'Tackling' the RFU's biggest change in 150 years

Reducing tackle height in Rugby Union might just save it from it's existential crisis, but the RFU need to treat it as the biggest change programme they've ever seen.

Last week the RFU announced that it had approved a reduction in tackle height to below the waist for the England community game to improve player safety. Coming into effect from 1 July 2023, this would include clubs, schools, colleges and universities and the change will impact age-grade and adult levels - from National One and below in the men's game and Championship One and below in the women's game.

Having spent many years in and around major transformation programmes, I found it interesting to see how this was announced and the reaction it has had in the traditional and social media (spolier alert - it's mostly negative). So what have the RFU done wrong, and what can they do to stop this being a runnaway train of misunderstanding, negative perception and unmitigated disaster of implementation?

1.Build a credible case for change

This announcement has 'spooked the horses' - 75,000 people have signed a petition against the change. This is partly because the RFU's press release did very little to describe the logical and emotional rationale for the change. A few lines on 'extensive research and law changes from [other countries]' were all that was shared. But there is so much more behind the change - it is more helpful to be open and honest in this situation.

Rugby is facing an existential crisis. Parents are thinking twice about allowing their children to play. Adults are opting out for fear of the long-term effects of numerous head impacts (brought into focus by a series of lawsuits brought by ex-pros and amateurs). Something needs to be done for the sake of the game over the longer term.

2. Create a compelling picture of the future

Even if there was an agreement that this is the right thing to do in principle, the RFU also need to be clear on what the change actually is. They have announced that 'tackle height is being set at waist height or below'. This is very much open to interpretation. My understanding is that they actually mean from the bottom of the sturnum and down (i.e. the trunk of the body, the safest place to tackle), rather than below the hips (where my thoughts went instinctively). There are also lots of sub-questions emerging around how it might affect: 2 player tackles, try line defence, driving mauls, what it means for dual registered players etc., which all need consultation, clarification and agreement.

Personally, I'd be looking to design the future state (what is going to be different) for each of the major actors involved - players, referees, coaches. parents and spectators - in quite alot of detail. This core design is what should inform policy, guidance, FAQs, training, communications etc.

3. Develop sustained capability to change

So we now know what the game might look like next season. They need to make sure they have the ability to take this idea from the board room to the playing field. Most importantly, it needs to be managed as an structured programme of change, with: robust programme / project management, rigourous governance Including an accountable individual), clear delivery projects / workstreams, strong financial control, all enabled by a change approach that maximises the likelihood of success.

The RFU have already spoken about a 'multi-format training offer'. This will take large numbers of people to design, deliver and evaluate the training. It will require investment in e-learning solutions. It needs controlled communications and engagement across the whole game.

This capability and capacity might not exist at the RFU today, and may need to be bought in from consulting organisations.

4. Write a credible plan to execute

There is a huge amount to be done to deliver this change. There needs to be a detailed plan for each project / workstream, with realistic timelines and the right number of appropriately skilled resources.

My fear is that the RFU have massively underestimated the size and complexity of this to-do list, and especially the pace at which it needs to be delivered. Given the time / cost / quality trade-offs they will have to make, I hope they have some extra cash down the back of the sofa, or they are willing to push out the implementation, otherwise the quality will suffer and it will be disaster of adoption. And that's just going to put more players, referees, coaches, parents and spectators off the game, than if they had done nothing at all.

In the 152 years that the RFU has existed, this is the biggest and most complex change they have ever proposed, impacting every stakeholder in the game (and beyond) in some way. Change in any organisation is tough, but there are ways to ease that pain. The eyes of the rugby world are on England now. I hope for the sake of the game many of us love, they see this change programme for what it is, and do it right.