yes, and if they are judging these tackles as worth RC then presumably they are following some defintion and some guidelines different from the definition in 10.4(j) and the guidelines in the 2009 memo.
Players really need to know what that definition is, and what those guidelines say
Our local Game Management Guidelines tell us that if a player is lifted and taken past the horizontal, we MUST issue at least a YC regardless of how the player is brought down (how he lands will determine if a RC is applicable). There is no wriggle room for an instance where a player lifts, the opposition player goes past the horizontal but then the tackler manages to "right the ship" and gently and safely return the player to the ground on his feet. The Laws of The Game do not back this mandatory YC.
We have seen tackles in this RWC, where a player has been lifted and either not gone past the horizontal or has been brought to ground safely, where following a TMO check, a PK has been awarded for a dangerous tackle.
The only reasoning that can be seen for the PK is the "LIFT" and the potential for things to go pear shaped because of that lift.
Obviously, the TMOs and referees are operating under instructions when judging such tackles but the laws are not clear enough one way or the other.
If WR want to eliminate the lift (which I see as a good thing), they need to reflect that in the written LoTG so that it is absolutely clear to the players/coaches that ANY static lifting action will result in a PK as a minimum.
