligned between club and country. Technology and science must be applied to every player and every session to allow the experts to agree on how long per week, per month, per season players are exposed not just in games but training as well.
Safety protocols must be policed. Every contact and scrummaging session must be independently reviewed and coordinated between club and country.
Players must be routinely assessed, especially the most vulnerable, with emphasis on their brains, backs and necks.
If rugby can find a way of complying with the complicated Covid protocols, it can — and must — do this when assessing potentially dangerous levels of contact work in training and during games.