RFU law variations approved to lower tackle height

didds

Resident Club Coach
Joined
Jan 27, 2004
Messages
12,093
Post Likes
1,809
I am aware of a specific set of circumstances [1] where that tackle above may be "OK" - but its very specific and Id say only with players who are very aware of those circumstances and can implement them. I wouldn't be coaching it at the levels I coached

didds
[1] basically a slide defence with a dominant tackle taking the BC backwards so the BC doesn't land "on top". I highlight my final point above.
 

Marc Wakeham


Referees in Wales
Joined
Jan 5, 2018
Messages
2,779
Post Likes
843
Current Referee grade:
Level 2
I am aware of a specific set of circumstances [1] where that tackle above may be "OK" - but its very specific and Id say only with players who are very aware of those circumstances and can implement them. I wouldn't be coaching it at the levels I coached

didds
[1] basically a slide defence with a dominant tackle taking the BC backwards so the BC doesn't land "on top". I highlight my final point above.
That would be liable to be pinged here in Wales.
 
Last edited:

Marc Wakeham


Referees in Wales
Joined
Jan 5, 2018
Messages
2,779
Post Likes
843
Current Referee grade:
Level 2
Would that be because of the position of the tacker's head?
If you make contact above the sternum irrespective of where the head is you are liable to penalty. The point of the trial is to reduce tackle height. This will , in theory reduce head contact. If you start make exceptions then you will not change behaviours.
 

didds

Resident Club Coach
Joined
Jan 27, 2004
Messages
12,093
Post Likes
1,809
maybe i wasnt clear.

the tackle would be below sternum. it would be AS in that pitcure. (thats if that red line is the sternum of course!)
 
Last edited:

buff


Referees in Canada
Joined
Feb 16, 2012
Messages
422
Post Likes
72
Current Referee grade:
Select Grade
If you make contact above the sternum irrespective of where the head is you are liable to penalty. The point of the trial is to reduce tackle height. This will , in theory reduce head contact. If you start make exceptions then you will not change behaviours.
Does the trial in Wales require a lower tackle height than in RFU-land?
 

Marc Wakeham


Referees in Wales
Joined
Jan 5, 2018
Messages
2,779
Post Likes
843
Current Referee grade:
Level 2
I think the important point to note is:

Tackles that start in the green zone and finish in the red zone may be liable to sanction.


So referees (in Wales) have discression not to blow if there is a "non dangerous" slip up or even a fairly "low-impact" tackle over the line. BUT we should still manage the issue.
Cards only come into play where there are repeated offences. (under the trial) "good old fashioned" high tackle sanctions are unchanged.


The trial here is about changing attitudes and behaviours.

So far I have found it is going well. Time and more data may paint a different picture.
 

Phil E


Referees in England
Staff member
Joined
Jan 22, 2008
Messages
16,111
Post Likes
2,372
Current Referee grade:
Level 8
Would you like to clarify?

The whole point of the image in post 43 was to show that the RFU are promoting an unsafe tackling technique (head on the wrong side). It was not about whether it was a legal tackle or not.
 

Marc Wakeham


Referees in Wales
Joined
Jan 5, 2018
Messages
2,779
Post Likes
843
Current Referee grade:
Level 2
I think the RFU (perhaps unwisely) are focusing on the point (that is tackle height) and not general tackle technique The Head at the front is legal, if stupid. But it does show where on the ball carrier is is OK or not ok to make contact so the point is made clearly.
In fact, it could be argued that, by using poor baisc technique the RFU have generated discussion around the picture that would have been quickly forgotten otherwise.
 

didds

Resident Club Coach
Joined
Jan 27, 2004
Messages
12,093
Post Likes
1,809
In fact, it could be argued that, by using poor baisc technique the RFU have generated discussion around the picture that would have been quickly forgotten otherwise.
Yee....eee...sss... I do see your point entirely.
But The RFU ain't that smart...
 
Top