Emergency Medicine Research in Sheffield Group, School of Health and Related Research, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UNITED KINGDOM.
Neural Systems Group, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Charlestown, MA.
Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2022 Sep 1;54(9):1560-1571. doi: 10.1249/MSS.0000000000002931. Epub 2022 Apr 8.
This study aimed to investigate how four types of successfully executed, legal front-on, one-on-one torso tackles influence the tacklers' and ball carriers' inertial head kinematics.
A total of 455 successful front-on, one-on-one torso tackle trials completed by 15 rugby code players using three-dimensional motion capture were recorded. Tackles differed with respects to the height of the contact point on the ball carrier's torso. A series of mixed general linear models were conducted.
The tackler sustained the highest peak resultant linear ( P < 0.001) and angular ( P < 0.01) head accelerations when contacting the lower torso to execute a "dominant" tackle compared with mid or upper torso, although these latter tackle types had the lowest ball carrier inertial head kinematics. When executing a "smother" tackle technique, a significant decrease in peak resultant linear head acceleration was observed with a vertical "pop" then lock action used, compared with the traditional upper torso tackling technique ( P < 0.001).
Modifying the tackler's engagement with a ball carrier's torso, with respect to height and technical execution, alters the inertial head kinematics of the tackler and the ball carrier. The traditional thinking about optimal tackle technique, as instructed, may need to be reevaluated, with the midtorso being a potential alternative target contact height, whereas changes in tackle execution may be relatively protective for tacklers when executing either a dominant or smother tackle. This study provides critical scientific evidence to underpin revised coaching tackling technique interventions that might enhance player safety. Tackles in which the tackler contacts the ball carrier around the midtorso region, rather than lower torso, produce the lowest acceleration and thus may contribute to reducing head injury risk for the tackler.
本研究旨在探讨四种成功执行的、合法的正面一对一躯干接触方式如何影响触球者和持球者的惯性头部运动学。
记录了 15 名橄榄球运动员使用三维运动捕捉完成的 455 次成功的正面一对一躯干接触。触球的位置不同，接触点的高度也不同。进行了一系列混合广义线性模型分析。
与接触中胸或上胸执行“主导”触球相比，触球者在接触球手的下胸执行“强势”触球时，头部承受的最大线性（P < 0.001）和角加速度（P < 0.01）最高，尽管后两种触球类型的球手惯性头部运动学最低。在执行“压制”触球技术时，与传统的上胸触球技术相比，使用垂直“弹出”然后锁定动作时，触球者的峰值线性头部加速度显著降低（P < 0.001）。
改变触球者与球手躯干的接触高度和技术执行方式会改变触球者和球手的惯性头部运动学。关于最佳触球技术的传统思维可能需要重新评估，中胸可能是潜在的替代目标接触高度，而触球技术的改变可能在执行强势或压制触球时对触球者具有相对的保护作用。本研究为修订教练触球技术干预措施提供了关键的科学证据，这可能会提高球员的安全性。触球者在中胸区域而不是下胸区域接触球手的触球方式产生的加速度最低，因此可能有助于降低触球者头部受伤的风险。
