A non-contact version of rugby union will be implemented in schools to help the Rugby Football Union manage a "decline in participation over injury fears". A review conducted by the RFU found fewer people are playing the sport at youth level and traditional private rugby schools because of injury concerns, and the view that it is a difficult game to introduce. Contact, reduced contact and non-contact formats will be supported in schools, enabling established schools to offer alternative forms of the game in their maintained 'compulsory rugby term'. Sir Jon Coles, chief executive of national schools group United Learning - who led the review - says that from "under-15 upwards" there will be a framework for full-contact rugby to give schools a "clear way" to manage injury risk. "The RFU must now take bold steps to make sure that schools with a strong rugby tradition want to play rugby and other schools want to join in," Coles said in a RFU statement. "Our proposals for the RFU to codify nationally three formats with clear competitive structures, are designed to make sure that established schools feel able to keep rugby firmly on their timetable for all pupils." Currently in England, children can start to be introduced to contact rugby from under-nines., external The aim is to have 5,000 schools playing the non-contact (T1) form of the game in the next four years, with a large untapped market in schools that have no tradition of playing rugby found in the review. 'Flatpacks' will be provided by the RFU, containing all the equipment needed to play T1 rugby, which will also have a range of resources for staff to be able to teach the format - even if they have no experience. The goal is the introduction of a national network of 100 school rugby managers by 2027, with 40 already in place working across clusters of local schools. ... What is T1 rugby? Launched in October 2023 by World Rugby,, external the game was introduced in England this season to increase participation numbers. It is the first non-contact format to reflect the unique characteristics of rugby, so includes scrums, line-outs, kicking and a breakdown. Played on half-sized pitches and with seven-a-side teams, it contains many of the attacking and defending aspects of rugby. Each half lasts 10 minutes and once touched the attacker must present the ball, with two attackers and three defenders required at the breakdown, while seven touches are allowed to score before a turnover is forced. If an opponent rips the ball then they must pass or kick within three steps and are unable to score from the breakdown. The game uses an uncontested drop-kick to start and restart the match, and uses rolling unlimited substitutes.

If the school plays rugby fine but team spirit,loyalty and enjoyment are fostered at grass roots level.

As usual the RFU are tinkering. Rugby is a game for all but only became popular in public and grammar schools after WW1.I watch games at various levels - are you telling me that players from the SW , Midlands or N are all posh white boys? 

Happy to enter the debate if you think I'm wrong.

Giving 33 million a year to 10 profligate clubs and then spending next to nothing on a new game that is supposed to create a whole new audience. Are you kidding?

I've read the whole report (probably written with chatgpt) and they are going to create a head of schools role and employ 100 part-time managers (1 day a week). 

Follow the money. It's embarrassing.

Totally agree Mark. It seems a very sensible way to introduce more kids to the game with some of them no doubt moving to "proper rugby". The others will if nothing else keep themselves fit which can't be a bad thing. 

One of the factors in the decline of rugby as the leading football code, was mothers petitioning schools to replace it with Soccer due to a fear of injuries - that was in the 1890s.

As long as there is a pathway, and pupils who want contact can find it - either in after-school sessions or at a local club - then the more youngsters picking up an oval ball the better.

A good step forward!

We all know of - and probably remember personally - the bullying PE teacher who humiliated the 'weedy' kids who were frightened. I was always against compulsory rugby, in principle, even as a boy myself, when I found no fun in playing against those who were afraid.

However, I did find a way of introducing the game to mixed-ability 11-year-olds that most of them loved, and the rest were at least able to tolerate. I would not have liked to try it with boys of 13+.

The other side of the picture is that those boys who do love rugby, do so precisely because of the aggressive physical contact, which is not available in any other team game, as far as I know. Many enjoy boxing, which was banned in Manchester schools even as far back as 1966, but thrived in local lads' clubs.

Touch rugby, or tag, can be played with boys mixing with girls, and kids with adults. I'm sure it could be fun and great, socially, but as a 'pathway'? I'm not so sure.

It would be a shame to deny the strong and self-confident under 12s a chance to experience the real thing, is my final thought. Just enough exposure to decide whether rugby is for them and, if so, to join the school team / local club and play properly.

My abiding memory is of a class of little kids squealing with pleasure at their first experience of the game. And of the previous week's class racing round the cross-country course in the hope of being able to join in at the end.

Their answer to all of the above is a more complex version of touch (T1).