The application of match‐event and instrumented mouthguard data to inform match limits: An example using rugby union Premiership and rugby league Super League data from England

The study aimed to illustrate how contact (from match-event data) and head acceleration event (HAE) (from instrumented mouthguard [iMG]) data can be combined to inform match limits within rugby. Match-event data from one rugby union and rugby league season, including all competitive matches involving players from the English Premiership and Super League, were used. Playing exposure was summarised as full game equivalents (FGE; total minutes played/80). Expected contact and HAE exposures at arbitrary thresholds were estimated using match-event and iMG data. Generalised linear models were used to identify differences in contact and HAE exposure per FGE. For 30 FGEs, forwards had greater contact than backs in rugby union (n = 1272 vs. 618) and league (n = 1569 vs. 706). As HAE magnitude increased, the differences between positional groups decreased (e.g., rugby union; n = 34 and 22 HAE >40 g for forwards and backs playing 30 FGEs). Currently, only a relatively small proportion of rugby union (2.5%) and league (7.3%) players exceeded 25 FGEs. Estimating contact and HAEs per FGE allows policymakers to prospectively plan and model estimated overall and position-specific loads over a season and longer term. Reducing FGE limits by a small amount would currently only affect contact and HAE exposure for a small proportion of players who complete the most minutes. This may be beneficial for this cohort but is not an effective HAE and contact exposure reduction strategy at a population level, which requires individual player management. Given the positional differences, FGE limits should exist to manage appropriate HAE and contact exposure.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
European Journal of Sport Science
Published
2024-09-21
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsc.12188
Citations
11
Primary Topic
Sports injuries and prevention
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
5.26
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

The application of match‐event and instrumented mouthguard data to inform match limits: An example using rugby union Premiership and rugby league Super League data from England

Ross Tucker, James Tooby, Gregory J. Tierney, Éanna Cian Falvey et al.
11 citations
European Journal of Sport Science
Sports injuries and prevention
5.26
article

The application of match‐event and instrumented mouthguard data to inform match limits: An example using rugby union Premiership and rugby league Super League data from England

Ross Tucker, James Tooby, Gregory J. Tierney, Éanna Cian Falvey, Matt Cross, David Allan, Keith Stokes, Lindsay Toyah Starling, Cameron Owen, Simon P T Kemp, Thomas Sawczuk, Gregory Roe, Ben Jones
article en
11 citations

Abstract

The study aimed to illustrate how contact (from match-event data) and head acceleration event (HAE) (from instrumented mouthguard [iMG]) data can be combined to inform match limits within rugby. Match-event data from one rugby union and rugby league season, including all competitive matches involving players from the English Premiership and Super League, were used. Playing exposure was summarised as full game equivalents (FGE; total minutes played/80). Expected contact and HAE exposures at arbitrary thresholds were estimated using match-event and iMG data. Generalised linear models were used to identify differences in contact and HAE exposure per FGE. For 30 FGEs, forwards had greater contact than backs in rugby union (n = 1272 vs. 618) and league (n = 1569 vs. 706). As HAE magnitude increased, the differences between positional groups decreased (e.g., rugby union; n = 34 and 22 HAE >40 g for forwards and backs playing 30 FGEs). Currently, only a relatively small proportion of rugby union (2.5%) and league (7.3%) players exceeded 25 FGEs. Estimating contact and HAEs per FGE allows policymakers to prospectively plan and model estimated overall and position-specific loads over a season and longer term. Reducing FGE limits by a small amount would currently only affect contact and HAE exposure for a small proportion of players who complete the most minutes. This may be beneficial for this cohort but is not an effective HAE and contact exposure reduction strategy at a population level, which requires individual player management. Given the positional differences, FGE limits should exist to manage appropriate HAE and contact exposure.

European Journal of Sport ScienceVol. 24(11)
University of Ulster (GB), University of Cape Town (ZA), Stellenbosch University (ZA), University College Cork (IE), The Football Association (GB), London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine (GB), World Rugby (IE), University of Bath (GB), Leeds Beckett University (GB), Australian Catholic University (AU)
Openalex Percentile: Top 4%
Sports injuries and prevention
5.26
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.