Drive tackle

[Browner]

[LAWS] [FONT=fs_blakeregular]Lifting a player from the ground and dropping or driving that player into the ground whilst that player's feet are still off the ground such that the player's head and/or upper body come into contact with the ground is dangerous play.[/FONT][/LAWS]

http://www.rugbyonslaught.com/2015/03/taqele-naiyaravoros-dumps-frank-halai.html


Review this tackle , it reflects my understanding of what constitutes a "Drive" Tackle 'despite' the BC ending up on his back with the Tackler on top of him... or proverbially 'dumping him on his ar$e'.

?

 

[OB..]

No problem for me. I see no deliberate lift.

 

[matty1194]

No problem for me. I see no deliberate lift.

I am in agreement with OB on this, nothing to see, and as per JP play on.

For me the commentators hit the nail on the head and state it was a massive collision between 2 players, Frank Halai weighing roughly 115 and Taqele Naiyaravoro weighing in at 123kg so always going to look worse than it would be if it were 2 scrumhalfs weighing 80kg wet threw in a similar situation.

Most big wingers like these 2 and George North, Cuthbert and going back in time Jonah Lomu all tried to run over the top of opposition players, this time Halai lost out in the contact.

 

[Browner]

[LAWS] [FONT=fs_blakeregular]Lifting a player from the ground and dropping or driving that player into the ground whilst that player's feet are still off the ground such that the player's head and/or upper body come into contact with the ground is dangerous play.[/FONT][/LAWS]

http://www.rugbyonslaught.com/2015/03/taqele-naiyaravoros-dumps-frank-halai.html


Review this tackle , it reflects my understanding of what constitutes a "Drive" Tackle 'despite' the BC ending up on his back with the Tackler on top of him... or proverbially 'dumping him on his ar$e'.

?

Just to be clear ( unlike my slightly ambiguous post ! ) , I'm saying its perfectly OK. & yet there is a raise and there is a drive and the player does end up hitting the ground with his back first.

Traditionally this was known as 'dumping' someone , I'm highlighting the difference when a legit dumping is achieved.

 

[Dixie]

I think OB's point is the key here - there was no lift. The hit was to the BC's chest. The reason it looks like a lift is that the BC's legs continue driving his lower body forward when his upper body is checked. If the BC had landed on his upper back rather than his arse, there would probably have been calls for a card - unfounded in my view. That would not even have been a PK.

Formula 1 has the concept of a "racing incident" - an unfortunate outcome that is the consequence of competitors pushing to - but not beyond - the limits of the rules. IMO, rugby needs to get to the same understanding. It's a tough sport, and there is risk. Kill the risk, kill the sport.

 

[Phil E]

Play on.

 

[Not Kurt Weaver]

[LAWS] [FONT=fs_blakeregular]Lifting a player from the ground and dropping or driving that player into the ground whilst that player's feet are still off the ground such that the player's head and/or upper body come into contact with the ground is dangerous play.[/FONT][/LAWS]

http://www.rugbyonslaught.com/2015/03/taqele-naiyaravoros-dumps-frank-halai.html


Review this tackle , it reflects my understanding of what constitutes a "Drive" Tackle 'despite' the BC ending up on his back with the Tackler on top of him... or proverbially 'dumping him on his ar$e'.

?

I just do not see BC head and/or upper body coming in contqct with the ground as result of tackle.

As much as I want to take a view differing from others I cannot do it.

BC carrier kind of jumps into tackle and his center of gravity is much higher, allowing the tackler to dump him . BC would have faired better if he would have led with a forearm to tacklers head and pushed off.

 

[Browner]

I agree that its acceptable and indeed wanted in the code, I'm only highlighting that many of the components that lead to illegal tackles are present in this one ....
Player raised
Defender pulls BC legs upwards as
Defender drives BC to the ground with shoulder
Defender body angle is pointing at the ground as he does so
BC elbow hits ground first.

But , & for the purpose of debate only, what would the opinions hve been if the whole tackle had been executed in the same way but the whole thing had rotated slightly further so that the BCs upper spine had hit the ground first,?? ( try and picture additional rotation) We'd still have the "no static lift" but we would have the C1-C7?? hitting the ground first.

In this hypothetical scenario, is it a 'rugby outcome' or an 'unsafe tackle' , ie where does the sanctioning line commence, or can there never be a line ????

???

 

[beckett50]

Nothing to see here. Move on

 

[Taff]

Play on.

No problem for me. I see no deliberate lift.

Agreed. A tackle to be proud of.

The BC is gently put on his arse. I bet it didn't even hurt.