Secondary school without Rugby

[westwood2016]

Happy new year! We are looking for a high level academic and sporty secondary school WITHOUT Rugby. Our two DS are currently in a prep school where rugby is dominating their lives, which was ok until they probably both got mild concussion following a knock on the head. We have been worried about them since they started contact rugby 3 years ago, now we have seen the consequences first hand, which could potentially be desastrous. We are ready to put a stop to Rugby, although they both live and breathe for the sport, which makes it very difficult. We live in Buckinghamshire but would be ready to move within the county or closer to London, should we find a school which offers other sports as well as having a high academic level. Many thanks in advance.

I believe most secondary schools in the independent sector have adopted the RFU guildlines following a even a minor head injury, which correctly very much errs on the side of caution. There’s is extensive training of both coaches players and medical staff involved in rugby. Pre season baseline assessment of players is becoming increasing common at secondary schools.
The research says head injuries occur in 1 in 21 amateur games but by head injury they are including bruising and laceration.
You may be inerested to know that American research shows that horse riding is the biggest cause of CTE! Although I think there’s probably a much lower incidence of wearing a riding hat in the US.

I thought that quite recently there was a letter signed by a long list of doctors asking the Government not to allow rugby in state secondaries? Those doctors believed the risk of harm to children was quite significant.

You need to clearly explain to your boys why you don't want them to continue with rugby, especially as you seem to put across that they really enjoy it. And I would not discount a school just because 'Rugby is compulsory'. You seem to want a fee paying school, so on that basis, you are their customer, and any good school should listen to you. Rugby playing schools should be carefully following the RFU guidance. I wouldnt let rugby be the deal breaker above academics, pastoral care and right fit for your children. I actually thought this thread would be about not wanting a rugby playing school for a DS who had never played rugby before, was physically of a small build and not really sporty. Many of the state grammars do rugby, but conversely also have several boys of that description that I know that hate the game. However, the parents didnt give up the grammar place even though they now have miserable DS in PE lessons.

Kingston Grammar has no Rugby at all.
It is a very good selective mixed day school.
There was a rugby 'incident' at least 15+ years ago and Rugby has not been offered since.
Hampton offers football or rugby (Parents choice) like many academic independent day
Schools.

Westminster? A big choice of sports, both team and individual, but no rugby.

You can’t really plan for this. Rugby can easily be introduced into a school’s curriculum or indeed abandoned.

Plus they could easily opt to do it later on if they wanted to.

Take a look at Kimbolton: football, hockey and cricket for boys plus marathon canoeing, sailing, tennis etc. It's just achieved excellent A level results and had excellent pastoral care.

Repton School don't do rugby, it's football, hockey or cricket depending on term if I remember correctly. We all really liked the school, both sons and daughter but went elsewhere as the boys wanted to play rugby.

I doubt many/any schools will switch to rugby. Latymer Upper tried, a few years ago, to promote rugby and insist that all boys played some, but met with real resistance from a number of parents. There is an increasing body of evidence, available via brain scanning and largely from American football, that repeated concussions do leave a child at risk of long term damage.

I doubt many/any schools will switch to rugby.

I know of 2 in the last year. It’s often considered good for pulling in more middle class families.

westwood you mentioned getting in touch with touch rugby league about which schools played it and had no reply. Has a dad of a dual code player of 17, who is a national schoolboy Rugby League Champion, Year 9, and a losing finalist in year 10, with his northern comp, I wouldn't seriously hold your breath for that reply. Especially if you asked for independent schools. Rugby League is a Northern born working class off shoot of Rugby union, which allowed it players to be paid. I played RL in the late 80's/early 90's, totally amateur, we payed for our own shorts/socks, and was banned for life from playing Rugby Union at college because I played RL. Thankfully rugby league is expanding southwards, but is never played in independent schools, even it its heartlands like Hull, Leeds. Manchester. So it won't have any involvement any any schools you are likely to want/choose.
By the way as a coach, have your DS's been taught to tackle and land correctly, we as an amateur club spent at least 15-20 minutes a week on this, it truly stops many head injuries. Do they wear scrum caps, eldest who completes over 30 tackles a match and is a flanker/second row, a present RU club, won't play without them.
Also they are at prep, is school following simple rules to make game safer, in rugby league, under 9's, mainly play touch. Then until under 16 there are no contested scrums and up to under 12/13's any contact above chest/nipple height is deemed a high tackle and a penalty awarded against the offending team. Their still are injuries, two broken legs, arm and 2 broken collar bones up to now with our 2 boys, But no way would either wife or I stop either playing rugby, DS1 loves it, and the game, both codes, make him a better person
We know friends who have more injuries from football, hockey( stick becomes weapon) and running then either of ours have had from rugby, but both have had proper coaches teaching them

No rugby at all, or would you be OK with 'rugby can be given up completely after a first term, unless selected for a team'?

Because if you move to London, you could add Alleyns to the list for none at all, and Dulwich College if one term is bearable (excellent programme of other sports to opt for)

"It’s often considered good for pulling in more middle class families"

I am surprised. Princess Diana apparently wanted to avoid compulsory rugby for sons, and she was very far from alone. There are two things. Both the rugby itself, and would that all sports coaches, not just rugby, were as careful as the ones user describes, and the rugger-bugger type culture that can invade. Great for those who belong, but many parents want a school where different talents and successes are celebrated equally.

The issue with rugby is not injury per se, but the risk of concussion. Hockey and football have real and obvious injury risks. And indeed individual sports like tennis, gymnastics and golf can put real strains on growing bodies.

I am also with User on Rugby League, a much more entertaining game, and without the sense that you need to be "one of us".

Needmore I like your user name, DS1 plays RU now, we call it going to the darkside. He loves playing and it suits his style of game. we all prefer watching RL. But to be fair to both codes they are really trying to deal with head injuries. Believe me when I say we as a family have stood many times whilst games rightly are stopped for any form of injury, but especially head injuries. Players involved routinely taken off and not allowed back on.
Ds2 plays football now, with his school friends, and only in last game before Christmas, two boys clashed heads and one collided head first with opposition goalie and 4g pitch. It was only because a coach for opposition is a schoolteacher and coaches rugby, that the game was stopped. All 3 players continued playing. Wife's cousins DD's play hockey. their goalie dd is regularly hit on her head and continues.
I saw a number of Gp's last year asking football to ban young children heading balls. Don't remember masses of parents saying don't want a school which plays football.
I am a coach and still help out if needed, yes there are idiots coaching, but I think they are slowing dying out. Sadly both codes face player shortages, mainly from parents who fear injury.
But I would say rugby league and union, have taught both sons total respect, teamwork and self worth
Eldest is 17, 6ft 3 in 13.5 stones, to see him call all referees sir and say sorry to team mates when he gets penalised is impressive, also he regularly stops any fights/disagreements. I certainly don't see that too often on football pitches'
I truly think rugby is 100 times safer than when I played. Thankfully

I know a surgeon who says he has seen injuries sixteen year olds have siffered playing rugby which they'll have for life.
I don't like the culture either. They may be polite to the ref on the pitch but so many can be absolute arseholes off the pitch.

I am expecting to get flamed, and the culture problems may not be universal. Earlier in the week I took the overseas son of a friend out for lunch with my two student DC. They soon found a common topic in comparing the behaviour of their respective University's rugby clubs, with initiation ceremonies, University sanctions and penalties and so on. The last hang-out of the Neanderthals?

Aside from football I suspect all sports may be struggling with recruitment, especially of kids who don't go to private school. For a range of reasons, though I would point the finger at the early entry point for pathways. If you don't start a sport like hockey whilst at Primary school, which implies your parents encouraged you, it is often too late to rise through Club and County ranks. No room for those who only come to it via secondary school sport. And though there are a number of good and dedicated coaches out there, each sport has its idiots. And schools may not know enough to be able to spot them.

So much depends on the attitude to rugby and head injuries of the school you’re considering. I know one independent school which takes rugby seriously and an excellent record of success but also employ HCPs whose job it is to monitor pupils and implement the RFU return to play guidelines. Players are assessed before the season start and regularly assessed during the rugby season, pupils are regularly put off rugby for month following even a very very minor head injury and only allowed to play once a doctor is totally satisfied that it is safe. This applies to all pupils regardless of how good a player you are or however much pressure the pupil parents or coach is applying.
In contrast other schools play lip service to the RFU guildlines, cave in under pressure from coaches pupils or parents and let pupils return to rugby within days following a significant minor head injury.

OP it’s worth asking what an individuals schools policy is or talk directly to the medical centre (if youre considering boarding) to ascertain what their views/policy is.

I actually think that's really mean. You've allowed your boys to start playing rugby & they love it & now you want to stop. Obviously we all want to keep our children safe, but good parenting also means allowing them to flourish & take risks. All sports are dangerous.

Kimbolton doesn't play Rugby (Cambridgeshire/Bedfordshire border).

Although we chose a secondary school for my ds particularly because of Rugby which he loves. My dh believes there are more lasting injuries from football.

Not all sports are dangerous and there is no way that football is more dangerous than football.

Thanks LIZS, i would rather a school where there is no rugby at all in order to avoid them having to be reminded daily that they can't be part of it.

thanks sendsummer. Yes both of the options you mentioned are bad: they will want to do their sport they love and they will be heart broken even if they understand our decision. We really don't know how to move this forward, we just know we are worried about getting bad news one day.

Thanks happygardening, regarding your message from Mon 01-Jan-18 22:29:38:
I am not sure the jury is out on brain injuries in rugby, i am sure you are aware there are more and more studies coming out, also major organisations have backed off from purchasing rugby leagues across the world because of the raise of brain injuries with professional players. Even if schools are improving in safety, I also know that all the staffs are not always 100% trained and concussion assessments are sometimes missed, young players over played. Also, even if players and staffs are trained, when the impact on the brain has happened, there is not much that can be done appart from getting out of the pitch. Your ski remark is interesting, I suppose the difference with rugby is that you dont go down slopes to provoke contact with a tree or another skier. I suppose we are very bothered by the fact that you are expecting and encouraged to hurt the opponent in rugby, with a risk, like in ski, of brain damage. (I also read that brain injury risks are actually higher in rugby than any other sports in Professor Alyson Pollock book, Tackling Rugby). It is true that we cannot make life risk free for ourselves or children but don't you think there is a difference between an accidental injury and an expected injury for which you have trained?

thanks luckylavender. We probably made a mistake in choosing a school where rugby was compulsory. We should have made our research before. We want them to flourish and are happy for them to take risks, but some of what i see on the pitches (i recently became coach at rugby in order to be closer to my boys and understand the game/risks better) is sometimes so violent, brutal and not normal for kids of 8/10 years old. Most sports are dangerous, but don't you think the intentional contact and level of brutality makes rugby appart form most other sports? (i am not including combat sports)