Rugby Science Update 11
The purpose of this study was to determine the rates of concussion underreporting in male and female Super League rugby players and to establish why players may not report suspected concussions. Furthermore, the study aimed to establish basic concussion knowledge and awareness of the long-term implications of concussions. This study undertook a cross sectional design. A survey was distributed to all registered men’s and women’s players from Super League teams by the Rugby Football League during the 2022 preseason. A total of 422 players completed the survey. Of the 422 players, 20% did not report concussion-related symptoms to the medical staff during the 2020 and 2021 seasons. One third of all players reported at least one concussion diagnosed by a doctor over the last two seasons. The most common reason for not reporting concussion-related symptoms were that players ‘didn’t want to be ruled out of a match’ and ‘didn’t want to let down team’. 62% of players reported receiving annual concussion education at their clubs. Knowledge about concussion and its potential long term implications improved from the beginning of the players senior club level careers. More than half of the players expressed concern about the potential long-term implications of concussions. The authors encourage medical and performance staff to be involved in concussion education to remove any negative perceptions surrounding concussion reporting.
This study is published in the Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport.
The aim of this study was two-fold: to describe the tackle characteristics during a single season, of community-level rugby conducted under the lowered, armpit-level maximum legal tackle height law variation and investigate factors that were associated with ‘high tackles under the new law’, during this season. The tackle analysis was completed throughout the Koshuis rugby competition in Stellenbosch University rugby club’s intra-university competition in 2018 and 2019, comprising of four leagues with 42 teams. The first year of the study used the standard shoulder-level maximum tackle height law and in the second year of the study the maximum legal tackle height was lowered from the ball carrier’s shoulder to the armpit. All matches were video recorded with referees wore Go Pro camera, and injury surveillance was conducted. The tackles were categorised as ‘high tackle under the new law’ or ‘not high’. A total of 108 matches and 14679 tackles were analysed. The results showed that ‘high tackles under the new law’ had significantly greater odds of occurring in the lower leagues. Notably, factors contributing to high tackles under the law variation condition included, lower front-on arm tackler, tacklers in upright positions, and ball carriers dipping into contact, all of which were associated with an increased risk of head injury. In conclusion, these findings support the implementation of a lowered maximum legal tackle height in rugby union. The authors did mention that when lowering the maximum legal tackle height, the ball carrier’s behaviour in the tackle event needs to be considered.
This study is published in the Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport.
Coach and player rating of perceived challenge (RPC) as a skill monitoring tool in Rugby Union
The aim of this study was to determine the relationship between player and coach Rating of Perceived Challenge (RPC) for different training sessions over a competitive rugby union season and explore the relationship between player RPC and Rating of Perceived Exertion (RPE). This observational study monitored 51 highly trained U21 rugby union players and four coaches over an 11-week competitive rugby season. Throughout the season players were asked for their RPC and RPE ratings 15 to 30 minutes after each team session, split session, and gym session, while the coaches were asked to provide their RPC ratings based on observation. All ratings were collected independently and confidentially. The key finding in this study was that, overall, players’ RPC did not match the coaches RPC, suggesting that the rugby union coaches may be overestimating the technical and tactical challenge of their training sessions. Additionally, forwards had a higher RPC for field sessions, likely due to their additional technical and tactical demands from training scrums, lineouts, and mauls. The authors mentioned that further robust validity studies are needed.
This study is published in the International Journal of Sports Science and Coaching.
Rugby Science 