New measures for contact with the head

[winchesterref]

http://worldrugby.matchdaymail.com/index.php?action=social&c=7380ad8a673226ae47fce7bff88e9c33.513

If players are down by 2 with a few mins to go, can they feign a slip into the tackle and buy a penalty?

 

[didds]

It must be so. Unless maybe the ref can spot that this occurred and PKs the slipper.

didds

 

[The Fat]

PREDICTION:
watch the explanatory video link in the report for Accidental Contact. I would say that one of the first things coaches will get the ball carrier to do when an opponent attempts to wrap their arms around him, is to raise both arms after the initial contact which will force the tackler's arms to slide up and possibly make contact with the head. Sanction: Penalty

 

[didds]

shurely shome mishtake?

;-)

didds

 

[Taff]

If players are down by 2 with a few mins to go, can they feign a slip into the tackle and buy a penalty?

Sorry, I don't understand what you mean. :chin:

It's a PK either way; it's just that the "Reckless Tackle" also gets a :noyc: or a :norc:

 

[winchesterref]

Sorry, I don't understand what you mean. :chin:

It's a PK either way; it's just that the "Reckless Tackle" also gets a :noyc: or a :norc:

This part mandates a penalty

[LAWS]Accidental tackle
When making contact with another player during a tackle or attempted tackle or during other phases of the game, if a player makes accidental contact with an opponent's head, either directly or where the contact starts below the line of the shoulders, the player may still be sanctioned. This includes situations where the ball-carrier slips into the tackle.

Minimum sanction: Penalty
[/LAWS]

I can see attacking/ball carrying players deliberately "slipping" to buy penalties. These changes will ensure diving in rugby becomes common.

 

[Taff]

... I can see attacking/ball carrying players deliberately "slipping" to buy penalties. These changes will ensure diving in rugby becomes common.

I can see the logic, but I think they may be errr ... "misguided".

[LAWS]21.9 Contrived infringements at the penalty kick
If the referee believes that the kicker’s team has contrived an infringement by their opponents, the referee does not award a further penalty but allows play to continue.[/LAWS]

[LAWS]10.2 (d) A player must not commit any act that may lead the match officials to consider that that player was subject to foul play or any other type of infringement committed by an opponent.
Sanction: Penalty kick[/LAWS]

[LAWS]10.4(m) Acts contrary to good sportsmanship. A player must not do anything that is against the spirit of good sportsmanship in the playing enclosure. Sanction: Penalty kick[/LAWS]

 

[Ian_Cook]

This is my only comment....

 

[didds]

I can see the logic, but I think they may be errr ... "misguided".

[LAWS]21.9 Contrived infringements at the penalty kick
If the referee believes that the kicker’s team has contrived an infringement by their opponents, the referee does not award a further penalty but allows play to continue.[/LAWS]

[LAWS]10.2 (d) A player must not commit any act that may lead the match officials to consider that that player was subject to foul play or any other type of infringement committed by an opponent.
Sanction: Penalty kick[/LAWS]

[LAWS]10.4(m) Acts contrary to good sportsmanship. A player must not do anything that is against the spirit of good sportsmanship in the playing enclosure. Sanction: Penalty kick[/LAWS]

yup.

BUT... the ref has to beleive that this is what has happened.

If you are losing by n2 points with a minute to go and the ref catches you ndelibersately slipping, what is the worst thing that may happen? You lose anyway by 2 points ie status quo.

If however he doesn't think you did it deliberately... what happens? You may actually win.

TBH, I suspect that this won;t just be a last-minute-losing-by-two-points thing. It will become standard practice. Bit like collapsing scrums on the 50/50 ref-hasn't-a-clue-we-may-win-a-PK-or-a-card basis that we've seen for yonks.

( I refer you all to my "who got the card" post from a few weeks ago)

didds

 

[Phil E]

Is it just me, but I can't see a lot of difference between some of the examples of the two types of tackles?

 

[DocY]

Is it just me, but I can't see a lot of difference between some of the examples of the two types of tackles?

Not being able to tell the difference is fairly standard for WR's new laws videos, isn't it?

 

[Dickie E]

I wonder if accidental head contact includes a head clash? If so, who is at fault?

 

[Guyseep]

What about in the reverse case?

Player bends down to tackle the ball carrier and in the process the BC's knee hits the tacklers head - do we penalize that?!

 

[DocY]

I wonder if accidental head contact includes a head clash? If so, who is at fault?

A strict reading would suggest both of them!

 

[Pegleg]

An interesting view:

http://www.varsity.co.uk/sport/11571

 

[didds]

"The problem is that the policy is far too heavily outcome-based."

Now there's a thing.

Apparently 72% of HIA are for TACKLERS not the tackled player.

So if WR want to fully address the concerns over concussions they need to do something about the likes of Leigh halfpenny's dangerous tackle techniqueView attachment 3498.

View attachment 3499

didds

 

[Taff]

... Apparently 72% of HIA are for TACKLERS not the tackled player.

I love it when statistics reveal that the real problem isn't what you always thought it was. That figure really surprised me.

 

[didds]

I love it when statistics reveal that the real problem isn't what you always thought it was. That figure really surprised me.

here is where I saw it


http://www.worldrugby.org/news/213339?utm_source=t.co

Headline findings:
611 HIA incidents were reviewed from 1,516 elite matches
76 per cent of HIA incidents occur in the tackle
72 per cent of HIA incidents in the tackle occur to the tackler
Body position, speed and direction of tackle all influence risk


didds

 

[OB..]

An interesting view:

http://www.varsity.co.uk/sport/11571

Yes, but not entirely accurate.

When England’s Elliot Daly was shown a red card against Argentina last month, it was because the player he tackled in the air unfortunately landed on his head.
Later in the game, Argentina’s Juan Pablo Estelles took out Jonny May in the air: May landed, by chance, on his side, so Estelles was sanctioned with merely a penalty. The intent appeared the same, yet there were radically different sanctions, purely because of the outcome.

As I have argued previously, the actions were significantly different: Daly forced his opponent past horizontal, whereas Estelles didn't. It was not by chance that they landed differently.

I don't know how far the referee applied "outcome only" (which I disagree with) but I certainly agree it was correct to treat them differently.

In Wasps’ European Champions Cup match against Connacht this weekend, Kurtley Beale was yellow-carded when his opponent fell into the tackle, and Beale’s arm slipped up just above the shoulder. Before the new directive, that tackle might not even have been a penalty, let alone a yellow card. Beale had no intent to make a high challenge – nor was he even reckless, in truth – but he spent 10 minutes in the sin bin.

Beale's fault was using a swinging arm. That was definitely reckless.

Attempted murder carries the same sentence as murder: mandatory life. Although you got lucky and did not end up killing anyone, the intention was the same.
If it were similar in rugby, Beale would certainly not have been sanctioned, whilst Daly and Estelles would have been treated equally.

So an attempted punch is just as bad as one that lends?!

I am not convinced that Daly knew what he was doing, but he got into a situation unintentionally and he was at fault because his instincts were wrong.

 

[DocY]

here is where I saw it


http://www.worldrugby.org/news/213339?utm_source=t.co

Headline findings:
611 HIA incidents were reviewed from 1,516 elite matches
76 per cent of HIA incidents occur in the tackle
72 per cent of HIA incidents in the tackle occur to the tackler
Body position, speed and direction of tackle all influence risk


didds

That's more-or-less what I'd expect from lower levels (though without numbers backing it up), so it's interesting to see it's similar at the top where you'd hope players know what they're doing.

That said, I'm still convinced at least some top players are coached to tackle with their heads on the wrong side. I can't see how Halfpenny could have developed into the player he is if he's always tackled like this.