Grabbing Players Shirt Around Neck

[BillBu]

Is the above practise considered a high tackle?

From the law book the definition of a tackle is "A tackle occurs when the ball carrier is held by one or more opponents and is brought to ground".

This definition implies that grabbing the players shirt is considered a tackle (so long as he is brought to ground).

After a small search I found the following clarification

Here is the guideline from the RFU, dated 1 November 2007:
A dangerous tackle is effected whenever there is contact above the line of the shoulders whether the contact is the first or a subsequent point of contact. To be clear, a tackle which involves arm contact below the line of the shoulders and thereafter contact is made with either the neck or the head of the tackled player is a dangerous tackle within Law 10.4 (e)

This infers that contact needs to be made with the other player for it to become a dangerous tackle.

So if a player grabs the opponents collar and drags the opponent backwards down to the ground is this considered a high tackle?

Conversely

If a player grabs the opponents collar and drags him back but lets go before the player is dragged to ground is this considered a high tackle / dangerous play? (as the tackle hasn't occured).

My own opinion is that it is dangerous play either way but I wanted a little clarification on what other refs were doing on this.

Thanks

Bill

 

[ExHookah]

I treat it as dangerous play. My view is that grabbing the back of the collar pulls up the front of the shirt, or the lapel area, around the throat like a garrote, which is very dangerous in my mind.

The NFL banned that type of tackle a couple of years ago, calling it a "horse collar tackle", so in the US the players tend to accept the penalty decision without complaint.

A ref in Texas awarded a penalty try last year in an incident involving a collar tackle, and that decision swung the result of the match and had impact on the National Championship participants. It was the correct call in my opinion, and the publicity surrounding the decision helped to highlight the views that referees have about that type of tackle.

 

[SimonSmith]

USA Rugby guidelines are that tackles like that ARE dangerous.

 

[Simon Thomas]

Official Hampshire Society policy is that grabbing a shirt collar is a dangerous tackle and immediately penalised.

I suspect it is the same for almost all other Societies too - no doubt in NLD John Edwards (aka Twiggy) will treat it is such !

 

[OB..]

Even in Gloucestershire, that is regarded as dangerous play.

 

[Simon Thomas]

OB

 

[BillBu]

I thought as such but I thought id check with there being no specific mention against it in the LOTG. I did penalise this in the last game so im glad I got the right decision :swet:

 

[Simon Thomas]

Bill Bu - you cannot expect every incident and scenario to be covered in LoG, so there is the 'catch all' of dangeroius play and your judgement.

Go with your gut feel and be confident - you got it right, well done.

 

[Dixie]

Where do people stand on grabbing a handful of shirt well below the collar, and swinging the player around by it?

I understand this is banned in the Continuum, by convention if not specifically (Pauldg care to confirm?), and this principle tends to leech into Junior rugby at the younder age groups. However, I generally have no problem with the practice at adult games (where it is rarely seen anyway).

Is it always dangerous? Never dangerous? Or is there an unofficial cut-off age?

 

[David J.]

I think any contact, performed with malice or lack of skill can be dangerous. Grabbing the shirt below the neck has more potential to be dangerous than a regular tackle, but is should be judged on its own merits.

Some forms of contact, like a high tackle, are so much more likely to injure than other types that they're de facto dangerous and named in law.

___

I think collar tackles are de facto (is this the right usage of latin? maybe I mean prima facie?) dangerous. The neck is a pretty vulnerable spot.

____

In a tackle that started high, but the tackler let go...it depends on the intent of the tackler. When a player starts high without intent (yes, I think it happens, a lot) but then slides down or lets go, I think applying materiality is fair.

Truth is high tackles are unavoidable, and if we don't allow some remedy for the tackler, we'll see blokes dropping in contact, hoping to draw the automatic penalty.

 

[OB..]

I think collar tackles are de facto (is this the right usage of latin? maybe I mean prima facie?) dangerous. The neck is a pretty vulnerable spot.

De facto (= in practice) is usually contrasted with de jure (= in law). Prima facie = at first sight. You probably want prima facie in this case. De facto would imply that it is going to get penalised even though it is not specified in the laws.

 

[The umpire]

Where do people stand on grabbing a handful of shirt well below the collar, and swinging the player around by it?

I understand this is banned in the Continuum, by convention if not specifically (Pauldg care to confirm?), and this principle tends to leech into Junior rugby at the younder age groups. However, I generally have no problem with the practice at adult games (where it is rarely seen anyway).

Is it always dangerous? Never dangerous? Or is there an unofficial cut-off age?

I penalised this exact thing this morning in U-15. Bigger player tackled small scrum half and swung him round, due to size difference ended up as practically a 360 and looked "undesirable" possibly dangerous. Had it been the other way round then he would never have got the same speed up and it wouldn't have been dangerous.

 

[Greg Collins]

If you pick him up then you have a responsibility to put him down again safely. For me the key is how he gets put down. Pick him up, swing him around and then return him to terra firma the right way up and with all major limbs intact. Play on. 'owt else? you probably need a rest for ten minutes.

Scragging the collar, always high, often dangerous. Ping it or play advantage if the player hasn't been decapitated.

 

[Deeps]

'Law 10.4 (e) A player must not tackle (or try to tackle) an opponent above the line of the shoulders.' Thus, 'grabbing a handful of shirt well below the collar, and swinging the player around by it' is, by definition, a high tackle, classified as 'dangerous tackling' and should be dealt with accordingly.

 

[Phil E]

Where do people stand on grabbing a handful of shirt well below the collar, and swinging the player around by it?

This is indeed banned in the continuum.

5. Tackling
Note 1: Any tackle level with or above the armpit is to be considered a high tackle.
Note 2: The scrag type tackle (ie swinging the player round by the shirt) must be considered dangerous play and must be penalised.

In any other age group you would have to make a judgement as to whether or not it was dangerous as you saw it.

 

[Dixie]

'Law 10.4 (e) A player must not tackle (or try to tackle) an opponent above the line of the shoulders.' Thus, 'grabbing a handful of shirt well below the collar, and swinging the player around by it' is, by definition, a high tackle, classified as 'dangerous tackling' and should be dealt with accordingly.

Deeps, your logic and mine have parted company. Using your logic, I might write: tackling an opponent above the line of the shoulders is an offence; thus, tackling the ball carrier's thigh is by definition a high tackle, and should be penalised."

I see you edited your post; if it no longer says what you intended, a further edit may be necessary to get your point across. If you intended what you wrote, we will have to disagree as to logic, though not necessarily as to the application of it.

 

[Deeps]

Deeps, your logic and mine have parted company. Using your logic, I might write: tackling an opponent above the line of the shoulders is an offence; thus, tackling the ball carrier's thigh is by definition a high tackle, and should be penalised."

I see you edited your post; if it no longer says what you intended, a further edit may be necessary to get your point across. If you intended what you wrote, we will have to disagree as to logic, though not necessarily as to the application of it.

Dixie, if your qualification of the scenario 'grabbing a handful of shirt well below the collar' is to infer that the supposed tackle is below the line of the shoulders and therefore not specifically covered by Law 10.4 (e), I understand your question a little better. Yet, such action demonstrates such an appalling lack of skill and has such a high probability of injuring the ball carrier that I have no problem in classifying the action as dangerous play. I doubt that this technique is taught anywhere on the face of the earth, it has nothing to do with rugby skill and should be actively discouraged from a very early age.

We automatically penalise 'squeeze ball' without question and without waiting for advantage in U18 rugby because we have been told to by directive. Just because another potentially dangerous activity e.g. the 'scrag' tackle has not been subject to a similar black and white directive does not mean we are not allowed to use our initiative to recognise a dangerous practise when we see one.

Perhaps my margins for what is dangerous or likely to be dangerous cut in a little earlier than others but I would rather nip something like this early rather than mentally cross my fingers that nobody gets hurt as a result of something that is not specifically prevented in Law.

 

[Davet]

What normally happens is that chasing would be tackler can only grab a handful of shirt. If he grabs the collar he in in deep trouble. If its the main body of the shirt, below the collar then he's OK.

If he can get close enough, at sufficient pace, to swing the ball carrier around then he would be far better advised to tackle the player properly - it is impossible to swing the BC round from behind if you're at arms stretch, well behind him and losing the footrace - the angles and momentum just don't work.

 

[nobackchat]

The following was posted on NZ's North Harbour's website section for referees:

A high tackle is classed as a high tackle when the arms are above the shoulder when the player hits the ground at the completion of the tackle. It is NOT when he tackler first makes the tackle.

 

[Greg Collins]

so in north harbour a decapitation is allowed provided you slide down the body afterwards? virile lot these kiwis