[Tackle] BC leading with the head

[DocY]

Question: would an offence of the ball carrier going into a tackle head first be a sensible thing?

I'm thinking about the principle here, more than the wording - obviously you wouldn't want to penalise a player driving for the goal line. But a ball carrier trying to bump off an opponent with their head rather than shoulder, for example, maybe should be an offence.

 

[beckett50]

I understand the direction from which you are coming, but this would be unworkable in such a collision orientated game.

 

[Rich_NL]

I've given a penalty for dangerous play when a BC began swinging his head around during a standing challenge. If it looks intentional, you always have that option; if it doesn't, tackler is responsible for safety.

 

[Marc Wakeham]

Agreed "danerous play" would allow a PK in such a scenario. Judge each incident on its merits.

 

[OB..]

From the Times today

Much attention this season has focused on the desire to reduce head contact in the game amid concerns about the growing numbers of concussions, with accompanying fears this season about the number of red cards that would be issued for high tackles. But there have only been two in the Premiership so far this season and Barnes feels the issue is settling down. “We’re getting more clarity now,” he says. “What we’re trying to clamp down on is the bloke who is standing upright and tackles above the ball. If someone ducks and you accidentally make contact with their head, that’s not foul play.”

 

[Not Kurt Weaver]

Question: would an offence of the ball carrier going into a tackle head first be a sensible thing?
But a ball carrier trying to bump off an opponent with their head rather than shoulder, for example, maybe should be an offence.

I always thought that was the description of a maori side step.