Bold claim: tackling higher than the sternum is being phased out, with a 2026 proposal making this the standard for the Under-20 World Championship in Georgia. The plan would ban tackles above the chest as the sport inches toward a broader limit on tackle height across the top levels.
In recent seasons, several rugby communities—spanning 11 countries—have already lowered the legal tackle height from the shoulder to the sternum. Analysis of nearly 150,000 tackles since that shift shows mixed yet generally positive trends: fewer concussions in some areas, and players adjusting by dropping their body height during contact.
World Rugby's leadership emphasizes that player welfare sits at the core of their mission. Chairman Brett Robinson stated that the organization will thoroughly explore every option to make rugby safer while preserving the elements that define the sport. He underscored the dual aim of protecting players and maintaining the excitement of rugby, especially in the Under-20 Championship, as the proposed trial proceeds.
The proposed lower tackle height would not apply in certain situations, including when an attacking player picks and goes around a breakdown or at the base of a scrum, or while a try is being scored. Ball carriers would face penalties if they initiate contact with the head, which would complicate making a legal tackle in those scenarios. If a tackler makes contact above the sternum but below the head, play would continue with the attacking team gaining an advantage.
Additionally, the plan includes rolling the new rule out to community rugby worldwide starting July 1.
Early feedback from England and France suggested the rule change could open up the game, but World Rugby’s broader analysis across 11 unions indicated only modest shifts in offloads, kicking patterns, and overall flow.
Jonathan Webb, World Rugby vice-chair and former England full-back, argued that if the Under-20 trial yields strong metrics and positive outcomes, the next step could be a full rollout to the elite game. He cautioned that any all-encompassing change would be highly complex—rugby today is faster, under close scrutiny, and places heavy demands on players and referees alike. Webb posed the key question: should the law change be adopted universally, or not at all? Would you side with a comprehensive implementation or prefer cautious, staged experimentation? Where do you stand on this potential shift in the sport’s safety and pace?
