Dangerous tackle?

[Agustin]

These tackles are becomming more and more common... at what point do they become penalisable for being dangerous?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GTV5v9T6r60

How much of an effort to grasp the ball carrier is necessary?

 

[dgilks]

For me, there is enough arm there. He goes in with a shoulder but the arm wraps around in one smooth movement.

 

[Ian_Cook]

For me that is a shoulder charge, and a high one at that.

The first point of contact is the point of Roussow's shoulder on Nallet's throat, so it was above the line of Nallet's shoulders.

The tell-tale sign of the shoulder change is that he braces his upper body with his shoulder leading; the wrapping of the arms is merely an afterthought to mask his intent.

PK and a warning. Another one and

 

[dgilks]

I don't know Ian. When I looked at it again the shoulder clearly hits the Blue player's shoulder not his neck. Further, the arm makes contact at essentially the same time as the shoulder. As I say, I think there are arms in there and it was sufficient to avoid a penalty. It's borderline but I think that it is a fine call by the ref.

 

[Agustin]

I have to say it looked dangerous to me. The trouble for me is that it all happens very very fast (at least on TV).

But here is a photo just after the contact that I think shows that it was a charge rather than a tackle, or at least quite a failed attempt to wrap the ball carrier.

(PS: interesting commentary from the TJ saying that he thought it was a shoulder charge but is happy enough with the scrum...)

 

[Ciaran Trainor]

nothing wrong with it for me. clearly tried to wrap his arms round and it wasn't high

 

[ianh5979]

The other question is why was he not penalised for falling on the wrong side(which IMO he did delibertely to slow the ball down)?

 

[Phil E]

The tell-tale sign of the shoulder change is that he braces his upper body with his shoulder leading;

Aren't all tackles led with the shoulder?

It's how I was taught to teach tackling by the RFU.

Cheek to cheek
Shoulder in to contact
Wrap arms

 

[Simon Thomas]

Nothing wrong in my view, and a style of tackling I have seen and used many many times.

Green used open inside of shoulder with his arm open and going around to connect with open stance of blue attacker. Two very big men hitting at speed, hence both took a while to recover.

The French had no reactions and of all sides would have complained if they thought it was high / illegal.

 

[Ian_Cook]

Aren't all tackles led with the shoulder?

It's how I was taught to teach tackling by the RFU.

Cheek to cheek
Shoulder in to contact
Wrap arms

But I'll bet you were NOT taught to brace into the tackle with the point of your shoulder leading. His right arm is back. It only came forward after the impact, and there was no real attempt to wrap. The other arm didn't wrap at all.

Sorry, but this....

is a player set for a shoulder charge, which he went through with.

Also, he followed up by going off his feet on the wrong side of the tackle zone, and made no attempt to roll away.

 

[Simon Thomas]

Ian, this was very much the kind of double impact tackle I was coached to do in the early days of my adult career. It is a "stopping" tackle with much higher chance of the ball being disloged either on the shoulder hit or slightly secondary arm hit.

I believe Union inherited it from League and I was taught it by my coach, a Kiki (Earle K), in late 70s.

 

[nealed]

hits with shoulder wraps arm late
however difficult pick without slow mo

 

[OB..]

The problem with still photos: in Ian's you cannot tell if the arm is moving or not. Fractionally later contact is made and the arm is forward; the point of contact for Rossouw's shoulder is below Nallet's shoulder. I suspect the contact with Nallet's throat was by Rossouw's head.

 

[Phil E]

Sorry, but this....

is a player set for a shoulder charge, which he went through with.

:nono: :nono: :nono: :nono: :nono:

No; that is a player in the process of making a tackle. His arm is actually swinging forward to make the wrap. You don't run into a tackle with your arms in front of you!!

In this photo he has the ball carrier wrapped with both arms (you can see hi left arm in your photo already moving into the wrap.

View attachment 1204

 

[Ian_Cook]

I believe Union inherited it from League and I was taught it by my coach, a Kiki (Earle K), in late 70s.

Well there's a reason not to use it. Shoulder charges are legal in RL

 

[didds]

I coach players to THROW the shoulder into the tackle.

SHOULDERS stop attackers, not arms.

Arms stop legs moving, but not bodies moving.

Technically I look for short arms close to body (good "core"), hands "up" (to enable a quick wrap... this in effect means the arms are not w-a-y behind the body, but the hands are somewhere in the region of the chest) and to THROW the shoulder in (usually with a same side foot plant close to the attacker)

A more modern RL style is opposite foot approaches attacker, body swivels on that foot to swing the shoulder around which would leave the outside arm swinging around more.

the still above suggests the latter type of tackle-you will note his nearest arm is "short" keeping good "core" and meaning a quick wrap is possible.

I coach the former type as in less able players I think it produces a more successful tackle rate as the latter poorly performed can leave an "arm tackle" which is weak.

didds

 

[Agustin]

To me, the intent of the law is to prevent dangerous collisions. (When I learned to play rugby the distinction was made between rugby football as a contact sport and gridiron football as a collision sport - a big reason why rugby players don't wear the hard padding.)

This looks like a collision to me; like the tackler led with his shoulder and threw the arm around to make it look more legitimate. It does not look to me like he made an effort to grasp the ball carrier.

IMHO this sets us on a dangerous track because the way these guys are throwing their bodies around will only lead to more and more severe injuries.... which is how gridiron players came to wear such heavy padding.

(I'm seeing the same progression in the scrum, where there is such a heavy emphasis on "winning the hit" that the front row players are having to absorb ever-increasing collisions.)

 

[Lee Lifeson-Peart]

I think Nallet got hurt because he didn't catch the ball cleanly from the pass :wow: -he was juggling/still trying to get it under control as he was hit IIRC and probably wasn't braced for the hit. His body position is not great as he makes contact with DR.

 

[andyscott]

to me that was not an attempt to wrap his arms into the tackle, it was a shoulder with an arm up to con the officials.

It is dangerous, and very much borderline in law, which side of the line, hmm thats a tough one.

 

[Ian_Cook]

To me, the intent of the law is to prevent dangerous collisions. (When I learned to play rugby the distinction was made between rugby football as a contact sport and gridiron football as a collision sport - a big reason why rugby players don't wear the hard padding.)

This looks like a collision to me; like the tackler led with his shoulder and threw the arm around to make it look more legitimate. It does not look to me like he made an effort to grasp the ball carrier.

IMHO this sets us on a dangerous track because the way these guys are throwing their bodies around will only lead to more and more severe injuries.... which is how gridiron players came to wear such heavy padding.

(I'm seeing the same progression in the scrum, where there is such a heavy emphasis on "winning the hit" that the front row players are having to absorb ever-increasing collisions.)

I agree 100% with all of this Agustin. Its also why Rugby League are also allowed shoulder padding and Rugby Union are not, because shoulder charges ARE legal in Rugby League.

We should be erring on the side of safety and caution.

The same thing that happened with charging into the ruck is beginning to happen with tackles of this type. It took some serious injuries (Bakkies on Jones, Lions tour 2009) before the iRB woke up to what was was happening. Then they issued some directives and memoranda, and ultimately, made changes to the Laws this year.

We are seeing more and more "tackles" that are no more than shoulder charges where the wrapping of the arms is merely an afterthought to disguise the illegality. Allowing them drives the thin end of the wedge in, and you have no idea how thick the other end is. Before long, we will be allowing shoulder charges, just like we have allowed charging into the ruck (under the guise of "cleaning out") until the Law change this year.