Is it true no mitigation on no arms or just a commentator phrase?

[Dave Elliott]

Keep hearing it in RWC, that if no wrap then mitigation can’t be applied but can’t find that in any head contact stuff I have???

 

[Marc Wakeham]

THere is no mitigation if "always illegal". It's on some of the pictures posted on this site. image link https://passport.world.rugby/media/ptwdbqhu/hcp-high-tackle-en.png

 

[chbg]

That was dated 1 Mar 23 in a pdf I had.

 

[Dickie E]

And is the phrase "always illegal" defined anywhere? Eg an offside player tackles a ball carrier ... that is "always illegal" so no mitigation?

 

[Locke]

And is the phrase "always illegal" defined anywhere? Eg an offside player tackles a ball carrier ... that is "always illegal" so no mitigation?

The wording is:
“Mitigation will not apply for intentional or always-illegal acts of foul play.”

The previous edition read:

“Mitigation will not apply for intentional or highly reckless acts of foul play.”

So take whatever you will from that.

 

[Marc Wakeham]

And is the phrase "always illegal" defined anywhere? Eg an offside player tackles a ball carrier ... that is "always illegal" so no mitigation?

The foul play is always illegal. Not an "unrelated" offence. Ie the "tackle was always foul play" not The tackle would have been legal but for....."

 

[crossref]

The wording is:
“Mitigation will not apply for intentional or always-illegal acts of foul play.”

The previous edition read:

“Mitigation will not apply for intentional or highly reckless acts of foul play.”

So take whatever you will from that.

Highly reckless acts can now be mitigated?

 

[Stu10]

My understanding is that a no-arm tackle is considered to be a conscious decision by the tackler, and is therefore intentional foul play. If you have committed foul play intentionally, there is no get out of jail free card.