Advanced search

Todays Daily Telegraph. 110 rugby players paralysed. Rugby for boys?

(34 Posts)
chill1243 Mon 12-Sep-11 11:13:46

I would have guessed at a figure much lower that 110 paralysed.

How does this compare with other contact sports?

The D.T are raising the question of rugby for boys.

It seems mre gruniad than tellegraph. Is ithe D.T going Liberal.

I thought they hated the Liberal influence on Camerons Tory government

GypsyMoth Mon 12-Sep-11 11:15:53

Not read the article

110 over how long a period? A year?

Pagwatch Mon 12-Sep-11 11:18:00

Most spine injuries occur in the scrum which does not happen until 'boys' are older.

What is the time frame for the number of injuries?

I don't know how it compares but ds1 loves rugby, has learnt self control, self respect and many other things from doing this thing he adores. Life is dangerous <<shrugs>>

I think the refereeing of the scrum needs tightening. The focus should be preventing injuries not questioning if the sport should be played.

munstersmum Mon 12-Sep-11 11:20:47

It seems a topic of debate at the moment. There was a recent suggestion to reduce the number of players in a scrum so less force being used.

chill1243 Mon 12-Sep-11 11:56:23

The period of time is relevant. It will be long. I only scan the Torygraph in the Library (dont tell Charles moore.)

The upside of sport get massive non-challenged publicity. We must look at the downside. Without making Will self minister of sport. (Will is bril on the Olympics....he turns the excitables theory upside down.)

I watch rugby world cup and footie on TV Rugby rules seem more difficult to fathom.....A commentator said rugby players dont challenge refs often; because the players dont understand the rules. (Hyperbole, but amusimng.0

The word is Wales wuz robbed. But I gather the supremos are backing the ref. Suprise, suprise. Is the ref wired for TV soun

PatriciaHolm Mon 12-Sep-11 12:20:51

The phrase used is

"There are 110 rugby players in Britain today who have been paralysed during the course of the game."

So that's going to be over, what, 20+ years?

Pagwatch Mon 12-Sep-11 12:30:34

It could be over 60 years . An 80 year old man injured when 20.

What a shit statistic. Actually what a shoddy article. Using a&e stats is a nonsense. 20 years ago dh never went to a&e and the equivalent of the premiership clubs put out three teams on a Saturday with one st johns ambulance and a bucket of water and a sponge.

Increased a &e presentation just shows that all rugby teams are all over injuries and get everything properly assessed.

Ds1 had three concussions and the school and gp were fully engaged in discussions about whether he would be allowed to play anymore.

IndigoBell Mon 12-Sep-11 14:54:09

Scrums have been tightened up dramatically.

Most of those injuries will have happened more than 20 years ago - when scrums were done differently.

whenIgetto3 Mon 12-Sep-11 16:09:12

Well if we are going to stop our boys playing rugby (mine love it) then maybe we also need to stop selling people trampolines as I am certain that no matter how many times I tell my 4DCs not to do somersaults on the thing they do how many spinal injuries are there a year in peoples own gardens?

How many serious football injuries are there a year? I mean should we pad goalposts like rugby ones?

Life is full of risks, you can do your best to be sensible and avoid unnecessary ones but accidents will always happen as my mother always says "make sure you have clean, ironed underwear on as you never know when you will be hit by a bus" grin

Acekicker Mon 12-Sep-11 16:50:35

That is such a badly written article it's unbelievable... It makes sweeping statements and random comparisons without giving many real stats to back things up.

If it's the same report as this article talks about then a sample population of 5 schools is statistically worthless. If say one school had crap coaching (sadly it happens) and another school had some batshit crazy thug of a fullback who was say 20cm taller than any other kid then that would skew the statistics hugely.

exoticfruits Mon 12-Sep-11 16:59:48

I think that you would find that far more boys are paralysed from accidents when crossing the road. Life is a risk-sport is an acceptable one.

WillbeanChariot Mon 12-Sep-11 19:19:20

Girls play rugby too. Just saying like.

It's a daft article, but scrums do need to be coached and reffed effectively for safety, and players can be taught safety drills too.

Gastonladybird Mon 12-Sep-11 19:39:22

Also am pretty sure that rugby is tightly controlled in training- they play touch rugby until they are 10/11 and scrum gradually introduced.

angry re for boys - a fair number of girls play locally too

Gastonladybird Mon 12-Sep-11 19:40:46

And what are comparable stats on football or skiing injuries. Just thinking of two sports where know a huge number of injuries occur (maybe not paralyzed but plates in your leg, knackered knees fairly debilitating)

Sirzy Mon 12-Sep-11 19:50:00

Injuries happen in a contact sport and its awful when they do. However, such serious injuries are rare and players are trained to do things as safely as possible.

I am a rugby fan and I have seen some horrific injuries occur on the pitch but even with that (minimal) risk I would have no qualms in encouraging DS to play if he wants to when older.

iskra Mon 12-Sep-11 19:55:39

Girls play rugby too, you know.

RunnerHasbeen Mon 12-Sep-11 19:57:23

There is a doctor I work with who claims that the serious injury rate from rugby is much lower in New Zealand, even though the proportion of people playing is higher. There they play in weight categories growing up, like boxing, here there can be quite a range of sizes in one age grouping. They made this change to reduce injuries and late developers giving up or losing confidence, if it was researched and found true I wouldn't think it was wrapping kids in cotton wool to take this approach.

Shame the article sounds so bad as to not be able to take anything interesting from it though.

Pagwatch Mon 12-Sep-11 20:02:38

My dd plays. They play at school.

dikkertjedap Mon 12-Sep-11 20:13:38

Don't know, but I expect there will be more cases in horse riding than that.

WillbeanChariot Mon 12-Sep-11 20:24:58

Hmm interesting about the size categories. I understand the reasons but to me one of the great things about rugby is that it's a game for all shapes and sizes and the weight groupings take away from that. You can be a big fat slow prop or a nippy little scrum-half and play happily in the same team. But then I love rugby and would encourage any child/friend/passing stranger to play.

<big fat slow prop aching happily from yesterday's match>

grumplestilskin Mon 12-Sep-11 20:29:45

boys play tag rugby (till early tweens) so not much risk to boys I'ld imagine. I bet most of those 110 who were paralysed (either in one game or in the whole history of the game???) were MEN
so I don't worry about my LO playing it, he's only 2.5, by the time he qualifies for the non-tag type he'll probably have discovered horrible loud music and girls LOL

grumplestilskin Mon 12-Sep-11 20:32:32

and if I had GIRL I wouldn't worry about her either and would take her to tag rubgy too if she had a similar personality to DS wink, its a fantastic activity

madwomanintheattic Mon 12-Sep-11 20:33:00

ya gotta love stats. <not>

exactly dikker. some timescales and comparisons would lend a little perspective. but i guess perspective isn't what's required for this point.

interestingly, the canadians are just wising up to head injury and concussion re ice hockey, due to some high profile players taking time out after injury. (although more hockey players seem to be committing suicide due to depression than picking up concussions at the mo. if you stick to the media story, anyway.)

newsflash. sport can cause injury. (oh, but also make you healthier, happier, more confident, etc etc)

no idea about rugby. or scrums. or paralysis. but do hate stats used out of context. bah.

(they tried to get me to play rugby at uni, will. i'm far too wussy for contact sports. grin)

blinkineck Mon 12-Sep-11 20:37:37

Contact begins in year 4 so the boys tackle from age 8/9. They play non-contested scrums and line outs. The rules change (and the game becomes more and more physical) as they progress through the age groups.

A lot depends upon how the game is refereed. It's terrifying to watch but as others have said there are similar/greater risks out there.

ivykaty44 Mon 12-Sep-11 20:39:03

Don't know, but I expect there will be more cases in horse riding than that.

I don't know either - but - a physio I see as a mum said she had three last week, three horse riding accidents and she was pleased hers where not into the riding scene. I don't know if three is a lot in one week or not ?

my eldest dd used to play rugby, her coach said it is far easier with girls than boys as they do as they are told far more often and therefore less injury on the pitch

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, watch threads, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now »

Already registered? Log in with: