Why Prof Pollock's views are more than disappointing...
Here's the letter I wrote to the Spectator magazine back in June when they republished an article from Professor Allyson Pollock about the dangers of school rugby...
Sir:
Having been involved in coaching school rugby for over twenty years, I was disappointed to read Professor Pollock’s arguments about the dangers of rugby.
First, I would suggest that she should not dismiss all criticism of her findings as rants, angry tweets or even arrogance. There is a healthy debate within rugby on safety and player welfare. She makes no mention of the recent rule/law changes made in the England and Wales, nor the RugbySmart initiatives from around the world which have safety as well as participation at their core.
Second, and she would testify to this, one small survey is not the basis for a cogent argument. She’s right to point out that there’s not enough research into this area, but that can be said of many areas of concern. But some research has taken place and rugby is below a number of other pastimes undertaken by children in terms of injury risks. For instance, there’s more chance of getting concussion in cheerleading than rugby. Her own article is littered with anecdotal evidence rather than hard scientific evidence.
Third, rugby is not compulsory for children. As a parent you can choose whether you send your child to an independent school or not. If the school offers rugby as a compulsory sport and you disagree with that, then send them somewhere else.
Fourth, the rugby governing bodies work very hard to ensure competitive rugby is appropriate for the age groups concerned. Unfortunately, there will always be reckless or ill-judged decisions by some over-zealous sports staff. That’s never excusable but it’s the fault of the particular school, not of rugby itself.
The debate over safety within the game is crucial. Professor Pollock’s comment that a "child’s game should be child’s play" mirrors what the RFU is phasing in now, and what many of the other unions around the world are doing also. Ironically, it’s some intransigent schools that are the slowest to want change, not the game as a whole.
Yours faithfully,
Dan Cottrell
Editor, Rugby Coach Weekly
Coach of Swansea Schools U15s, Mumbles U15s,
Former Head of Rugby, Cranleigh School (8 years)
Former coach at Ospreys U16s, Surrey U16s
Father of two rugby playing sons
25% of my own stitches are from rugby, the rest from skiing and other accidents
25% of my own stitches are from rugby, the rest from skiing and other accidents
Account Manager at Quorum Cyber
8yWell said. I've coached mini and midi rugby for 13 years in Midlothian and lost more players to skiing injuries such as 'Hillend Thumb'! The SRU could perhaps do more to ensure that coaches know how to deal with serious injuries and that they are reported but they are making positive strides in that direction.
Principal Solution Consultant - Sourcing Optimization
8ySadly this professor seems to get more column inches than is necessary. Both my boys have played this wonderful game since they were 5. (It was allowed then). They have benefited from physical exercise certainly but more than that they have benefited from meeting people from outside their school circle, from being coached by adults who never, not once talked down to them, from being part of a club, a family, a worldwide group of mates (some they have met and some still to meet). The eldest was offered the opportunity to play in Sydney thanks to a wonderful coach and a great friend. He took the offer, loved it, made more mates who he'll keep for life. The youngest is off to university in September and will play for the them if possible. Both have played senior rugby for the club they started as as minis. Rugby is more than a game, so much more than a game and sadly this individual just doesn't get it.
PREVENTION is the best form of SAFETY.
8yMr Cottrell, well done and well said. My questions on this subject to all and sundry are: a) Where are all other experts? b) How come Prof. Pollock's voice seem to be the beacon to follow? c) It seems to me politicians and bureaucrats have left this subject unattended and under-investigated? d) Is political correctness more important than good mental and physical health of young population? e) Are Insurance assessors hijacking this debate? f) This sounds like World Rugby's scrummaging circus debacle where not many people know what needs to be done? FOOD 4 THOUGHT Best regards, TOPO
CAD Manager at Bridgecon Infra Consultant (P) Ltd.
8yHow r u Ajit? Where r u?. Know i m in Qatar.
Teacher of Physical Education
8yIssues with pollocks studies (though there is some valid points) How do you define a serious injury? She isn't using the definition a world rugby focus group came up with. Also is she classing all injuries in rugby to be a rugby injury is sprinting down the wing and pulling q muscle an injury because of rugby The study was done in the second half of the season so there is a chance of an injury being a re-injury and plus injury in all sports are morelikely in the second half of a season. Also has hasn't taken into account previous injury (from rugby, other sport or medical) She hasn't taken into account of players were fatigued trough playing say football for a club the night before and wasn't declared by the player. Also when you go into a school to evaluate injuries schools will class everything as an injury to cover themselves. Proven by only one of the hospital admissions in Her stidies to be anything serious (broken neck) all the rest were released with tissue damage etc. she says there is no way to monitor injuries (her stidies are based in Scotland) but SRU have an injury report system and concussion is taught every year through rugby ready. Finally she is focusing on after school rugby, curriculum rugby is moreskill and touch rugby focused.