BMJ 2006;332:1281 (27 May), doi:10.1136/bmj.332.7552.1281
reviews
Personal views
Rugby union should ban contested scrums
For 30 years I have been an honorary medical officer to Nottingham Rugby Football Club. In this time I have attended about 25 games a season and on many occasions have been the "duty doctor," either officially or unofficially. In that time four players have been removed from the field of play at Nottingham with serious neck injuries. Three of the injuries were associated with scrums, and one occurred in a tackle. All four players had initial sensory and motor impairment. Two recovered within minutes or hours; one recovered in days; and one became paraplegic. Three needed an operation for fracture. Another three Nottingham players injured their necks in scrums while playing away from home and needed to be removed from the pitch. One player needed an operation and is paraplegic. Therefore I have experience of seven serious spinal cord injuries, five of which have required an operation. Two of the players are wheelchair dependent. Six of the seven injuries were related to the scrum, and in all cases the scrums were of the contested type—in which each set of forwards tries to shove the opponents off the ball—and that is more dangerous than the uncontested scrum, in which the players are not allowed to push their opponents away from the spot where the scrum occurs.
| The continuing risk of injury cannot be accepted
|
A recent Australian study looked at acute spinal cord injuries among players of rugby union, rugby league, Australian rules football, and soccer from 1997 to 2002 (Medical Journal of Australia 2005;182: 561-4[Web of Science][Medline]). These data were compared with those from a 1986-1996 survey. Fifty two players (45 men and seven schoolboys) suffered acute spinal cord injuries over the study period. The average annual incidence of such injuries per 100 000 players was 3.2 for rugby union, 1.5 for rugby league, 0.5 for Australian rules, and 0.2 for soccer. Although the incidence had changed little since the earlier survey, there was a trend towards less severe injuries in rugby union and league but not in Australian rules. No scrum injuries have occurred in rugby league in Australia since 1996, when contested scrums stopped being allowed. Seven injuries occurred in rugby union scrums, six at the moment of engagement with the opposing team. Overall 39% of injured players became permanently dependent on a wheelchair. The Australian authors also noted that the cost of care of a quadriplegic young man over his lifetime is enormous. For a 19 year old with C5 quadriplegia resulting from a road traffic crash in 2002 the payout would be between $A7m (£3m; 
4.2m; $5.4m) and $A9m. They say that under the existing insurance cover for rugby union players, however, the maximum award for quadriplegia is $A300 000. The study concludes that the laws of scrum engagement in rugby union and the amount of insurance cover for injured players are grossly inadequate.
In Britain acute spinal cord injuries in rugby union continue to occur, typically associated with scrums at the moment of engagement. Wheelchair dependency among those injured is common, and insurance is inadequate. The rugby football union is known to be concerned about the high level of injury, severity, and insurance.
Rugby union became professional in 1995; players are paid to play and train. Professional rugby union is now often described as an industry. It may be subject to the Health and Safety at Work Act (1974), which requires working practices that are safe and do not put workers at risk. In the under 19 game contested scrums are not allowed.
The authors of the 2005 Australian paper noted: "In our opinion there has been a gradual return to a forceful scrum engagement. While this may allow a tactical advantage for a team, it increases the risk of engagement injury. In our present study six of the seven scrum injuries occurred at engagement. We recall the 1988 warning of Burry and Calcinai [BMJ 1988;296: 149-50
In Britain such a case went to court in 2002: that of Richard Vowles of the Llanharan second XV against the Welsh Rugby Union. Vowles had suffered a severe injury in a game in January 1998 that left him paralysed when the players in the scrum failed to engage properly. The court ordered the union to compensate Vowles.
The incidents involving the two young Nottingham players who are now wheelchair dependent have caused me to change my opinion on contested scrums. The consequences of injury are so great that the continuing risk of injury cannot be accepted.
Players now deserve uncontested scrums in rugby union. In rugby league in Australia no acute spinal cord injuries have occurred since the scrum stopped being contested. Rugby union should follow this example. Rugby union outlawed the "flying wedge" and the "cavalry charge" as they are potentially dangerous. It should now also outlaw the contested scrum.
James B Bourke, consultant general surgeon
University Hospital, Queen's Medical Centre, Nottingham jandabourke20vc{at}aol.com
CiteULike 
Complore 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us 
Digg 
Reddit 
StumbleUpon 
Technorati What's this?
Relevant Articles
- Effect of nationwide injury prevention programme on serious spinal injuries in New Zealand rugby union: ecological study
- Kenneth L Quarrie, Simon M Gianotti, Will G Hopkins, and Patria A Hume
BMJ 2007 334: 1150.[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
- Rugby union should ban contested scrums: Scrums are contested in junior rugby
- Dylan M Wilson
BMJ 2006 332: 1391.[Extract] [Full Text] [PDF]
- Rugby union should ban contested scrums: Technique is important
- Robert W Standfield
BMJ 2006 332: 1391.[Extract] [Full Text]
- Rugby union should ban contested scrums: Reality check is needed
- Malcolm Cameron
BMJ 2006 332: 1391.[Extract] [Full Text]
- Rugby union should ban contested scrums: Engage, don't ban
- John J Macfarlane
BMJ 2006 332: 1391-1392.[Extract] [Full Text]
This article has been cited by other articles:
-
Quarrie, K. L, Gianotti, S. M, Hopkins, W. G, Hume, P. A
(2007). Effect of nationwide injury prevention programme on serious spinal injuries in New Zealand rugby union: ecological study. BMJ
334: 1150-1150
[Abstract] [Full text] -
Wilson, D. M
(2006). Rugby union should ban contested scrums: Scrums are contested in junior rugby.. BMJ
332: 1391-1391
[Full text] -
Standfield, R. W
(2006). Rugby union should ban contested scrums: Technique is important.. BMJ
332: 1391-1391
[Full text] -
Cameron, M.
(2006). Rugby union should ban contested scrums: Reality check is needed.. BMJ
332: 1391-1391
[Full text] -
Macfarlane, J. J
(2006). Rugby union should ban contested scrums: Engage, don't ban.. BMJ
332: 1391-1392
[Full text]
Rapid Responses:
Read all Rapid Responses
- Junior Rugby - Scrums ARE contested
- Dylan M Wilson
bmj.com, 25 May 2006 [Full text] - Personal experience
- Robert W Standfield
bmj.com, 26 May 2006 [Full text] - Is the scrum really the area of greatest danger?
- Roy A Farrant
bmj.com, 26 May 2006 [Full text] - Re: Junior Rugby - Scrums ARE contested
- Richard A R Cantelo
bmj.com, 26 May 2006 [Full text] - A sense of perspective is required
- Mark R Savage
bmj.com, 26 May 2006 [Full text] - What is the risk of NOT having scrums?
- Matthew L Howse
bmj.com, 26 May 2006 [Full text] - Engagement or Contest ?
- Michael A McDowall
bmj.com, 26 May 2006 [Full text] - Stop scrummaging - reality check needed!
- Malcolm Cameron
bmj.com, 26 May 2006 [Full text] - Players are aware of the risks they take
- Christopher T P Hurrell
bmj.com, 27 May 2006 [Full text] - Safety paramount
- Chris J Pickering
bmj.com, 27 May 2006 [Full text] - So ... Rugby Union is now a 'dangerous sport'?
- Tim Wilbraham
bmj.com, 27 May 2006 [Full text] - Contested Scrum, Not the Greatest Risk to Cervical Spine Injury
- Alan T Rankin
bmj.com, 27 May 2006 [Full text] - Engage not ban
- John J Macfarlane
bmj.com, 27 May 2006 [Full text] - To Push or not to Push- how do I Collapse Thee
- Simon C West
bmj.com, 28 May 2006 [Full text] - Re. Rugby Union Should Ban Contested Scrums BMJ 27th May 2006 page 1281
- I. Luc Evans
bmj.com, 28 May 2006 [Full text] - Rugby union should not ban contested scrums
- David M Bunting
bmj.com, 30 May 2006 [Full text] - Consider the evidence
- Philip H Brown
bmj.com, 31 May 2006 [Full text] - Tackle not scrum.
- Jonathan R Hanson
bmj.com, 31 May 2006 [Full text] - Rules of Engagement
- Ian Verber
bmj.com, 1 Jun 2006 [Full text] - S.O.S - Save our scrums
- DAVID G SAMUEL
bmj.com, 2 Jun 2006 [Full text] - Banning of Scrums? Whatever next?!
- Robert J Macdonald
bmj.com, 2 Jun 2006 [Full text] - Rugby union and contested scrums
- Edward Grayson
bmj.com, 5 Jun 2006 [Full text] - Lack of perspective
- Abdul Zubairu
bmj.com, 6 Jun 2006 [Full text] - Spinal Cord Injuries and the Scrum in Rugby Union
- Gordon J. McArthur
bmj.com, 7 Jun 2006 [Full text] - No evidence to ban contested rugby scrums.
- Paul d Hamilton, et al.
bmj.com, 10 Jun 2006 [Full text]
This Article
-
Extract
- Respond to this article
- Read responses to this article
- Alert me when this article is cited
- Alert me when responses are posted
- Alert me when a correction is posted
- View citation map
Services
- Email this article to a friend
- Find similar articles in BMJ
- Add article to my folders
- Download to citation manager
- Request Permissions
Citing Articles
Google Scholar
PubMed
Related Content
Bookmark with
What's new
Latest blogs
Find BMJ on:
Services
Tools
Online poll
Resources
Rapid responses for this article
Print issues
