Jumping the tackler

[SimonSmith]

Aside from danger, I think it cuts against the spirit of the game.

I can't think of other circumstances in which a player can render himself untackleable. The ball carrier can make tackles more difficult - fends, swerves, running lines - but he is still nonetheless open to being tackled if the tackler is good/fast/determined.

You put yourself in the air, I think you can't be tackled, if only on safety grounds. What would you do as the referee if the tackler tried a tackle on a jumper/hurdler and upended him because of where the centre of gravity is?

 

[Toby Warren]

It's a PK against the ball carrier for me.

It's dangerous, and prevents himself from being tackled.

 

[RobLev]

Poor tackling technique, far too low.

Hip-high? You should have put a :sarc: mark after that, because people think you're being serious.

 

[Phil E]

Hip-high? You should have put a :sarc: mark after that, because people think you're being serious.

Hip high my arse....pardon the pun.
The tackler went for his shins, he deserved to be made a fool of.

 

[Rushforth]

This incident: no penalty.

Attempting to hurdle the tackler and kicking him instead: red. Kicking him in the head, recommendation 26-104 weeks in card report.

Which is probably why most ball carriers don't attempt it.

 

[RobLev]

Hip high my arse....pardon the pun.
The tackler went for his shins, he deserved to be made a fool of.

The tackler's legs are only half-bent, and he's definitely taking-off, not landing. I don't know where you keep your shins, but mine aren't three feet plus off the ground - until I try to jump over someone who's trying to tackle me, of course...

 

[Browner]

Aside from danger, I think it cuts against the spirit of the game.

I can't think of other circumstances in which a player can render himself untackleable. The ball carrier can make tackles more difficult - fends, swerves, running lines - but he is still nonetheless open to being tackled if the tackler is good/fast/determined.

You put yourself in the air, I think you can't be tackled, if only on safety grounds. What would you do as the referee if the tackler tried a tackle on a jumper/hurdler and upended him because of where the centre of gravity is?

In another thread Dixie described jumping into the tackler as against the 'article of faith'

In the OP vid the BC seems to be constantly assessing the arriving player and appears intent on avoiding him, this is very different to the player who jumps into a tackler IMO.

Its interesting to watch the reaction of the other players on the pitch, none of them seem to react in a way that suggests they consider the hurdle to be unfair or dangerous, maybe this is the acid test?

 

[OB..]

Its interesting to watch the reaction of the other players on the pitch, none of them seem to react in a way that suggests they consider the hurdle to be unfair or dangerous, maybe this is the acid test?

Unless the referee stops play, defenders do not have time to register a protest - they have to get on with defending.

 

[Browner]

Unless the referee stops play, defenders do not have time to register a protest - they have to get on with defending.

Cmon OB, many do, even if its merely looking toward the ref ....we all see the same every match.

 

[dave_clark]

Its interesting to watch the reaction of the other players on the pitch, none of them seem to react in a way that suggests they consider the hurdle to be unfair or dangerous, maybe this is the acid test?

by this logic we should allow tip tackles, and stamping on those lying on the wrong side of a ruck.

 

[Browner]

by this logic we should allow tip tackles, and stamping on those lying on the wrong side of a ruck.

Eh? I'm sure most teammates of the victim think your examples are dangerous,
yet the tackles teammates didn't seem to offer that same suggestion with their body language.

 

[OB..]

Eh? I'm sure most teammates of the victim think your examples are dangerous,
yet the tackles teammates didn't seem to offer that same suggestion with their body language.

There have been many high tackles that result in no injury, yet the high tackle is illegal because it is deemed to be too risky. There is a specific law about it because it occurs fairly frequently.

Jumping a tackle is rare, so as yet there has been no specific law.

You have no chance of persuading me that is is in general a safe thing to do.

 

[Browner]

You have no chance of persuading me that is is in general a safe thing to do.

Your view is fairly obvious from your posts, and respected.

Safe fair play is expected, LoTG penalises dangerous play. In this instance the hurdling was potentially dangerous, i agree that, but without contact it never becomes actual foul play.

I agree its a risky BC action which could get him a RC if he gets his timing wrong and he jumps at rather than to evade, but the risk 'variable' applies to a number of rugby actions; fend,tackle, BC charge etc ..

Is it against the spirit of the game??? Good question and open to debate, I suspect opinions will be divided wherever you ask. In the match we saw, neither the referee, the defenders, or the applauding supporters seemed to consider it anymore than well timed athleticism. It will indeed be interesting to see how a jump/hurdle over a player is viewed when we next get a high profile example.

Until then, or until IRB specifiy the offence , then it will remain referee judgement.

 

[itin]

I am with the penalty against the ball carrier side. For me, regardless of the outcome, out and out leaping over a player is dangerous both to the tackler and the ball carrier.

 

[didds]

having thought about it a little more... and leaving aside the hurdling itself as potentially illegal, what as ref do you do if, the defender having crouched to start a tackle and the attacker hurdling him

* the tackler sees what is happening, starts to stand up and gets caught square in the face/head with a boot with what is effectively a kick

* the tackler part stands and now effects a tackle on the attacker that is wholely in the air - effectively jumping in the air in fact

* the tackler part stands and effects a tackle that due to the attacker's upward momentum, and the tackler's initial upward movement creates purely by circumstance a tip-tackle?


ie in all three circumstances the tackler had reacted very late to something he would not nortmally have foreseen.

I appreciate tis is hypothetical and may never ever happen in a ref's career. But - IF they happened... what should a ref do in each of the 3 situations?

didds

 

[Browner]

having thought about it a little more... and leaving aside the hurdling itself as potentially illegal, what as ref do you do if, the defender having crouched to start a tackle and the attacker hurdling him

* the tackler sees what is happening, starts to stand up and gets caught square in the face/head with a boot with what is effectively a kick

* the tackler part stands and now effects a tackle on the attacker that is wholely in the air - effectively jumping in the air in fact

* the tackler part stands and effects a tackle that due to the attacker's upward momentum, and the tackler's initial upward movement creates purely by circumstance a tip-tackle?


ie in all three circumstances the tackler had reacted very late to something he would not nortmally have foreseen.

I appreciate tis is hypothetical and may never ever happen in a ref's career. But - IF they happened... what should a ref do in each of the 3 situations?

didds

I'm game for this...I won't wait for others to go 1st!
1) RC , the BC is the gambler - risk of kicking deters most BC from attempting
2) Play on , Risk sits with the jumping BC
3) Play on , Risk sits with the jumping BC

My 2p worth.

If you recall Rocky Elsons famous jump over the Fijian, we'll never know if he got penalised for
A) jumping over the no15, or
B) for jumping into the covering player.

I'm inclined to think that had there not been a covering player the he would have been allowed to score, but I might be wrong on that.

 

[Browner]

I am with the penalty against the ball carrier side. For me, regardless of the outcome, out and out leaping over a player is dangerous both to the tackler and the ball carrier.

What about the player who dives head first between two defenders?....try?....
What if he gets his timing wrong?....flying headbutt?

 

[Dixie]

Poor tackling technique, far too low.

You're way off beam here, Phil. Just because world champion high jumpers could not jump over an Everett when crouched doesn't mean the same is true for normal people. This tackler adopted a perfect stance - crouched, balanced, arms open ready for the contact which never came, because the ball carrier jumped over his back.

PK against the ball carrier for dangerous play.

 

[ChrisR]

For me this example is dangerous. However, I wouldn't want to see "jumping the tackler" codified as "dangerous" as jumping over a tackle from the side may not be.

Not the case with tips & neck tackles. They will always be dangerous.

 

[Ciaran Trainor]

Penalty against the ball carrier all day long.
Loud peep, and just say "you can't do that dngerous play"
End of incident any sensible rugby person would accept that decision