Is this a ridiculous and unjustifed YC?

[Browner]

The bigger issue is ball carriers offloading at the last moment and "jumping" into the contact which almost always will send them head over heels. We had a discussion last weekend about a similar incident with one of the Womens Sevens World series refs who gave a card for a similar incident a couple weeks ago at a uni sevens tournament.

The way WR currently sets it's standards, it's a YC as it's entirely the tacklers responsibility to ensure the BC gets to ground safely. What needs to change is that jumping into a contact situation is at your own risk and once your feet leave the ground before contact, as a BC, a tackler can no longer be penalized if you end up on your head because of your own stupidity.

Where is that 'standard' written???? IIUC the responsibility for safe landing applies if a tackler "lifts" a player off his feet. I don't believe there is any responsibility if a tackler 'goes with a players momentum' or one who jumps/ bounces up into the tacklers grasp.

Unless I've missed an important interpretation change?

 

[Browner]

If any referee is considering this a penalty please re train or retire !

No chance of this being you Womble , eh ! ..... :biggrin:

 

[OB..]

The object of specifying the need to use the arms in the tackle is to stop the point of the shoulder being driven into the player. It is not practical to wrap the arms before any contact with the shoulder, but if the arms are forward in an attempt to grasp as contact is made, it reduces the shoulder impact.

 

[Ian_Cook]

... It is not practical to wrap the arms before any contact with the shoulder,....

No, but its a damned good way of getting your arm broken!

 

[4eyesbetter]

Re : Re: Is this a ridiculous and unjustifed YC?

No arms, cuts into legs, in the NFL its a chop block

No, it isn't. This is a chop block.

 

[Crucial]

Looking for other reasons for the card (possible late or possible no arms) is a complete red herring to the discussion here.

The black player was YC'd for a dangerous tackle. It seems that now in any tackle the tackler has to miraculously be responsible for the actions or inactions of the BC.

The tackler didn't lift and nor was the BC in the air any more than a normal running player is when both feet are momentarily off the ground. It was simply a freak of timing where as the tackler committed the BC passed and wasn't braced. If the BC kept hold of the ball he would have continued running forward and not tipped up.

Again, this is an example of the stupid type of outcome you get when the supposed (as yet unseen in evidence by anyone on this forum) edict from WR that a player that has their feet off the ground is sacrosanct. This ruling/interpretation needs far more qualification so that no fault accidents or instances where the danger is caused by the airbourne player leaping into contact are treated sensibly.

I'd like to think it was just an error by the officials but suspect they are simply acting on (stupid) orders.

Where does this lead? "you tackled him and he got injured, therefore you are off"?

As Tana Umaga says "This isn't tiddlywinks we are playing here"

 

[SimonSmith]

Not sure if you're referring to NFL or rugby since you're in the US
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chop_block_(gridiron_football)

Cutting someone down by blocking their legs is not the same as making a tackle, its a forceful hit across the thighs that can damage knees etc.

Whilst the example we're discussing wasn't the worst, it shouldn't be left unpenalised in my opinion.
Although I probably wouldn't have gone to a YC myself, I would have explained what was wrong with it.

In rugby. A hard tackle across the legs, assuming compliance with wrap, is fine with me. You would, I suggest, be very hard pressed to justify penalizing a tackle acrosss the legs where there no lifting.

 

[JohnP]

Pleased to see the majority think this is a bad call, at full speed I thought no arms, but the replay is clear. Have noticed a few low chop/no arm tackles starting to get called. Sinckler in the last Quins game at Northampton as an example, this one wasnt in that league.

 

[Fatboy_Ginge]

What a shocking decision. Fekitoa almost jumped into the tackle. Now as I interpret the WR directive, it's for players jumping for the kick that it was intended to protect not ANYONE in the air.

Someone somewhere needs to look at that directive again and soon...

 

[crossref]

there is no IRB directive....

there's the secret email from Joel Jutge, but that's hardly the same thing.

 

[Mat 04]

Scandalous and I totally concur with Womble.

 

[ddjamo]

embarrassing

 

[beckett50]

In essence, yes it is a shocking decision.

Rugby is a collision sport and that was a collision