to think allowing our sons to play rugby is irresponsible parenting?

[AddToBasket]

There's another article in the Times today about Professor Allyson Pollock's attempt to get people to understand how dangerous school rugby is. She's been abused on Twitter, stonewalled by other parents, ignored by Rugby's professional bodies. (Link here but behind paywall)

Basically, a combination of parental peer pressure and the Establishment mean people won't listen to what she has to say. Rugby as it is played at school at present is not safe.

AIBU to think we aren't protecting our sons? Why are we allowing this compulsory sport to put at risk so much for our boys?

the a&e dr who treated ds2 for a head injury (fainted at school not rugby related) was a rugby player as they spent ages talking about it and he loved the game.

I worked with plenty of dr's at the hospital and a fair few of those played rugby or had dc playing rugby. Members of the teams parents include 2 gps and a dr in orthopaedics.

Again - more anecdotes

I'm guessing the risk was acceptable to them.

I know doctors who smoke and who abuse alcohol.

So therefore smoking and alcohol abuse must be ok if doctors do it

Yes Orlando - I think there should be more focus on the data. I would also be interested to find out if my perception that proper teaching of rugby in a club with trained coaches and proper warm ups (training sessions even at age 9 are two hours with plenty of warm up and concentration of learning safe tackling, falling etc) is actually safer.

Thanks for raising this OP

I think rugby should be offered as an option in school PE
Surely it wouldn't be too hard to have a rugby/football option and children could choose whichever they and their parents prefer

I think we need to be told the risks so that we can make judgements for our DC. DS quite enjoys rugby but I must get him a mouth-guard for next season to protect his teeth - especially as he loves playing his trumpet more

What I think is worrying is that the discussion with the RFU and schools seems to be shut down and it's not something that they want to talk about or address.

It might be safe. Or safe enough. Or it might be too risky for some.

But it is a debate that the rugby bodies and the rugby playing schools need to engage with. What are they afraid of?

Full on rugby should NOT be compulsory in schools. It must give many parents and children nightmares. Not at all sporting. More controlled yobbing.

Assessed that there was a chance he'd come home unable to walk? Not really no! Orlando. My point is, risk assessments aside, there's risk in everything if you look long and hard enough for it...

A friend of mine has her two boys at the French Lycee here in London. They offer practically no sports at all, (an hour of P.E once a week is about it).. No Football, Rugby, Hockey, Netball teams, nothing. Her boys as well as many other kids and parents hate it and are constantly putting pressure on the school leadership to change it. Sports teams give the kids a chance to work together, bond, get their aggression out and achieve something special. I've fond and proud memories of being in my school netball team. How do kids know they're going to hate it unless they have to do it. Because they're unlikely to do it by choice?

My point is, risk assessments aside, there's risk in everything if you look long and hard enough for it

Yes - but some things are far riskier than others.

Sports teams give the kids a chance to work together, bond, get their aggression out and achieve something special

Bingo. House. That point has been made on here frequently.

It's not the point of the OP though.

Of course some things are riskier than others. Being a passenger in a car is probably the riskiest thing anyone could do.

If we'd have had an option at our school for the boys to opt out of Hockey they just about all would have done, I'm sure. I remember them moaning how it was a girls game!! But they were forced to, and guess what? Some loved it and we ended up with a boys Hockey team. I'm proud to say the girls team used to thrash them on a regular basis. There's risk in Hockey too, broken ankles, gashes to the head, sprained wrists and so on.

At school level the risks of injury playing sport aren't that high. Let's not be scared of letting our kids take a chance or two. They take plenty outside school (mine do anyway) that's for sure.

I do agree there should be more data, and that the focus should be on that data.

I also suspect that there is a lot in what pp have said about longer club sessions being safer. Even at DC's school which has, compared to most, long and frequent games sessions, I do suspect that time for warm up and warm down is sacrificed in the name of getting more playing into the time available.

Juggling - is the implication of your post that your DS has been allowed to play without a mouthguard? That would worry me a lot - in itself, and as an indication of how seriously the school are taking safety in general. DC's school have compulsory dentist-fitted exorbitantly expensive mouthguards. No mouthguard (and they all have their names embedded in them so they can't be wearing someone else's) - and you're not playing. Or training - for either rugby or hockey. I get that the whole dentist-fitted bit would be impossible and deeply unfair to enforce in a state school, but mouthguards are not expensive - you can get them for £1 - so they should be non-negotiable.

This thread is like a trap for people who are statistically naive. Especially the brain surgeons comparing driving accident stats to rugby injuries.....

of course rugby should not be compulsory. No sport should be compulsory, just some physical activity.

I won't be letting either of my children play rugby. The benefits simply don't outweigh the risks in my opinion. The severity of the injuries alone, specifically concussions and spinal injuries makes my mind up. If I was in the US I wouldn't be letting them play American football either.

sounds a bit a sci-fi, but I think human evolution has got to a point where we are too strong and fast to play rugby in its current form. In the 70s and 80s as an amateur game and with archaic training methods it worked fine.
Now, not only are humans bigger and faster than they were 20 years ago, training methods have evolved so you have guys that can bench press 150% of their body weight and run 50m in 6 seconds. The impacts are faster, the bodies heavier and inevitably the injuries worse. Something needs to be done to reduce the collisions. Helmets and padding won't help, as American football proved, players just think they are more indestructible and hit harder using the helmets.

Scrums are a cause of many of the injuries and frankly they are just not necessary any more, it's so rare posession is won back at a scrum why not just restart like in rugby league.

There are also the longer term consequences which are only just becoming evident. I'm certain we will see a long line of former pro rugby players with early onset dementia and depressive / suicidal thoughts from all the undiagnosed concussions causing head trauma

incidentally many of the pro rugby posters in this thread were active on the "isn't rugby a real mans game compared to football" thread a few months ago when they celebrated George north and his idiotic irresponsibility in playing on after being out cold. As long as you are proud of your "real men" sons when you are feeding them their 40th birthday cake with a straw, that's fine. It's your right and your children's right to do as you wish, but compulsory rugby.... No thanks.

I appreciate we are talking about children here, but it's all relative to what they are being hit by as recent tragedies have proved.

This thread was predictable from the start,

Never did me any harm.
Character building
DCs enjoy it.
People need to do sport or they'll get fat
Cotton wool
Drs play it

You could have played thread bingo.

Sorry to take you to ground where your less strong footed Orlando.

sourdrawers

I've stopped engaging with your arguments TBH.

I think it is an interesting debate. Oldest DS is at a school where they don't play any contact sports for fear of injury (to main reason for being at school). Eg. - you can't play the piano if you have mashed your hands! Youngest DS will probably not have the same talent/path and I am already starting to worry about him. It seems pointless to risk it - but am I even allowed to ban him from it if I want to? I don't know...

With respect orlando why did you stick around?

Did you expect links to collected stats? phd studies? learned articles? case studies?

Most mere mortals are quite anecdotal in their day to day observations and opinions.

I agree that it would be very interesting to see the stats on injuries incurred in children's sport. I think there would be some surprises.

However I find you very patronising.

spiney

Patronising?

Anecdotes are not data. The OP is about an author who has tried to discuss injuries in school sports. She has been ignored by the RFU and subject to abuse in social media. Why?

Did you expect links to collected stats? phd studies? learned articles? case studies

Actually - yes. You can't use anecdotes to discuss risk.

Why aren't there published stats? If you think it's patronising to ask why there aren't stats but we should accept anecdotes,then that is not a good way to analyse risk.

It's like "Well I smoked 20 a day for life but I never got cancer"

I was forced to play rugby for 5 years. First week - someone got a broken leg. I've seen ambulances arrive, broken legs, arms, concussions, people twice your size charging at you, scrums collapse etc. It's an incredibly physical game and if you are not the kind of child who likes physical contact games with people who are much bigger and stronger than you, it's not "very nice".

That's my anecdotes.It's my personal experience of 5 years at a rugby playing school where the PE teacher did not give a shit about your PE experience if you were crap at rugby.

YANBU.

Children should be rolled carefully to school in padded spheres, and once there should sit quietly reading dull books.

such a silly comment ifyourawizard - don't tell me...is it 'political correctness gorn mad'?

Orlando

I think your trite summary of many posters input is really patronising. Did you play thread Bingo with all those posts?

of course anecdote is not the the same as stats for goodness sake. I am able to appreciate it is not a good way to analyse risk myself, thanks.

I would like to see proper stats myself but I am also really interested in what other posters think on the matter.

Did you play thread Bingo with all those posts

It's very predictable. If you read the article by the author, you'll see she has pointed out the responses she gets. They are exactly the same as on here. Predictable responses to criticism.

Like I said orlando why stick around?

Then again you might start getting the answers you want.

spiney

Do you think rugby should be a compulsory sport in schools (where it is already compulsory)?

If not, why not?