# Tackle Height and Tackle Success—An Analysis of 52,204 Tackle Events

## TL;DR

This study analyzed 52,204 rugby tackles to determine how contact height and tackle type affect tackle success across different age and skill levels.

## Contribution

The study provides new insights into tackle effectiveness by analyzing large-scale data across multiple playing levels and tackle types.

## Key findings

- At senior levels, contacting the shoulder or mid-torso had similar probabilities of tackle success.
- Active shoulder tackles had the highest success rate across all playing levels and contact heights.
- Arm tackles had the lowest probability of success compared to other tackle types.

## Abstract

To compare the probability of tackle success (the tackler preventing the ball‐carrier and ball from progressing towards the tackler try‐line) when contacting the ball‐carrier at different heights (shoulder, mid‐torso and legs) for different types of tackles (active, passive, smother and arm) while accounting for other tackler situational factors within seven playing levels. Video footage of 271 male rugby union matches were analysed across seven playing groups (Under [U] 12, n = 25 matches; U14, n = 35; U16, n = 39; U18 Amateur n = 39; U18 Elite n = 38; Senior Amateur, n = 40 and Senior Elite, n = 50) across England, New Zealand, South Africa, Portugal and USA (a total of 51,106 tackles). A multi‐level logistic regression model with tackle success as the outcome variable and first point of contact and type of tackle as the explanatory variables were computed. Included in the model as cofounders were the situational variables tackle direction, tackle sequence, number of players in the tackle and attacker intention. Post‐estimation marginal effects were used to calculate the probabilities (expressed as a percentage %) of tackle success for each interaction between tackle type (active shoulder, smother, passive shoulder and arm) and the first point of contact (shoulder, mid‐torso and legs). The probability of tackle success in relation to where the ball‐carrier is contacted varied by tackle type and within each age group. The probabilities (Pr) for contacting the shoulder versus mid‐torso at the senior levels (elite and amateur) did not differ in relation to tackle success (for instance, for active shoulder tackles within senior elite; shoulder Pr 86% 95% CI 82–89 and mid‐torso Pr 82% 95% CI 77–86), whereas at the junior levels, contacting the shoulder had a higher probability than other points of contact. Active shoulder tackles had the highest probability of tackle success across the different playing levels across the different contact heights, whereas arm tackles had the lowest probability (for instance, for mid‐torso tackles within senior elite, active Pr 82% 95% CI 77–86 vs. arm Pr 69% 95% CI 64–75). Coaches and practitioners can use this information to improve tackle training design and planning within the different age groups and facilitate player development.

From a performance perspective, contacting the shoulder versus mid‐torso at the senior levels (elite and amateur) made no difference in tackle outcomes.At the junior levels, there was a small advantage for contacting the shoulder, which likely relates to weaker tackling technique and attempts to prevent offloads.Active shoulder tackles had the highest probability of tackle success across all playing levels, irrespective of contact height, whereas arm tackles had the lowest probability.The probability of tackle success in relation to where the ball‐carrier is contacted varied by tackle type and within each age group, highlighting that there are different approaches to ‘win’ the tackle contest.

From a performance perspective, contacting the shoulder versus mid‐torso at the senior levels (elite and amateur) made no difference in tackle outcomes.

At the junior levels, there was a small advantage for contacting the shoulder, which likely relates to weaker tackling technique and attempts to prevent offloads.

Active shoulder tackles had the highest probability of tackle success across all playing levels, irrespective of contact height, whereas arm tackles had the lowest probability.

The probability of tackle success in relation to where the ball‐carrier is contacted varied by tackle type and within each age group, highlighting that there are different approaches to ‘win’ the tackle contest.