Implicit motor learning strategies have been shown to have benefits when learning a new skill, because they encourage users to accumulate little to no declarative knowledge about the motor task. The aim of this thesis was to investigate whether a specific implicit motor learning approach, learning by analogy, could help children perform safer rugby tackles and potentially reduce the risk of concussions. Chapter One is a review of current literature and discusses concussions, concussions in rugby, various implicit motor learning theories, and current research. Chapter Two represents the process in which focus groups were held with small groups of people who all had varying experience of rugby tackling. The focus groups were designed to supply us with knowledge, common ideas and themes, and the fundamentals of a safe rugby tackling, to then help us develop an analogy or analogies that encompassed most of what defines a safe rugby tackle. The first challenge was to identify the important fundamentals in a rugby tackle. From the focus group, the fundamentals commonly mentioned were ‘same foot same shoulder’, ‘eyes focused upward’, ‘head to the side’, ‘cheek to cheek’, and ‘strong wrap’. Animals were a common theme mentioned among all groups, highlighting the importance of the use of animals when developing analogies for children. Based on this information, we were able to come up with two analogies “tackle like a raging bull” (analogy 1) and “tackle like an angry bear hugging a pillow” (analogy 2). Chapter Three details a pilot study that was conducted on 11-year-old rugby playing children. The pilot study was designed to test the two analogies that were developed in Chapter Two. All participants underwent two consecutive trials in a baseline control condition without receiving any instructions. Subsequently, half of the participants engaged in two trials using analogy 1, while the other group conducted two trials using analogy 2. The groups then swapped and completed the remaining analogy condition. The baseline control condition had the highest score across most of the tackling fundamentals, albeit not significantly different from either analogy 1 or analogy 2. Analogy 2 closely mirrored the control condition in most aspects. Notably, the 'dip' (cheek to cheek) aspect in analogy 2 scored marginally lower than the control, while 'same foot same shoulder' obtained a diminished score. However, analogy 2 exhibited superior performance in the wrapping technique, displaying similarities in other aspects as well. Conversely, the 'same foot same shoulder' fundamental received relatively low scores across all conditions. This informs us that more research is required to obtain conclusive data, with a larger participant group, stronger analysis methods, addressing the impracticality of specific fundamentals when tackling a bag versus a human, and developing analogy 2 “tackle like an angry bear hugging a pillow” further to include the aspects it scored low on.