New Tackle Law

[whatisthejava]

Im actually a big fan of the proposed new law although im concerned that it isn't giving enough time to refs and players before the 6N and feel that a couple of teams (Italy and Scotland) are going to be pretty hard done by during the 6N when we see the Irish week in and week out still use the choke tackle and still see Sexton use his face to tackle .

But by next season I think the game will have adapted and we will be used to it and just like the spear and tip tackle we won't miss it.

Darcys article is a good read and heexpecs quite a lot of red cards before everyone gets used to it

http://www.irishtimes.com/sport/rugby/g ... -1.2924806

[Big D]

I think the idea is ok but it adds more difficulty to the refs already difficult job. They are going to have to try and be consistent with what they see as reckless and accidental. And then with the reckless ones, which are yellows and which are reds. Going by the WR video, there could be an unlikely scenario where a tackle can start below the shoulders and end up being a red card if you come into contact with the head and the ref deems it a bad reckless tackle. In the video from WR literally the 1st tackle in the accidental tackles could be seen as reckless as he should have known diving at the shoulders means he could have come into contact with the head.

[Cameo]

My view if thatif you are aiming at or near the shoulder line and driving up then that is reckless. A split secomd off and you can do serious damage

[whatisthejava]

The thing that really interests me is if the choke tackle can survive, the easiest way out of it is to make sure when the next arriving player comes is to dip the head and make sure you get hit. Instant penalty, this could really screw Ireland over as I don't think I have ever seen Sexton take a straight on tackle without standing straight up, if he makes contact with the head its yellow or red depending on how much the player milks it, and to get rid of Sexton id milk the sh!t out it

[Cameo]

Generally, Im not too worried about the changes though. I think lower tackles lead to a better game and players should be able to adapt

[whatisthejava]

New laws seem to have reduced high tackles, watched first half of Newcastle v bath and 1 high tackle, 2nd half ulster v Scarlett's think the ref would have been pinging the choke tackle but isn't.

[whatisthejava]

Spoke to soon, 2 yellows in the Scarlett's game for 2 tackles that 1 week ago wouldn't have been a penalty.

[hugh_woatmeigh]

Spoke to soon, 2 yellows in the Scarlett's game for 2 tackles that 1 week ago wouldn't have been a penalty.

Ulster immune for the most part.

[kk67]

The thing that really interests me is if the choke tackle can survive, the easiest way out of it is to make sure when the next arriving player comes is to dip the head and make sure you get hit. Instant penalty, this could really screw Ireland over as I don't think I have ever seen Sexton take a straight on tackle without standing straight up, if he makes contact with the head its yellow or red depending on how much the player milks it, and to get rid of Sexton id milk the sh!t out it

So revealing.

[kk67]

Who says 'Ooooh, I love eating people'...?
That's sharkasm.

[whatisthejava]

Sarries just had a 1 red carded for tackle. Lucky could have had a second man yellow carded also.

One thing for sure is high tackles won't last long with the new directive.

[OptimisticJock]

That was brutal on parling

[hugh_woatmeigh]

Are the new laws in play in all competitions ? Watching HC and that's a yellow for the racing 6 under the new laws. Just a pen instead.

[hugh_woatmeigh]

This is way too far. You can't always avoid a high tackle but you can attempt to make it as safely as you can. What are you supposed to do? Let the man run through or put yourself in a dangerous position as a defender? Just awful.

If these laws are actually applied consistently then Ireland and most of their provincial players are in for a tough, tough time.

[whatisthejava]

This is way too far. You can't always avoid a high tackle but you can attempt to make it as safely as you can. What are you supposed to do? Let the man run through or put yourself in a dangerous position as a defender? Just awful.

If these laws are actually applied consistently then Ireland and most of their provincial players are in for a tough, tough time.

Laws applied against Ireland, what u been smoking ?


interesting high tackle in the Ospreys game, not a yellow



Some refs are going to be put very clearly in their place

Also reckon Barrit will be cited

[Big D]

The ref's are going to have a hard time between "reckless" where the tackler should have known he could hit the head and "accidental".

They need to be careful bout penalty tries too. If laws correctly applied we should see a few more.

[Big D]

Did anyone hear the tmo/ref convo in the Sarries game at the point of the red card? Words to the effect that the Barrington tackle was the more serious foul play, which may have been right but using it to gloss over the high tackle by BB was just plain wrong. Since when under the laws has only the most serious foul play been considered for punishment? If the TMO and ref can't come to the right answer then the TMO shouldn't be consulted on high tackles if that trend continues.

[whatisthejava]

Think the ref was trying not to kill the game 10 mins in considering its a new law and no one was really trying to be dangerous

Thought the ref was trying not to be a dickhead

[Big D]

Think the ref was trying not to kill the game 10 mins in considering its a new law and no one was really trying to be dangerous

Thought the ref was trying not to be a dickhead

But "not being a dickhead" isn't following the laws is it? If the law has been brought in then the officials have to uphold them whether they, players or fans like it or not. Exeter, in theory were robbed the opportunity of playing 60odd minutes v 13 men and possibly a 5 point swing against a rival in the league.It continues to be a nonsense that the refs let players off who are then banned for games where the team offended against don't get the benefit.

On Barritts tackle, for a 1st time red card for that type of tackle I wouldn't be against them ruling that the red card was sufficient and no ban is needed.

[Cameo]

Think the ref was trying not to kill the game 10 mins in considering its a new law and no one was really trying to be dangerous

Thought the ref was trying not to be a dickhead

But "not being a dickhead" isn't following the laws is it? If the law has been brought in then the officials have to uphold them whether they, players or fans like it or not. Exeter, in theory were robbed the opportunity of playing 60odd minutes v 13 men and possibly a 5 point swing against a rival in the league.It continues to be a nonsense that the refs let players off who are then banned for games where the team offended against don't get the benefit.

On Barritts tackle, for a 1st time red card for that type of tackle I wouldn't be against them ruling that the red card was sufficient and no ban is needed.

Is any account taken of whether a player got a red when they are deciding on the suspension? I think it should be. If someone has missed 40 mins and left their team down to 14 then that is part of the punishment. However, if they and their team have got away with it then the ban should be longer. Doesnt help the team the offence was committed against mind. Could you have an automatic ban for the next game against that team if the player was not sent off on the day

[Big D]

Think the ref was trying not to kill the game 10 mins in considering its a new law and no one was really trying to be dangerous

Thought the ref was trying not to be a dickhead

But "not being a dickhead" isn't following the laws is it? If the law has been brought in then the officials have to uphold them whether they, players or fans like it or not. Exeter, in theory were robbed the opportunity of playing 60odd minutes v 13 men and possibly a 5 point swing against a rival in the league.It continues to be a nonsense that the refs let players off who are then banned for games where the team offended against don't get the benefit.

On Barritts tackle, for a 1st time red card for that type of tackle I wouldn't be against them ruling that the red card was sufficient and no ban is needed.

Is any account taken of whether a player got a red when they are deciding on the suspension? I think it should be. If someone has missed 40 mins and left their team down to 14 then that is part of the punishment. However, if they and their team have got away with it then the ban should be longer. Doesnt help the team the offence was committed against mind. Could you have an automatic ban for the next game against that team if the player was not sent off on the day

I don't think so. As I said, IMO just add the red card to BB's record and let him play next week. There is no real way to compensate the teams where the player should have been sent off. Missing the next game against them wouldn't work.

[Cameo]

Just saw the Sam Davies one that people are outraged about. To me, it is the kind of accidental but reckless tackle the laws are correctly targetting. I'd probs be happier with just a penalty but if you go for a big hit around the chest of someone being tackled and you end up bouncing over their head then I dont think you have too many complaints

[Matt Ha]

Don't know if anybody saw the Scarlets Ulster game. Ref deemed a high-tackle was committed by Ulster player. Result yellow card and penalty try. While the tackle was high the Scarlets scrum half was low and going for the line. The only other option I think the Ulster player had was not to make a tackle and let the man score.

2.20 mark

[whatisthejava]

Ive heard the same arguments several times about this but I kinda think you can't minimise concusions in rugby without stopping choke tackles and this round the neck tackle when someone is clear and going for the line.

If Ulster had had an extra man their or if Trimble had been in closer then I think a safe tackle and a try could have been prevented

[kk67]

Don't know if anybody saw the Scarlets Ulster game. Ref deemed a high-tackle was committed by Ulster player. Result yellow card and penalty try. While the tackle was high the Scarlets scrum half was low and going for the line. The only other option I think the Ulster player had was not to make a tackle and let the man score.

2.20 mark

It was tough on Marius Mitrea to be the first to ref' the new directives....I thought he did pretty well with what are increasingly looking like rather vague laws.
Despite the two cards it was a cracking game of rugby, played at full tilt, by a lot of guys who could yet become starting Lions.