Smart Mouthguards

[molman]

Originally posted in: Super Rugby Round One: Western Force vs Hurricanes

I saw mention of these in the lead up to SuperRugby starting, but are every team now wearing these with the Dr's at every game having the receivers? Surely their introduction doesn't remove the need for the Dr's to be using all available evidence such as clear visuals of head on head collisions.

I'd also be curious what the protocols are for a player just shoving a non-smart mouthguard into their mouth of failing to charge the smart one. Are there any repercussions. This is before my questions about the actual technologies reliability with things like transmission range etc.

Anyway, don't want to gunk up this match thread, but their introduction (or trail) does open some questions. I do hope they end up working and the guessing is taken out of this aspect of the sport, but it's got to frustrating for the players who don't feel like they've had a head impact event.

---

@Wilson reply

I think every team will be, but not necessarily this round. I know for the Australian sides RUPA struck a deal where players had to have two weeks minimum with the new mouthguards to get used to them before they'd have to wear them, and for the at least the Reds they only arrived a week ago:

Teething issue: Smart mouthguards the new weapon in concussion battle, but there’s a catch

High-tech mouthguards that cost up to $500 and detect dangerous levels of force to the head during tackles are compulsory for Super Rugby players this year.

www.smh.com.au

Not sure what the situation is for Kiwi sides, but I imagine it is something similar. The mouthguards were clearly in use for the Crusaders Chiefs game, but that's the only one I noticed mouthguard triggered reviews in. Rollout definitely leaves something to be desired here.

As far as not wearing one goes you're supposed to get a medical exemption, otherwise the HIA protocols are stricter than they have been previously:

 

[molman]

@Wilson

Thanks for the reply. I was curious as I also only really noticed their impact in the Crusaders/Chiefs game which struck me as odd. It's interesting to note that the players will not have to wear them during all training also.

Are there details on the specific technology provider and will this be the same used across all the Rugby nations?

 

[Strewthcobber]

Ross Tucker has put out lots of info on the smart mouthguards, both on X/Twitter and his podcast real science of sport, if anyone is interested in getting more info from someone very close to the project

 

[Strewthcobber]

As I understand it, there is no real change to the HIA protocol, and the mouthguards don't diagnose a concussion.

They are just used as another indicator that someone may need to enter the HIA protocol - a Criteria 2 case

 

[Dismal Pillock]

As I said in the match thread, if they're going to randomly ping people off for HIA's at crucial junctures of the match, then players are just going to slyly tuck the stupid things in their socks in the last 10 mins.

Also, Blues players mouthguards should come equipped with cyanide capsules in case they are losing too badly to the Cantabs and want to take the honourable way out.

 

[Strewthcobber]

@Wilson

Thanks for the reply. I was curious as I also only really noticed their impact in the Crusaders/Chiefs game which struck me as odd. It's interesting to note that the players will not have to wear them during all training also.

Are there details on the specific technology provider and will this be the same used across all the Rugby nations?

Only one supplier at the moment

OPRO Smart Mouthguards

www.opro.com

 

[dru]

Also, Blues players mouthguards should come equipped with cyanide capsules in case they are losing too badly to the Cantabs and want to take the honourable way out.

Only one supplier at the moment

Sounds like an opportunity for Gunston inc. I claim the rights to the manual control feature in that last 10.

 

[molman]

Only one supplier at the moment

OPRO Smart Mouthguards

www.opro.com

I haven't come across Opro before. I've heard of Pervent Biometrics and HitIQ, but not Opro.

Considering most of these things are likely using off the shelf sensors similar to those found mobile phones and other consumer products, I'm assuming most of the differentiation is in the algorithms used to filter out the metrics (positive incidents or not) and/or the usability side of things (monitoring consoles/system etc).

Probably a shame there is no standard as I can see a future of varying results based on brand and/or system, but then I guess it's hard to create some shareholder value if you don't have some secret sauce your selling.

 

[Strewthcobber]

@Wilson

Thanks for the reply. I was curious as I also only really noticed their impact in the Crusaders/Chiefs game which struck me as odd.

I watched a replay looking out for what could have triggered ALB who was subbed at around 75min.

I reckon it was probably a tackle made at 73:41 on the match clock. Scott Barrett came in as a third tackler and kind of ran into ALBs head, who was ducked and tied up in the tackle, but still on his feet.

It's hard to tell from the angle we got, and doesn't seem to have too much damage done, but I think there probably was head contact, and obviously triggered some significant forces.

Would not have got a second look last year.

Edit - interesting that a genuine high tackle at 74:50 off the kick-off was seen by the ref "no foul play", the player got up very slowly but didn't trigger a Hia

 

[molman]

Ross Tucker has put out lots of info on the smart mouthguards, both on X/Twitter and his podcast real science of sport, if anyone is interested in getting more info from someone very close to the project

Thanks for the recommendation. Found this episode here which might be one you're referring to?

Rugby's New High-Tech Mouthguards: How They Work And Why? | The Real Science of Sport Podcast

New tech could help identify potential head injuries during the game

shows.acast.com

 

[molman]

I watched a replay looking out for what could have triggered ALB who was subbed at around 75min.

I reckon it was probably a tackle made at 73:41 on the match clock. Scott Barrett came in as a third tackler and kind of ran into ALBs head, who was ducked and tied up in the tackle, but still on his feet.

It's hard to tell from the angle we got, and doesn't seem to have too much damage done, but I think there probably was head contact, and obviously triggered some significant forces.

Would not have got a second look last year.

Edit - interesting that a genuine high tackle at 74:50 off the kick-off was seen by the ref "no foul play", but didn't trigger a Hia

It will be interesting what incidents these might turn up that haven't historically been captured through exisiting protocols like visual checks. It's a tricky line for some of these contacts sports where the presence of this data could illuminate risks that they haven't historically had to contend with - i.e like the ALB case where it would have been carry on in the past.

I'm curious where other sports like Rugby League/AFL are with these technologies.

 

[Jimmy_Crouch]

As I said in the match thread, if they're going to randomly ping people off for HIA's at crucial junctures of the match, then players are just going to slyly tuck the stupid things in their socks in the last 10 mins.

Didnt Ardie get done a year or two ago for not wearing one? I remember at the time there was chat that it was a requirement for all players as per the NZ CBA.

 

[Strewthcobber]

Bit more info on the tech from Prof Ross Tucker's Twitter. There have been 9000 head accelerations measured though 9 matches in the six nations so far with 7 alerts triggered.

So around 1 in every 1200 accelerations or less than 0.01% being flagged.

I saw some reports that there were 8 in the first round of Super Rugby

 

[Jimmy_Crouch]

Bit more info on the tech from Prof Ross Tucker's Twitter. There have been 9000 head accelerations measured though 9 matches in the six nations so far with 7 alerts triggered.

So around 1 in every 1200 accelerations or less than 0.01% being flagged.

I saw some reports that there were 8 in the first round of Super Rugby

We accelerate more in the south

 

[dillyboy]

Didnt Ardie get done a year or two ago for not wearing one? I remember at the time there was chat that it was a requirement for all players as per the NZ CBA.

I don't think Thor wears one either - I'm sure I've heard the commentators mention it....

 

[Ignoto]

Didnt Ardie get done a year or two ago for not wearing one? I remember at the time there was chat that it was a requirement for all players as per the NZ CBA.

Dylan Pietsch didn't appear to be wearing one. When he scored that try after bounced off Hunter, he was smiling on the big screen and couldn't see anything in his mouth.

I'd say just from anecdotal evidence there's at least 20% of players not wearing a mouthguard in super rugby.

 

[Strewthcobber]

Looking forward to the inevitable commentary outrage when the first player not wearing a mouth guard is removed from the game and can't come back on as only players wearing IMG are eligible for HIA1 assessment

 

[Rob42]

I've always been shocked how many players don't wear a mouthguard, and Tupou chews gum on the field!! But I thought the requirement was now that all would have to wear one, once each team has had access to them for two weeks, so we will see some changes on the field in the next week or two.

 

[Dan54]

I noticed it mainly because of the Chiefs/Crusaders game, and it seem ALB and Strange were called off because of technical issue(ie think bluetooth dropped out). They can't take them out as they stop reading and that's immediate call off anyway. But it's used in 6Ns etc and I think we have to just ride out the teething (yep I know teeth?) problems, but like anything new in the game it's the end of the world for some.

 

[Strewthcobber]

I've always been shocked how many players don't wear a mouthguard, and Tupou chews gum on the field!! But I thought the requirement was now that all would have to wear one, once each team has had access to them for two weeks, so we will see some changes on the field in the next week or two.

You don't have to wear one, but if you don't you can't access the HIA1 assessment, meaning if the doctor sees you taking a hit and pulls you off that's it, you can't come back on