European Club Rugby
-
@mariner4life said in NH club rugby:
See, we're coming at this from 2 different angles. My experience, and the way I was taught to tackle says that's not high as the ball runner has ducked in to it. I have made hundreds of similar tackles, in open play and most especially next to the ruck. A taller player will find it very very difficult to get under a player of that height who is also ducking (and open himself up to a greater risk of a knee to the temple, a concussion, and the very thing we have tried to avoid).
Ducking his head has gained him a massive advantage, and that's a poor outcome
You were taught it's ok to tackle high if you're tall or the other guy isn't completely upright? Well fuck, now I see the problem. Is it ok to tackle high if I jump and the other guy doesn't?
-
@taniwharugby Yeah, I'd agree TR but this then means he is not then paying due care and attention to the collision (under the current guidelines). So he's almost automatically a goner. Similar to the Daly red v Argentina. Can't really argue with either..
Whether that's right or wrong is another matter.
@Catogrande so much about rugby is instinct and decisions made at the last split second or as late as possible, and IMO right to the point where he did leap he had done everything right. I don't believe for a second his actions were deliberate or with any intent, all down to a decision probably 1/10th of a second too late and he ends up with a red card....harsh IMO
It is ones where they are so close like this that will become controversial rather than some of the dumb shit ones we see where players get it very wrong, see Naholo v Wales, and iirc the landing of the Welshman probably saved Naholo, which IMO is wrong.
Although I guess you do get a different sentence for attempted murder than actual murder don't you....
-
@Bones you are being a dick now
@mariner4life said in NH club rugby:
@Bones you are being a dick now
You just intimated a high tackle is ok if you're a taller player and don't have the opportunity to get lower. That's like saying a late tackle is ok if you're a slower player. And I'm being a dick?
-
TBF on the Saracens one, Barrington and/or Barritt would have been in trouble for that one if it had occurred last year. It was pretty ugly
-
@mariner4life said in NH club rugby:
@Bones you are being a dick now
You just intimated a high tackle is ok if you're a taller player and don't have the opportunity to get lower. That's like saying a late tackle is ok if you're a slower player. And I'm being a dick?
@Bones The issue for me is not that they're being penalised per se, but that they're being carded for these tackles.
-
It's not about tall players vs short players, though that does exasberate the issue. It's about players charging at the line with their head down. It's nearly impossible to tackle them without some contact around the shoulders. If a team is 5m out the percentage option will be for the props or halfback to have a go at the line with their head as low as possible. Penalty try plus yellow/red card on the offer.
-
It's not about tall players vs short players, though that does exasberate the issue. It's about players charging at the line with their head down. It's nearly impossible to tackle them without some contact around the shoulders. If a team is 5m out the percentage option will be for the props or halfback to have a go at the line with their head as low as possible. Penalty try plus yellow/red card on the offer.
@No-Quarter said in NH club rugby:
It's not about tall players vs short players, though that does exasberate the issue. It's about players charging at the line with their head down. It's nearly impossible to tackle them without some contact around the shoulders. If a team is 5m out the percentage option will be for the props or halfback to have a go at the line with their head as low as possible. Penalty try plus yellow/red card on the offer.
And where's the problem with that? Just like teams may have a strong scrum/lineout and be nigh on unstoppable from 5m out. If you don't want teams to do that, don't let them get 5m out...
-
@No-Quarter said in NH club rugby:
It's not about tall players vs short players, though that does exasberate the issue. It's about players charging at the line with their head down. It's nearly impossible to tackle them without some contact around the shoulders. If a team is 5m out the percentage option will be for the props or halfback to have a go at the line with their head as low as possible. Penalty try plus yellow/red card on the offer.
And where's the problem with that? Just like teams may have a strong scrum/lineout and be nigh on unstoppable from 5m out. If you don't want teams to do that, don't let them get 5m out...
@Bones said in NH club rugby:
@No-Quarter said in NH club rugby:
It's not about tall players vs short players, though that does exasberate the issue. It's about players charging at the line with their head down. It's nearly impossible to tackle them without some contact around the shoulders. If a team is 5m out the percentage option will be for the props or halfback to have a go at the line with their head as low as possible. Penalty try plus yellow/red card on the offer.
And where's the problem with that? Just like teams may have a strong scrum/lineout and be nigh on unstoppable from 5m out. If you don't want teams to do that, don't let them get 5m out...
Because what was previously an accidental and not very dangerous contact that even under the new rules would result in a penalty only becomes a penalty try and card because of proximity to the line.
The punishment way exceeds the offence.
In fact there is now the perverse danger that players who, once, would think twice about going head first toward the opposition out of self preservation are now rewarded for increasing the risk level to themselves -
@Bones said in NH club rugby:
@No-Quarter said in NH club rugby:
It's not about tall players vs short players, though that does exasberate the issue. It's about players charging at the line with their head down. It's nearly impossible to tackle them without some contact around the shoulders. If a team is 5m out the percentage option will be for the props or halfback to have a go at the line with their head as low as possible. Penalty try plus yellow/red card on the offer.
And where's the problem with that? Just like teams may have a strong scrum/lineout and be nigh on unstoppable from 5m out. If you don't want teams to do that, don't let them get 5m out...
Because what was previously an accidental and not very dangerous contact that even under the new rules would result in a penalty only becomes a penalty try and card because of proximity to the line.
The punishment way exceeds the offence.
In fact there is now the perverse danger that players who, once, would think twice about going head first toward the opposition out of self preservation are now rewarded for increasing the risk level to themselves -
@Crucial Just like if you drag down a maul or collapse a scrum 5m out, it's more likely to be a card...
@Bones although we all know how controversial those mauls can be.
-
Two players make contact with the head, one red card?
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/sport/news/article.cfm?c_id=4&objectid=11778949
@gt12 The fuck that's a red card for Barrington. Brad Barritt, sure. How the hell can you get that wrong?
-
If it's a red to the prop, why was it not also a red for the 12? Because it looks a lot like he chickened out of sending two players off.
-
If it's a red to the prop, why was it not also a red for the 12? Because it looks a lot like he chickened out of sending two players off.
@mariner4life said in NH club rugby:
If it's a red to the prop, why was it not also a red for the 12? Because it looks a lot like he chickened out of sending two players off.
Exactly. From where I was watching, if the new law interpretation is applied, that should be two reds, or a red and a yellow. Plus, I thought the swinging arm was worse too.
Even going back to the scrumhalf held up one, I don't understand why the winger didn't get a yellow for the slap to the face of the halfie. This is going to be a bit of a shambles, I'm afraid.
-
you would have to wonder if you take the 12 out, would the other have happened exactly the same to result in a RC; I reckon that way the ball carrier was moving, the prop woulda maybe hit him with his arm, similar to the 12 so in theory, woulda been sweet.
Shoulda been both with a card, not sure this has a huge amount to do with the new rules though?? Was poor technique by 2 guys that resulted in 1 guy getting knocked out, and a poor decision by the ref.
-
And since when is "but he would have scored a try" a defence? Is it cool to tackle players chasing a kick now because they might score a try?
If you can't stop a player from scoring using a legal tackle, why does that mean it's a free for all? Surely it just means you don't attempt the tackle or risk facing the consequences.
@Bones said in NH club rugby:
If you can't stop a player from scoring using a legal tackle, why does that mean it's a free for all? Surely it just means you don't attempt the tackle or risk facing the consequences.
This is the key bit.
Half the arguement here is "but the only way I can stop a try is by putting my forearm through the players face so surely that makes it OK!"
Well then you don't make that tackle. You make a legal tackle & if he scores so be it. Same deal when Barrett got held up by Sexton putting him in a headlock over the line.
Rugby has increasing gone with those over the shoulder style tackles, where (as in the video) a player wraps an arm over the players shoulder & sort of clips the neck but in a way that could be legitimate. Its a hugely effective tackle at pulling back the player, but also one that regularly clips the chin, neck & slips up.
As Crucial points out, it makes short guys doing pick & goes the new 6'4 guys doing one handed offloads.
There's 2 bits here re the rule, yes it changes the game at the top level, but rugby has been losing young players because mums watching top flight rugby see concussion being more & more prevelant & head & neck injuries on the rise. So if you don't move rugby away from being "the concussion sport" it'll die at a grass roots level & we'll have to watch soccer. Rugby in UK schools ranks 15th. Behind dance. DANCE
-
@mooshld said in NH club rugby:
Aki not declaring for Ireland reeks of a negotiation tactic. To squeeze the last few euros out of them that he can.
Nothing more he won't come back to NZ where he has no guarantee of anything and won't play for peanuts for Samoa.
Just his agent earning his paycheck if you ask me.
Not at all. He's signed a new contract - there isn't anything to squeeze. Player payments for test matches are fixed team amounts, there is no difference in these either. He could declare for Samoa and there would be nothing to stop him contractually.
@Pot-Hale Thats how it works wow that's weird I would have thought he would have gotten some sort of salary bump for getting selected for Ireland and it wasn"t all just match fees.
Does he have a contract now with the IRU, I didn't think he could until he was Irish qualified.
