Controversial tackle-height change has ‘reduced head contacts'

Telegraph

28-02-2025

Two years ago the sudden and controversial decision to lower the tackle height in the community game sparked outrage across English rugby. Now, the Rugby Football Union has revealed that head contacts and red cards were reduced in the aftermath.
Such was the uproar over the RFU's decision in 2023 that the governing body released an apology at the time, releasing a statement saying: 'In our desire to act quickly to reduce head impacts and concussions, we have upset many of you. We fully acknowledge we got the engagement wrong, and we are truly sorry.'
The data, which is still in its early stages, is drawn from analysis of 200 matches across the National Leagues, the university system's BUCS Men's Super Rugby and schoolboys under-18 level to examine the effects of lowering the tackle height to below the base of the sternum.
In BUCS matches, tackles above the sternum following the law-change dropped from 42 per game to 28. In National One, the average number of head contacts dropped from six to three.
A knock-on effect from lowering the tackle height was an increase in offloads and a reduced number of breakdowns. At National League level, the number of average tackles per game dropped from 259 to 225, while offloads increased on average from 19 to 23.
The number of red cards issued for dangerous play under Law 9.13 notably decreased, while the number of reported concussions in men's levels three to nine stabilised, having steadily increased since 2009-2010. The concussion numbers for the women's game remained similar to previous seasons.
Discussing the Domestic Law Variation, Paula Carter, RFU board and council member and chair of the RFU's head impact prevention and management steering group, said: 'The RFU takes player welfare incredibly seriously, and we are determined to promote the many benefits of our game alongside analysing data and science to make our sport as safe as it can be.
'These early results of the initial impact of the reduction in the tackle height are positive indicators that the community game, where most of the rugby is played in England, are benefitting from the decisions we are taking relating to welfare and injury prevention. We are grateful for all the work the community game is doing to make this a success.'
The figures provide a welcome update on how that law change is progressing after its introduction in 2023 triggered a backlash from players, with one describing the process as 'a total shambles'. The RFU was also heavily criticised for the manner in which the radical development was first introduced, with critics pointing to 'a lack of transparency and communication'.
Plan to empower clubs in decision-making
The tackle height update is part of a published response from the RFU following a roadshow around the country to speak with aggrieved clubs after last year's bonus scandal surrounding chief executive Bill Sweeney.
Having met already with representatives from 400 clubs, and with more roadshow events in the pipeline, the RFU has announced that action will be taken in multiple areas. The most interesting proposal regards governance reform, with Sir Bill Beaumont, the interim chair of the RFU board, proposing an additional motion, ahead of the special general meeting to be held on March 27. The motion calls for the RFU's 'governance and representation review' to be expedited, giving clubs more decision-making power at a local level.
'We want to create a new relationship between clubs and the union – with stronger engagement in how the game is run,' the RFU says in a document titled 'Our Commitment To The Community Game'. 'We anticipate this accelerated governance review will enable the union to move to a regional structure where more decisions can be made locally, with greater flexibility achieved in competition management and devolved funding to help local decisions to be made to drive participation growth, aid player retention and support club sustainability.'
Beaumont urges clubs to back Sweeney
In the letter, Beaumont urges RFU members 'to vote in favour of this resolution which can bring about meaningful governance change and against the motion that members have no confidence in the Chief Executive Officer', adding that the RFU board 'unanimously supports Bill Sweeney remaining as CEO'.
Addressing the push from the group known as Whole Game Union, made up of the Rugby Football Referees Union and Championship clubs who called for the SGM, Beaumont warns that a vote of no confidence in Sweeney 'risks sending the Union into paralysis and creating a costly leadership vacuum'.
Whole Game Union responded to the RFU's announcements in a statement, stressing that the letter calling for the SGM had been signed by 152 clubs 'and is supported by scores more at every level and in every region'.
The statement continued: 'It is only because of the Whole Game Union's ability to corral the dissatisfaction of English Rugby with its leadership that Sir Bill and his board belatedly discovered the need to go out and meet clubs. None of the proposals in his letter would have been forthcoming if our Union was just a few malcontents stirring a pot. The pot was already boiling.
'The desperation inherent in this letter to clubs can be summed up by the sudden realisation that they need to make promises to address the points made in the SGM letter. Our message remains that the board and the CEO have lost the dressing room.'
Analysis: This is first step towards RFU regaining clubs' trust
By Ben Coles
To say that the Rugby Football Union is beginning to show signs of improving its communication with its members and the wider public means, given recent events, that a very low bar has been cleared. Friday's news, however, feels like a marked improvement, an implied mea culpa, which continues the work that began with Sir Bill Beaumont's return to the RFU to kickstart one of the great charm offensives in English rugby. Focus on this Bill, not the other Bill.
While the bonus payment made to Bill Sweeney provoked a level of outrage so startling that the RFU never saw it coming, intel from the roadshow events suggests that the size of Sweeney's salary is not a primary concern for clubs. The Pontefract chairman Phil Atkinson described it as a 'red herring' in my colleague Ben Rumsby's piece covering one of the events.
Teams want to know how their floodlights will be fixed and why they were not consulted properly about lowering the tackle height. Those issues matter more than the chief executive's pay packet.
Releasing data on the impact of lowering the tackle height in the community game does not vindicate the RFU's failure to properly communicate such a fundamental shift in how the game is played. But it will at least help to persuade those concerned for the future of the sport that the change was necessary. Members likely knew already that something had to give. You can separate the professional and amateur games but the high-profile court case concerning former players and brain injuries, which has hung over the game in recent years, affects the overall perception of the sport. What members wanted was an opportunity to voice any queries and to push for answers, rather than to be directed without consultation. Improving county and regional governance, meanwhile, which should allow greater flexibility between areas of the country where player numbers differ and give counties more of an identity and voice, feels like a common-sense approach, too.
Club vote will reveal success of Sweeney roadshow
The tackle-height data is encouraging, absolutely, but it should be stressed that it is still in its early stages. A better picture will emerge over the coming seasons as more matches are studied and dissected, and you suspect the numbers will continue to trend down and up appropriately, as players continue to adapt. The aim of reducing head contacts and concussions was always creditable and worth exploring. The execution of it was just such a mess.
Beaumont's letter does not hold back, 'urging' members not to vote against Sweeney in the forthcoming special general meeting, arguing that he is 'spearheading vital commercial and broadcast negotiations that will play a huge role in safeguarding our financial sustainability'. The success of Sweeney's speaking (but mainly listening) tour of the country will become apparent when the votes are cast at the SGM. It all feels like the start of a long road for the ruling body to win back everyone's trust. But a start nonetheless.