Explain what you see as the inconsistency.
pegleg, I feel like you have brought some manner of axe to grind!
First inconsistency, you point out yourself: the 2009 memo talks about tackles, and this being a type of dangerous tackle. but then when you turn to the Law book and look at the Law on dangerous tackles 10.4.e , tip tackles are missing.
Second inconsistency is the different wording in the dfinitions
memo
[LAWS]tackles involving a player being lifted off the ground and tipped horizontally and were then either forced or dropped to the ground are illegal and constitute dangerous play.[/LAWS]
10.4.j
[LAWS]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.[/LAWS]
does it matter that the definition is different? After all they aren't that different and they are both driving at the same thing.
Well, yes defintions do matter - recall at the RWC every single RC and citing for tip tackles under 10.4.j was rejected by the disciplinary panel who said the tackle didn't fit the definition of 10.4.j, and the players were processed under 10.4.e instead (even though the tackles
certainly didn't fit the criteria under 10.4.e!)