New measures for contact with the head

[didds]

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

It is in football aka soccer.

Is the FA (EUFA? FIFA?) wrong then?

didds

- - - Updated - - -

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.

totally agree

didds

 

[Phil E]

Looking at some of the wording in the World Rugby Announcement:

New law application guideline will codify zero-tolerance to contact with the head

Head is a no-go area

Reinforcing the zero-tolerance culture regarding head contact in the game at all levels using practical advice and visual educational materials

Does this mean Hand-offs to the head are due to become illegal?

 

[DocY]

Looking at some of the wording in the World Rugby Announcement:



Does this mean Hand-offs to the head are due to become illegal?

Maybe that was the source of the Yorkshire(?) North Mid's society's rumour.

NB: Edited by MOD for clarity.

 

[Ian_Cook]

A NZ Referee perspective

http://lastwordonrugby.com/2016/12/31/new-high-tackle-directive-takes-effect/

Personally, I don't see why WR doesn't just stop pussyfooting around this issue, and simply change the the Law regarding height of tackles.

Currently it states

[LAWS]Law 10.4 (e)

A player must not tackle (or try to tackle) an opponent above the line of the shoulders even if the tackle starts below the line of the shoulders. A tackle around the opponent’s neck or head is dangerous play.
Sanction: Penalty kick[/LAWS]

they should simply change the Law to read

Law 10.4 (e)

A player must not tackle (or try to tackle) an opponent above the line of the armpits even if the tackle starts below the line of the armpits. A tackle around the opponent’s neck or head is dangerous play.
Sanction: Penalty kick

This would lower the top of the "target zone", including the orange area as high instead legal as it is now.

If tackles were kept below the line of the armpits, it would be much less likely that a tackle could "ride up" to the head/neck area.

 

[taff426]

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

Key phrase, MAY still be sanctioned! It seems to me that people are looking at this and thinking any contact to the head will be a Penalty minimum. If it is accidental, in my eyes unless something serious has occurred, it's play on!

 

[didds]

... so I suspect the concern there is that this "MAY" will end up be interpreted as "ALWAYS" as then the ref cannot get hung out to dry on a difference of opinion as to whether the sanction/card was actually warratnted. Its just easier to say WILL rather than make a judgement call.

I'm not saying that is right...

didds

 

[taff426]

The way people are talking you are spot on with what I was inferring Dodds. Surely as refs we are there to manage (where possible) rather than penalise?

 

[Not Kurt Weaver]

This would lower the top of the "target zone", including the orange area as high instead legal as it is now.

If tackles were kept below the line of the armpits, it would be much less likely that a tackle could "ride up" to the head/neck area.

Good picture and explanation.

Perhaps rugby could require a red hoop strip be placed on jerseys world wide. Placed right where the orange area is on picture.

Despite my usual smart arse remarks, I'm half heartedly serious about this. Perhaps RR should seek a patent and we will all be rich.

 

[Pegleg]

I usually tell players to aim low as they are responsible if the arms slide up - whatever the reason. Some take the advise some don't. A law such as Ian suggest would seem a good idea.

 

[Camquin]

I think specifying a red line might be problematical,not sure it would show on a Welsh shirt, having shoulders in contrasting colour would be possible with most designs, even Quins.

 

[talbazar]

... so I suspect the concern there is that this "MAY" will end up be interpreted as "ALWAYS" as then the ref cannot get hung out to dry on a difference of opinion as to whether the sanction/card was actually warratnted. Its just easier to say WILL rather than make a judgement call.

I'm not saying that is right...

didds

To illustrate that, can the more experienced here tell when did the sentence "I don't have a choice" appeared n the referees toolbox to justify sending a player off the pitch?

Just saying...

Note: I use it too...

 

[Lee Lifeson-Peart]

To illustrate that, can the more experienced here tell when did the sentence "I don't have a choice" appeared n the referees toolbox to justify sending a player off the pitch?

Just saying...

Note: I use it too...

I seem to remember Alain Rolland used the phrase when sending Sam Warburton off against France at Eden Park in the RWC in 2011.

He certainly used it (in so many words) in articles later - I assume the quotes are bonafide and not journalese.

See here

If someone could Youtube it (I'm at work) it might reveal if I'm correct or mistaken (again).

 

[didds]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yLpptT_nCp0

I didn't hear the words (then again maybe I missed it!)

didds

 

[SimonSmith]

To illustrate that, can the more experienced here tell when did the sentence "I don't have a choice" appeared n the referees toolbox to justify sending a player off the pitch?

Just saying...

Note: I use it too...

I've used it for a very long time, as with "you're running me out of options" - it places the blame squarely where it belongs, and to a degree depersonalizes the situation.

 

[L'irlandais]

I seem to remember Alain Rolland used the phrase...

I agree Alain Rolland has used those very words when sending Sharpels to the bin in France-England game of 2012 Six Nations. Isn't it possible he's been using it before the infamous match during RWC? He made his Six Nations debut when France beat Scotland 22-10 at Murrayfield in 2002.

 

[Not Kurt Weaver]

I think specifying a red line might be problematical,not sure it would show on a Welsh shirt, having shoulders in contrasting colour would be possible with most designs, even Quins.

Your name is subsequently off the patent application for failure to see the monopolistical (intended msp) opportunities ahead.

The problem with the Welsh means more WR approved jersey sales.

Jesrseys will have to have strict standards (cause the RFU will have their boys with hoop at the belly button). Strict standard means more jerseys and then more......

I do appreciate the reverse negative propaganda you exhibited, perhaps there will be a place for you after all.

 

[Camquin]

I though "I have run out of options" was code for 'you have been cheating all game'.
Whereas "I have no choice" meant 'the gin swilling blazers have told me that is a red, even though I might think otherwise'.

 

[Skids]

A friend on another forum who is not a rugby fan suggested all players be made to wear padded helmets. Surely this would be a good mitigating factor in minimising head injuries?

If they're really serious.

 

[TheBFG]

Yeah, they could wear shoulder pads and have an attacking team and a DEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEfence too :wink:

 

[L'irlandais]

Many's a true word spoken in jest BFG.

Given that across the Big Pond they wear helmets that'd protect a scooter rider from head injury, yet the sport of Americian Football has far more serious problems with concussion and serious head/neck injuries than Rugby Union has. The introduction of such safety gear into the game of Rugby would create more problems than it would solve.
:knuppel2: The rise in serious injury in our sport is due to a rise in cynical foul play in the Professional game
Players must be made responsible for the safety of their opponent. Rather than any additional safety gear, why not make players liable to civil/criminal prosecution for acts of foul play outside the laws of the game? If you punch somebody and go to court for it, I suggest that player won't do that repeatedly. Once or twice maybe, but a career change (or prison sentence) would come along time before for example - Dylan Hartley's run of 7 suspensions. Doesn't Health and Safety at work apply to Professional rugby player? If not, why not? If one is guilty of deliberately inflicting injury to a colleague at his place of work - that is surely gross misconduct and valid reason for getting one's walking papers.

Rugby Unions are at a loss as to how to deal with the issue for years now, the law of the land(or health and Safety people) would put and end to such acts fairly swiftly. If you think that's far fetched, consider Racing Metro are taking South African to court for quitting his job. or read this study
The notion that it is a Sport and so opposition players accept the risks, doesn't wash when it comes to deliberate/cynical acts of foul play. Yes accidents can happen, but enough is enough with deliberately ending an opponents career (tetraplegia for example) with dangerous foul play.