ObjectivesMost concussions in rugby union occur during tackles. We investigated whether legislating to lower maximum tackle height would change tackle behaviour, and reduce concussion incidence rate.MethodsIn a single group intervention, 12 elite men’s teams played in two competitions during the 2019/2020 season. The Championship (control, 90 games) retained standard Laws of Rugby for the tackle; the Championship Cup (intervention, 36 games) used revised laws—the maximum tackle height was lowered from the line of the shoulders on the ball carrier to the line of the armpits. Videos of tackles were analysed for ball carrier and tackler behaviour. Injury data were collected using standardised methods.ResultsIn the intervention setting, there was a significantly lower proportion of tackles; (1) in which ball carriers (rate ratio (RR) 0.83, 95% CI 0.79 to 0.86) and tacklers (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.76 to 0.84) were upright, (2) in which the tackler’s initial contact was to the ball carrier’s head or neck (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.58 to 0.84) and (3) in which initial contact was above the line of the ball carrier’s armpit (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.80 to 0.88). Concussion incidence rate did not differ between conditions (RR 1.31, 95% CI 0.85 to 2.01). Unexpectedly, compared with the control setting, tacklers in the intervention setting were themselves concussed at a higher rate as measured by; (1) incidence (RR 1.90, 95% CI 1.05 to 3.45) and (2) concussions per 1000 tackles (2.09, 95% CI 1.15 to 3.80) than in the control setting.ConclusionsLegislating to lower the height of the tackle meant that tacklers made contact with the ball carrier’s head and neck 30% less often. This did not influence concussion incidence rates. Tacklers in the intervention setting—who were aiming to tackle lower—suffered more concussions than did tacklers in the control setting.

Outcomes of Premiership rugby matches are better predicted when relative data sets are utilised. Basic open-field abilities based around an effective kicking game, ball carrying abilities, and not conceding penalties when the opposition are in possession are the most relevant predictors of success.

Hughes MT, Hughes MD, Williams J, James N, Vuckovic G, Locke D. Performance indicators in rugby union. J. Hum. Sport Exerc. Vol. 7, No. 7, pp. 383-401, 2012. Team performance in rugby has typically been assessed through the comparison of winning and losing teams, however, the distinction between winning and losing was used as the sole independent variable. Thus potential confounding variables that may affect performance such as match venue, weather conditions and the strength of the opposition were not considered in this profile of a rugby team. Insufficient data currently exist regarding the development and measurement of performance indicators in rugby union. In particular, there is little research concerning position-specific performance indicators and their subsequent performance profiles. Research has also yet to establish the confidence to which these performance profiles are representative of an individual's performance. The aim of this study was to exploit the unique opportunity of a large dataset from the 2011 World Cup, from analysts working with national teams, and combine this with examples of data taken from previous studies, in an attempt to identify a more focused direction for the analysis of rugby union. The majority of data collected in the results section were during and after the 2011 Ruby Union World Cup in New Zealand by professional analysts working for a firm called PGIR, which has the analysis franchise for the England RFU. All data were checked for accuracy and reliability by cross-referencing actions to post event from video. It was concluded that in a complex dynamic interactive team sport, such as rugby, that simple analyses of frequency data, although informative, cannot possibly be expected to model this very difficult and multivariate problem.