World Rugby has announced measures aimed at stamping out the hip-drop tackle, a move backed by former international referee Nigel Owens. He also says Louis Rees-Zammit is right to highlight the dangers of artificial pitches after showing off a bad graze on his leg.
World Rugby acts on hip-drop tackle
Changes around the game tend to happen in every World Cup cycle, and tend to change laws that have been trialed first before implementing them. But when it relates to player safety, they don't often wait around too long to change something.
Any area of the game they feel is unsafe or dangerous can often change pretty much overnight. World Rugby's always trying to keep on top of any issues involving serious injuries or player safety and welfare.
For instance, there was a big clampdown with contact in the air in recent years. We then saw a big clampdown on tip tackles, which we don't really see anymore. Probably the only one they've tried to clamp down on that we are still seeing a recurrence is the head-to-shoulder contact or the upright tackle. Similarly, we're still seeing reckless clear outs.
Upright tackles still an issue
Now there's nothing in law to say that you can't make an upright tackle. It only becomes illegal if you get it wrong and you cause head contact. So for me, if you want to get players to tackle low, you need to make the upright tackle illegal, but that's a different conversation.
What they're doing here now is taking action against what can be a very dangerous tackle, where you sort of tackle a player, then you drop your body onto the lower limbs of the player. In rugby league, it's already been outlawed.
That sort of thing is going to be an offence in rugby union too, and hopefully what you'll see then is this sort of thing coming out of the game, although it's admittedly not the sort of tackle we see that frequently anyway.
Definitive stand needed on dangerous tackles
I always say it's important that we keep evolving around player safety and player welfare, and if any aspect of the game becomes dangerous and puts players at risk of serious injury, then it needs measures to outlaw it. Or, at the very least, minimise the risk as much as possible in a contact sport like ours.
I guess my only issue is that upright tackles, which are far more common, are still being punished with a yellow card or 20-minute red card and that's because they've not been made illegal in the same way as the croc roll or the spear tackle, for example. If we're serious about combating shoulder to head contact then it's time to make a more definitive stand on that sort of thing.
Concerns over 4G pitches
Speaking of player safety, I saw the pictures of Louis Rees-Zammit, who showed off what looked a bad graze on his leg after playing on an artificial surface recently. I've never been a fan of these 4G pitches. For me, rugby should be played on grass, or a mix of artificial and real grass, which is what some pitches have now.
I certainly knew the day after if I'd been refereeing on a 4G pitch. You'd feel it in your calves. You'd feel it in your legs and in your joints. Whether that was to do with my age, I don't know, but I certainly knew that you'd been running on a different surface than a grass surface.
So I've never been keen on them, although I do see the benefits. For one, the game can carry on, whereas in the past it may have been called off or played in such conditions that you wouldn't know who's playing for who with all the mud on their jerseys. But with the modern drainage systems around pitches now, you don't tend to see those heavy pitches like we'd have seen in years gone past anyway.
Benefits and unanswered questions
The other benefit I suppose is that it does allow kids to train and have sessions more regularly and more easily. It doesn't matter now if it's a cold, wet night, they can still train on a reasonable firm surface rather than going out and getting covered in mud. Then there's the added revenues those pitches can bring in. Pitches can now be hired out and used every day, all day and night.
So I do understand why they've become so popular, but I always much preferred refereeing on a proper grass pitch. It felt more like rugby. Whether it's safer, only the players and data can answer that. But I would be interested to know how many injuries and what types of injuries occur on artificial pitches and the comparison with real pitches.
Certainly there's no doubt that the sort of grazes and burning Louis suffered appears to be a lot more common, and basically won't happen on grass. That's probably why World Rugby has allowed players to wear skins underneath their shorts. I'd be interested to see if that data is available, and if it isn't available then it probably should be. All I know is that my legs certainly felt very different after the 4G pitch than a normal pitch. But as I said, it could be down to my age!
