No tackle..?

[Rich_NL]

https://twitter.com/i/status/1126923614283030528

Seems like it's not in itself dangerous, but where do you start?

If Blue 14 grabs white 1, is it a maul if the BC is off feet? In fact, is he off feet, because no other part of him is supported on the ground? Can the BC dot the ball (or his hand) down and be counted as tackled? What are blue's options to contest safely?

Or is it just a tackle, BC held and eventually brought to ground in touch?

 

[Flish]

It’s not enough for maul, it’s not a completed tackle either, so I’d consider it a tackle in progress that’s gone into touch? With a word after about how the player is returned to the ground safely.

PS: Impressive use of French by WB last night

 

[Christy]

Can i take it ,,there was no penalty awarded .
Just a line out

 

[Dickie E]

line out

 

[mcroker]

Call me soft, but that's pretty close to the wind on 9.18 for me, they had every opportunity (and no legitimate reason not to) to bring him down with far more control than that.

[LAWS][FONT=fs_blakeregular]A player must not lift an opponent off the ground and drop or drive that player so that their head and/or upper body make contact with the ground.[/FONT][/LAWS]

 

[Flish]

Yup, see my comment #2 - at very least that was a potential flare point, in fact I think it did kick off a bit

 

[tewdric]

It looks like hes grasped in the neck area and it is unsportsmanlike - doesn't sit right with me. Instinct is penalty high tackle.

 

[Taff]

For me, the BC has just been pushed / carried to touch.

No offence (he wasn't tipped past the horizontal etc) so LO for me.

 

[crossref]

There should be Law , I think saying no picking up, and if you end up picking someone up unintentionally, you have to put them down

 

[tewdric]

I'd like to see it from a different angle for sure.

 

[mcroker]

Yup, see my comment #2 - at very least that was a potential flare point, in fact I think it did kick off a bit

Interesting the law doesn’t actually say anything about above the horizontal ... and his upper body does make contact with the ground (although that happens in nearly every tackle)

 

[tewdric]

Where has white 10 got his right arm?

 

[Taff]

There should be Law , I think saying no picking up, and if you end up picking someone up unintentionally, you have to put them down

There's already a law against Dangerous Play.

Having your nuts crushed while being dumped in touch may have been humiliating, but it wasn't dangerous IMO.

 

[Zebra1922]

I think he has been lifted, which of itself is not necessarily dangerous, but he has not be lowered to the ground safely, in fact he has been thrown to the ground. Definite penalty with a possible YC.

 

[beckett50]

Nothing in it. Line out to White, and perhaps an acknowledgment to the white players that they didn't drop the ball carrier and kept it all legal

If you see it as "

close to the wind on 9.18

" that means it isn't over the line and you are also saying it is OK.

The ball carrier is not taken past the horizontal and is not dropped from a height. One player has him round the pelvic area and the other is round the thorax so no foul play.

 

[crossref]

There's already a law against Dangerous Play.

Having your nuts crushed while being dumped in touch may have been humiliating, but it wasn't dangerous IMO.

I agree that wasn't dangerous , and therefore not covered by the Law on dangerous play

Which is exactly why I think we need a new law. I don't think we want people being carried

 

[Camquin]

Why now - why not when Carling got carried by all blacks.

 

[Taff]

.... Which is exactly why I think we need a new law. I don't think we want people being carried

But why?

What's the difference between being carried and being lifted? Would the ban on carrying apply to team mates or just opponents? I just don't think it's a big issue - and if it happens and does become dangerous, we already have the laws to penalise them.

 

[Zebra1922]

But why?

What's the difference between being carried and being lifted? Would the ban on carrying apply to team mates or just opponents? I just don't think it's a big issue - and if it happens and does become dangerous, we already have the laws to penalise them.

Whilst i I disagree with those who say no offence, I agree there is no requirement for a new law, this is adequately covered by laws relating to dangerous play (if you view it as dangerous of course!)

 

[crossref]

But why?

What's the difference between being carried and being lifted? Would the ban on carrying apply to team mates or just opponents? I just don't think it's a big issue - and if it happens and does become dangerous, we already have the laws to penalise them.

Whilst i I disagree with those who say no offence, I agree there is no requirement for a new law, this is adequately covered by laws relating to dangerous play (if you view it as dangerous of course!)

I don't think it's a big issue, either; but on balance I think the game would be a little bit better if there was a no carrying law - not because it's dangerous, but because I don't think it's part of what makes rugby the great game it is.

But no biggie, I don't care much either way and I'd far rather WR spent some time and effort sorting out the ruck.