We can’t be slave to insurance, talk about the tail wagging the dog.

There must be alternatives to provide some funds for insurance purposes, and contracts which allow for some risk etc - we need to think laterally.

Whilst this doesn't allay my concerns, I've a couple of mates who've been playing union with restricted height tackles. After a few games with lots of pens & a few cards tacklers changed their approach. Year and a half on, it's pretty much a forgotten issue now, so they tell me.
Though I do understand all the "buts".

With hindsight, the game should have brought these rules into the junior leagues 15 years ago when the talk around head impacts in contact sports started, so that we'd now have a generation of players and coaches who had already adapted to the new tackle height.
I think it will be chaotic for a while, but the refs will become more lenient over time, as Clearwing mentioned. That's basically what happened with the current rules for most of the games history. Any borderline tackle was usually let go.

Maybe the new rules will work in time. Are the same rules being adopted in Australia?

Quote: KaeruJim "Maybe the new rules will work in time. Are the same rules being adopted in Australia?'" I think they've introduced them in the junior grades, u15 and below. https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.theg ... id-us-push

Quote: KaeruJim "Maybe the new rules will work in time. Are the same rules being adopted in Australia?'" I think they've introduced them in the junior grades, u15 and below. https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.theg ... id-us-push

Again I’m firmly in the camp of reasonable reduction of risk in training and games, and healthy return-to-play protocols.

We have to decide what level of risk is acceptable and understand you simply cannot design all risk out of a contact sport. Maybe it will be possible to find a balance but I haven’t seen it so far.