High Tackles.

[Andy P]

I dropped this one onto the SA Rugby refereeing site

Question: Watching a number of Tri-Nations matches, there appears to be an acceptance by the referee and assistants of tackles coming in above the shoulder. While the attacking player isn't normally injured in the tackle, it does appear to kill the off load by getting the ball above the tackler.

Is this a deliberate decision to allow tackling above the shoulder?

Cheers Andy

Jaco Peyper: Halo Andy

The Law is clear on this aspect under Law 10 (e) Dangerous Tackling: A player must not tackle (or try to tackle) an opponent above the line of shoulders. A tackle around the opponent’s neck or head is dangerous play.

Referees may not allow any tackles of dangerous nature (or potentially dangerous) which includes tackles above the shoulder. This will be primarily for safety reasons and could only secondary be deducted for off-load purposes in a safe tackle.

Good question and I think referees should just all kill the dangerous tackle at the root and consistently hammer perpetrators and players will have to adapt or not be selected no more.

Regards - Jaco

There is often talk in these forums of making decisions based on the level of teams on the pitch, should this make a difference with high tackles? I know not every tackle that is high is dangerous or deliberate.

Andy.

 

[Dixie]

Normally, the advocates of different standards would show greater tolerance at the lower levels, on the basis that elite players know exactly what they are doing, while the social player may just have made an error of timing or judgement.

Few, however, would extend the arrangement to dangerous play. IMO, zero tolerance needs to be shown as regards high tackles, stamping, front row collapses and all the other means by which players might finish the game with a lower quality of life than they started it with.

 

[Phil E]

Like Dixie said

I always come down hard on high tackles and stamping etc. No exceptions.

Front row collapsing is something I would like to come down hard on, but when it happens I can never tell who was responsible. I usually give them all a very stiff talking to and tel them to sort it out themselves. This has always worked so far. But.........?

 

[Toby Warren]

The high tackle I always struggle to ping is when player is chasing a ball carrier puts his arm over the shoulder of the ball carrier his arm then goes down the body - rather than across the neck / shoulders and makes the tackle that way.

Your views high or not?

 

[Phil E]

The high tackle I always struggle to ping is when player is chasing a ball carrier puts his arm over the shoulder of the ball carrier his arm then goes down the body - rather than across the neck / shoulders and makes the tackle that way.

Your views high or not?

Higher..........

The other version of this is that he grabs the shirt collar and nearly chokes the ball carrier to death. IMO if you let him get away with the first version its only a matter of time before he resort to the collar grab.

 

[Davet]

I would suggest a simple penalty would be appropriate for that type of high tackle, along with soothing words.. just a timimng thing guys, no malice there, only a penalty - lets keep 'em down please.

 

[OB..]

Law 10.4 (e) [...]
A player must not tackle (or try to tackle) an opponent above the line of the shoulders. A tackle around the opponent's neck or head is dangerous play.

Is this making a distinction? Possibly. I certainly see the collar grab as more dangerous than the over the shoulder tackle.

IMHO the collar grab should always be penalised.

 

[Rawling]

I've seen tackles where someone chasing the ball carrier puts a hand on each shoulder and pulls them over - high, or clear of the neck so it's ok?

 

[Simon Thomas]

Front row collapsing is something I would like to come down hard on, but when it happens I can never tell who was responsible. I usually give them all a very stiff talking to and tel them to sort it out themselves. This has always worked so far. But.........?

Phil - you could be opening yourself up to all sorts of problems should a FR collapse injury happen.

You are in effect abdicating your safety responsibility by telling them to sort it themselves. Be very careful with the words you use.

A sharp insurance company lawyer in a third party injury liability case might ask :

a) why did you fail to deal with the problem personally - were you not the referee ?
b) do you regard the players as better 'qualified' to solve the collapse problems
c) are you qualified to sort out front row problems such as collapsing
d) have you attended Society Training meetings regularly
e) have you attended the scrum module of the CRDP course ?

see where I am going ?

 

[Phil E]

Phil - you could be opening yourself up to all sorts of problems should a FR collapse injury happen.

You are in effect abdicating your safety responsibility by telling them to sort it themselves. Be very careful with the words you use.

A sharp insurance company lawyer in a third party injury liability case might ask :

a) why did you fail to deal with the problem personally - were you not the referee ?
b) do you regard the players as better 'qualified' to solve the collapse problems
c) are you qualified to sort out front row problems such as collapsing
d) have you attended Society Training meetings regularly
e) have you attended the scrum module of the CRDP course ?

see where I am going ?

So whats the alternative?
You can't penalise a side if you dont know who is causing the collapse or how the collapse is being caused?
They know whats causing it, but they arent going to tell me.

 

[Simon Thomas]

Phil

You have got to get control and manage the process.

If you don't know and can't work it out, then go to very very slow engagements and immediately penalise the first one of them to bind incorrectly, not offer a shoulder, not have head up & back straight, not have parallel shoulders above the hips, not staying straight once engaged. Forget the scrum halves and back-row binds - concentrate on FR and first offence ping it and warn.

If you still have a problem one finalk warning to skippers and then go to uncontested scrums - I would 100% support any of our members who did so as a safety decision.

 

[SimonSmith]

What he said.

I have warned front rows that "I'll ping the first "wrong" thing I see. Might not actually be causing a problem, but I'll be right in law. You want to run that risk? drive straight, and bind right, and we'll be ok gents"

Whatever else you are at the scrum, be decisive. Those cunning low lifes smell uncertainty the same way sharks smell blood

 

[Phil E]

You have got to get control and manage the process.

That's a none answer, it gives me no help whatsoever.

If you don't know and can't work it out, then go to very very slow engagements and immediately penalise the first one of them to bind incorrectly, not have head up & back straight, not have parallel shoulders above the hips, not staying straight once engaged. Forget the scrum halves and back-row binds - concentrate on FR and first offence ping it and warn.

I check all that and can't see any problems.

not offer a shoulder,.

I dont know what that means?

If you still have a problem one finalk warning to skippers and then go to uncontested scrums - I would 100% support any of our members who did so as a safety decision.

That is basically telling them to sort it out themselves, or else. You just told me not to do that?

I am not trying to be awkward Simon, I am genuinly looking for advice. I see the scrum go down (btw, I am not talking every game, or several times a game, its isolated), but I can't see the cause.

 

[Simon Thomas]

Phil

My advice above is take it back the basics - each part of engagement and subsequent scrum needs to be under your control. They either do it your way or they go to uncontested as final stage of escalation.

I repeat you have to control and manage it - that is the best help I can give you. As Simon S says, you must be decisive and confident.

OK if all that engagement and body poistions and binds is correct (and assuming you have got right distance established pre-engagement) then the collapse is being caused by one or more of FR - so watch for body positions changing, a shoulder being dipped, a bind being changed, etc.

Offering a shoulder - FR player must offer his shoulder to opp for engagement of head and bind. Classic technique is to turn shoulder at last moment and oppo slides straight down.

In stating you will go to un-opposed scrums, you are making a positive decision, not abdicating it.

You need to talk to some FR boys and refs who played there - ask them.

 

[ex-lucy]

Phil, i am working in Aston, living in Brum city centre. Any good to meet up and have a chat?

 

[Phil E]

Phil, i am working in Aston, living in Brum city centre. Any good to meet up and have a chat?

Lucy, that would be valuable I am sure, have sent you an email.

 

[SimonSmith]

You have got to get control and manage the process.

Phil - I think I know what SimonT means; or at least, here's how I interpret it:

Think about the scrum, and engagement as a process with clearly defined steps.
Think about what you need to see at each step - what should each prop be doing? What should he look like (back straight, head down or up, angled in or out, that sort of thing). Establish a visual "norm" for yourself.

Then when you see things go to sh!t, you should be able to see deviation from your norm - his body angled in, or his head was going down...

By breaking it into chunks with specific data points to look for, it helps the management process.

 

[Phil E]

Thanks guys, have logged all those suggestions.

Gonna try and meet up with Lucy for a chat. He only works about 15 or 20 minutes from my work.

 

[chopper15]

What about tackle attempts making contact above the shoulders?

Are there degrees of hinderence or danger to be considered before playing advantage?

If so, can a retro' pen. as well as a YC/RC be awarded should a try be scored?

 

[Simon Thomas]

What about tackle attempts making contact above the shoulders? Illegal
Are there degrees of hinderence or danger to be considered before playing advantage? Totally - if dangerous, injury etc stop immediately. If U19 or younger you should not play advantage
If so, can a retro' pen. as well as a YC/RC be awarded should a try be scored? If the try has been scored then advantage has been taken and so a secondary penalty is NOT applied. However YC or RC (unlikely to play advantage on a RC offence) is applied after the advantage is over - in your scenario a try being scored.

Hope that helps.