Said the RFU medical services director, quoted in "Smart mouthguards to be offered to all elite players in effort to curb rising concussions" (London Times).
RFU = The Rugby Football Union... "the national governing body for rugby union in England."
I had to look it up in Wikipedia, where I was interested to see the recent history of its "Royal Patrons":
Queen Elizabeth II 1952 – December 2016
Prince Harry, Duke of Sussex December 2016 – February 2021
Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge February 2022 – Present
Here's where the RFU expressed thanks to Harry for his 5 years of service. The Queen served as their patron for 64 years before giving that to Harry. Oh, Harry!
Anyway... I hope the smart mouthguards help with the brain damage problem.
ADDED: The term "rugby union" seemed odd to me, but I see it's the actual name of the sport that we usual refer to as rugby. It is, we are told, not to be confused with "rugby league." I am still confusing them, though I am now enlightened to the level where I know you're not supposed to confuse them.
पोस्ट्स
३३ टिप्पण्या:
Althouse said...
I hope the smart mouthguards help with the brain damage problem.
You're giving Biden's handlers ideas.
Rugby Union is far superior to Rugby League. IMO.
"effort to curb rising concussions"
Couldn't read the piece. How do they know concussions are rising if they are just now getting around to precise measurement?
Seems like a good idea. (American) football might try this on helmets.
Althouse. You subscribe to the Sunday Times and therefore have access to its wonderful Sports section which features Rugby, Football, Cricket and Other. If you are confused by Rugby Union, Rugby Leagues etc I commend to you the articles on Cricket which for us in the US will read as though in Chinese.
'Anyway... I hope the smart mouthguards help with the brain damage problem.'
Which came first, the brain damage or the desire to play rugby?
Everything in Britain has a "class" component to it. Rugby historically was created in one of the true elite public schools (Britain's term for private schools) named Rugby. It has historically been an upper class sport for the elites both in participation and spectator support. Football, what we know as soccer, was for the riffraff blue collar workers. There is a wonderful British saying that sums this up perfectly, "football (soccer) is a game for gentlemen played by hooligans, and rugby union is a game for hooligans played by gentlemen."
Over the years much to the surprise of the British elite, soccer has become a world class sport surpassing Rugby in popular support. The top level of football is the Premier League in Britain. The RFU's top level has historically been the European intercountry international league where there is one team per country namely England, Wales, Scotland, Ireland, Italy and France. Complicating things have been the upstart countries of New Zealand, Australia and South Africa who in international competition invariably beat the 6 European countries. Up until recently RFU was an amateur sport and was probably the last bastion of shame amateurism but that has now changed. Prior to that A British Rugby League was set up as a professional league with teams in major cities in the UK along the lines of British soccer leagues. Rugby League had slightly different rules since the RFU opposed it and wouldn't let them copy their sport. The Rugby League tended to attract non-elite players and tended to have a lower class fan base. Most Rugby Union supporters continue to look down their noses at Rugby League as being substandard. As the standard of play has gone up in Rugby League, RFU country teams now recruit the league players but for many years league players were shunned.
To understand the class difference you just need to go to Twickenham (England's rugby stadium) on a RFU match day and listen to the posh accents. Then go to a Premier League soccer game in London and listen to the dominant accents. They'll be very different!
The term "rugby union" seemed odd to me
Similarly the actual name of the sport the English refer to as “football” and Americans refer to as “soccer” is “association football” (“soccer” derives etymologically from “association”).
One was considered more Northern and working-class, I think, but I don't care enough to find out more.
Rugby has fans in a lot of countries, but rugby-playing Americans are an annoyance on par with Ultimate Frisbee and quiddich players, IMHO.
@JAORE wrote Seems like a good idea. (American) football might try this on helmets.
They have been doing it for a while in college football, both helmets and mouthguards. The NFL also has trackers in shoulder pads that track player movements in real time. The data are recorded and analyzed after the game, in part to monitor collisions.
The basic problem was summed up by a neurologist that studies concussions. Paraphrased, he said "It doesn't matter how much padding you put on a box with a ball in it. If you drop the box, the ball will bounce around." And that's what causes concussions. What better helmets did in football was nearly eliminate skull fractures and cuts.
"Rugby is a ruffian's sport played by gentlemen, whereas soccer is a gentleman's sport played by ruffians."--Some ponce scribbler, c. mid-20th C.
I'm so old (and American) I can remember when soccer was exotic, and rugby was a distant rumor. My son played rugby his senior year of high school, and I recall how the disclosures and waivers emphasized the relative safety of the sport: the rate of serious, long term injury is less than for the other contact sports.
Alrighty then. Anyway, he had fun and no serious injury.
There is no mystery in contact and blunt force trauma, which is the leading means of committing assault with homicidal and injurious intent. As for sports, informed choice is the foundation of personal autonomy, equal and reconcilable.
Rugby Union started as a (public) school sport with relatively few spectators. No stands, like for football in US even at HS level. Rugby League started as a professional, spectator sport in the north. Rule changes to make it more fun to watch, and in practice closer to American football, although latter preceded former. 13 instead of 15 players. Something akin to downs, in that when tackled you keep possession until 6th tackle. Means less downtime, more action.
League v union. The ultimate rabbit hole and class war.
Just walk away and let them sort it out before the cries of "Tory scum" get rolling.
Long term head injury growing problem in rugby. Also in soccer, and school soccer in US increasingly discourages heading the ball.
And when concussions don't decline very much, what then?
will [sp]ring stretchers around neck help avoid soccer heading injuries?
can we use Klingon and Cardassian bio-technology to ridge up the skull?
will it still be ball bouncing in a box?
"Cricket which for us in the US will read as though in Chinese."
Indian Premier League broadcast and streaming rights just went for $6 billion for five years.
Walk don't run - that's a fairly accurate summary, but the wall of money that has gone into Association Football (as we Twickenham types call soccer) and the smartening up of grounds to appeal to the billionaire owners of teams means that spectating at Premier League games has become pretty expensive and the accents in the better seats are not so different from those at Twickenham. Also, in an effort to appear "relevant" people who previously would not have been seen dead at a soccer match, such as High Court judges, now earnestly profess enthusiasm for football, although an important class signifier is to support a relatively underdog team, not Manchester United.
I'm not surprised about the concussions however; rugby is as much a contact sport as American Football, but without the protective equipment.
Rugby league rules lead to a more interesting game from the spectator point of view. Personally, I live Rugby sevens the best. Lots of action.
No sport like Rugby or Football can be completely safe. I'm all for making it more safe, but its NEVER going to be totally safe. if you don't want to take risks, stick to croquet.
As someone mentioned above, I kind of doubt these will do any good because the main injury to the brain is, like falling off a building, the sudden stop that does the damage because the brain keeps moving and smacks the inside of the skull.
Some have argued that going back to simple leather helmets would reduce concussions because players wouldn't feel safe anymore using their heads as (basically) weapons. Not sure I go along with that, but there it is.
"It Takes Leather Balls to Play Rugby". Bumper sticker.
Narr,
The Spanish equivalent is "El rugby es un juego para caballos jugado por caballeros y el fútbol es para caballeros jugado por caballos". Caballeros is gentlemen and caballos are horses. Soccer is a sissy game played by animals and rugby is a animal game played by gentlemen. Rough translation.
The Uruguayans plane wrecked in the Andes 50 years ago consisted of Rubgy players.
rcocean, with you on Sevens.
If you want even more confusion have a look at a few clips of Aussie Rules aka AFL aka Australian football.
Best game in the world.
I've heard rugby-fanciers say that serious head injuries are rarer than in American football because the players don't have a false sense of security under the helmet and pads.
Plausible enough but maybe too neat.
Rumor has it the Academy of Motion Pictures Arts and Sciences is also interested in rolling out these instrumented mouthguards to top-flight actors, directors and comedians.
Gracias, Eric Rathmann. I have enough Spanish to get the sense--interesting nuances.
Are concussions increasing because they're actually increasing, or are they detecting them more frequently because they now have real concussion protocols in place? I have heard so many middle aged men here in Texas tell stories from their youth of being sent back onto the football field unable to properly see, or something equally awful. I assume rugby was much the same, and for years players at every level were told to "shake it off" and get back into the game. HS rugby - and football, if I'm being honest - now seems to have pretty good concussion protocols even without tech like this. Still, tech can be helpful: my younger son and his teammates wore sensor vests in practice and matches the last 2 seasons he played rugby, and the vests helped reduce injuries and gave the coaches more information to use in planning practice, determining who played what position, etc. It was also cool for the players like my son, who didn't play a flashy, try-scoring position, to see the stats generated by the sensor, and realize what a good player he was after all. Having concrete evidence that as a lock he made the most tackles, ran 5 miles, and was the second fastest player on the pitch in a match makes a not-always-that-confident teenage boy feel pretty good about himself.
On the subject of Rugby Union vs Rugby League, it's Rugby Union by a mile - although I'm definitely biased because both my boys were jumping locks. I'm sure in the UK, the fact that it's played by "gentlemen" means (or used to mean) it's for toffs, but in the US, rugby players generally take great pride in the "gentlemen" moniker. At least with the MS and HS players I knew, it set an expectation they felt they had to live up to - not to be a snob but to be a "real" gentleman. As a parent, having others support you in your quest to turn your feral children into gentlemen is always a good thing.
@Morsie 5:20PM. With you there on AFL, aka Aussie Rules. Sitting here in Hong Kong, I’ve been watching the premiership, every weekend. It’s a fabulous, athletic, fast-flowing game.
No one has even mentioned GAA. The best football of all.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा