Tackle change

[Balones]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/49281949

Opinions?

 

[crossref]

Do we have any idea which of these will be trialled in England next month?

 

[chbg]

The Times of London reports that the tackle height experiment will be trialled immediately in the French community game. Could be interesting for tourists.

So … not only 'how much time left?' but 'how many PK/FKs have we/they incurred?'.

 

[chbg]

This will be a welcome change, but is subject to further investigation:

Off feet at the ruck – players must move away from the ball without delay.
Rationale: To ensure more space and time is afforded to the attacking side. Specialist working group to be formed to assess all issues regarding the ruck/ breakdown.

 

[Pablo]

Several of these are potential nightmares for the lonely community ref, independent of their relative merits.

The 50:22 is going to be a challenge with incompetent/biased/disengaged/non-existent club TJs. In terms of merit, I’m unconvinced - I guess the idea is to force a winger to hang back against the possibility of conceding a deep attacking line-out, thereby creating more space further up the pitch. Only way to prove it works is to trial it, but I’m not looking forward to administering it.

The goal-line drop out - I sort of like the idea of greater rewards for the defenders preventing grounding, but it places HUGE pressure on the ref and his/her positioning. Without a TMO, any doubt over grounding is a potential critical incident.

Team foul limit - I hate this in spades. Mainly because it’s going to be far too hard to keep a good track of penalties along with everything else the lonely community ref has to do. If a team takes a quick tap too fast for me to add to the penalty count, I have another potential critical incident on my hands. I also don’t see these things as being black and white - let’s say the limit is 6 penalties. If Team A accumulates their 6 penalties over 60 minutes for totally unrelated offences, I don’t feel they deserve a yellow card... but if Team B racks up 6 related offences in 12 mins, they TOTALLY deserve their yellow card. But very probably, I would have given them one anyway under the current laws; I don’t need a team penalty limit to enable me to do this.

And for the tackle height that headlines the article: unconvinced. The Championship trial saw an increase in concussions for the tacklers; I will be interested to see if the new trial concludes any differently.

 

[Marc Wakeham]

• No tackles above the waist.

However, an experiment that lowered the tackle height from shoulder height to the level of the tackled player's armpit in the second-tier Championship Cup last season had to be abandoned after concussions increased rather than dropped.

Already trialled and dismissed. So do we keep trilling until they get the result they want?

• A basketball-style team foul limit that sees the final player to infringe given a yellow card as their team reaches the specific number of penalty or free-kick limit.

9.10 already is a form of this law. However, why can’t they leave referees to make the call based on their reading of the game in front of them?

• A 50:22 kick giving a team put-in to the line-out if they kick into touch indirectly (ie on the bounce) when kicking either from their own half into the opposition 22m or from inside their own 22m to the opposition half. The law aims to force wingers to drop deep out of the defensive line, creating space for the attacker to run the ball.

I don’t see a great issue with implementation of this, once we get used to it. However, I can’t see that it will do anything other than encourage more kicking.

• Review of a yellow card during a player's sin-bin period to ensure serious foul play is upgraded to a red card.

.
Not applicable below elite / TV games, where a TMO is available

• Defending team awarded a drop-out from own tryline when attacking player is held up over the line. The current law is to award an attacking scrum five metres out.

Just apply the Laws re grounding. The “didds” principle. Attackers take it in Drop out 22. Defenders take it is 5 m scrum attacking ball. Consistent approach.

 

[TigerCraig]

Dont like any of them. I think I'm going to havr to give rugby away

 

[buff]

I am going to need one of these to keep track of penalties. I won't want to get out my score card for every PK/FK.

https://www.refscorer.com/product/refscorer-digital-watch/

Will tackling below the waist mean no contact at all above the waist of the ball carrier? How will this trial allow the defending team to defend a pick and go where it is difficult to impossible to get at the ball carrier's waist? If you can't get at the ball carrier's arms, how to you stop the offload, short of smashing him onto his back? That is hardly likely to make tackling safer. There are a lot of pitfalls here.

 

[Dickie E]

The 50:22 is going to be a challenge with incompetent/biased/disengaged/non-existent club TJs. In terms of merit, I’m unconvinced - I guess the idea is to force a winger to hang back against the possibility of conceding a deep attacking line-out, thereby creating more space further up the pitch. Only way to prove it works is to trial it, but I’m not looking forward to administering it.

when I read the rationale for this it was (IIRC) all about reducing concussions for the tackler (presumably less tacklers = less concussions).

But less tacklers = less 2 man tacklers = more 1 man tacklers. Surely this then puts a greater physical strain on the lone tackler ???

And with a guaranteed 1 man overlap to the attacking team (cos the open side winger is now deep to guard the 50:22) there will be fewer structured (i.e. well formed & safer) tackles and more last-gasp, desperate tackles with flailing arms, legs, etc

 

[TigerCraig]

I am going to need one of these to keep track of penalties. I won't want to get out my score card for every PK/FK.

https://www.refscorer.com/product/refscorer-digital-watch/

Will tackling below the waist mean no contact at all above the waist of the ball carrier? How will this trial allow the defending team to defend a pick and go where it is difficult to impossible to get at the ball carrier's waist? If you can't get at the ball carrier's arms, how to you stop the offload, short of smashing him onto his back? That is hardly likely to make tackling safer. There are a lot of pitfalls here.

Exactly

I'd be coaching my team to just pick & drive and approach contact by bending double - just draw penalties, and after 10 penalties in the first 5 minutes the oppos will start losing players to the bin

 

[TigerCraig]

With the line drop out, where will the oppos be? If its the same as a 22 (ie they are on the goal line) its going to be hard on the kicker

 

[Dickie E]

With the line drop out, where will the oppos be? If its the same as a 22 (ie they are on the goal line) its going to be hard on the kicker

TC, we will see this at the end of Aug in NRC. I assume oppos will need to be 10 metres and the kick will need to go 10 metres. But who knows?

What if the kick doesn't go 10 and is played by an opponent? Play on, advantage or retake?

 

[TigerCraig]

TC, we will see this at the end of Aug in NRC. I assume oppos will need to be 10 metres and the kick will need to go 10 metres. But who knows?

That would make sense, but to be consistent with other restarts it should be a 5m drop out. Also will it be like a 22 - anywhere along the line, like league from under the posts, or like the current restart in line with the holding up?

 

[crossref]

On the 50:22 does it have the bounce in the oppo 22. Or go onto touch inside the oppo 22? (Or both)

And presumably 'taken back' would apply , so you can't take the ball into your own half and then do a 50 22 m kick ?

I think there is a lot for the community ref to monitor

 

[Pablo]

On the 50:22 does it have the bounce in the oppo 22. Or go onto touch inside the oppo 22? (Or both)

I think both - not sure it makes sense otherwise.

And presumably 'taken back' would apply , so you can't take the ball into your own half and then do a 50 22 m kick ?

This is a really good point, and one I had overlooked. Now I’m looking forward to it even less :-(

 

[Balones]

Whenever new laws are suggested or old ones modified I try to analyse what is proposed in terms of how it is possible for all referees across all levels to be able to apply consistency throughout an individual game and across all referees, with appropriate training of course. I have some doubts about the ability to do this in relation to the tackle proposal. Hence the title of the thread rather than mention of the article as a whole. I was trying to elicit specific opinion on the ‘tackle’. Buff has touched in some areas of this proposed law that could raise issues. No specific guidance has been provided yet as to how the law should be applied so I will reserve judgement until then, but I can see the need for some very clear and extensive guidance so that we can apply some consistency. So much for simplifying the laws! Surely ball carriers are taught, partly for self preservation, to actually dip into a would be tackle to avoid being tackled. To be able to get below the waist in some circumstances would mean the tackler would have to practically lay on the floor. - Another can of worms! Also, where exactly is ‘the waist’? It differs on each person so how is the tackler supposed to know? A line across the chest between armpits is a lot easier to imagine. Tacklers must make contact with the shorts? Hence my concern about consistency across the game.

Personally I have suffered more injuries from a badly positioned/timed tackle on somebody’s hip rather than on their midriff.

 

[OB..]

On the 50:22 does it have the bounce in the oppo 22. Or go onto touch inside the oppo 22? (Or both)

Until told otherwise, I will assume it can bounce anywhere in the field of play before going into touch inside the 22.

And presumably 'taken back' would apply , so you can't take the ball into your own half and then do a 50 22 m kick ?

.Good point. I would assume so.

 

[crossref]

So far as I can tell NONE of these trials will apply in grassroots rugby in England next season

But correct me if I am wrong ?

 

[tewdric]

Neither England or Wales as far as I can see - certainly nothing was mentioned at the recent Dragons/Blues regions refs conference.

I think we have enough on our plates with the high tackle / shoulder charge guidance. I don't think many at community level have grasped how much of a change it is going to be.

 

[Rich_NL]

Also, where exactly is ‘the waist’? It differs on each person so how is the tackler supposed to know?

I presume it's elite-level guidance only. I mean, at grassroots it's something that only the backs really have...