[Tackle] Wales v All Blacks U20 - how is this not a red card?

[Treadmore]

https://mobile.twitter.com/garethsdavies/status/1140651142306816001?s=09

https://rugby365.com/tournaments/un...ccused-of-bias-after-brutal-hit-on-junior-bok

same tackler? Distinctive green boots. Looks like a serial offender.

good spot

 

[Ian_Cook]

The tackle he initiated was safe.
The fact that it wasn't is down to the actions of the ball carrier.

Agree

So it's the victims fault in some eyes?

The ball catcher's actions look like 'bracing for impact' to me - entirely understandable in the circumstances. It is unreasonable to expect the ball catcher to adopt a tall, open stance (they will be hurt if they do) to a tackler, just in case they 'cause' a penalty/yellow/red for the poor tackler.

Bracing for impact? Really?

If you were coaching a team with one of my lads in it, and you coached them to "brace for impact" by lowering their head into the path of an oncoming tackler, I'd be pulling my lad from your team and signing him up with a team that had a coach who knew what he was doing, and was not coaching them techniques that could get them seriously injured.

Unless you're wearing BLACK :sarc: :wink:

Not at all. I would never defend a player based on who he is playing for.


All that said, this lad does have a problem with his tackling technique that needs addressing. Nothing wrong with his positioning in the tackle; leading with the shoulder with arms out ready to wrap and hammering the opponent hard. Its his action of launching himself at the opponent that is the problem. It means he's out of control and there is no margin for error, and no way to pull out if the opponent does something unexpected.

 

[Marc Wakeham]

He's been cited. So we wait and see.


From watching it, after hearing some of the debate (so an "influenced" observation), I could see it being a red or a yellow to the guys on the field. The CC has longer to look and none of the pressures the team have at the game. He should be able to watch it more calmly.

I guess this tackle is on that the idea of the "White" (on report) card was trialled. On field team are not completely convinced so yellow and let the DC look at it at leisure.

 

[didds]

Its his action of launching himself at the opponent that is the problem. It means he's out of control and there is no margin for error, and no way to pull out if the opponent does something unexpected.

This 100%. Feet on the ground gives ability to move, drive with the legs provides coninuous power right through the tackle. Once he is launched as ian says, there is no more control - BC steps - tackler cant go anywhere. initial hit unsettles but doesnt bring to gro0und - no further drive/push available. This is simple, basic stuff too.

didds

 

[Ian_Cook]

This 100%. Feet on the ground gives ability to move, drive with the legs provides coninuous power right through the tackle. Once he is launched as ian says, there is no more control - BC steps - tackler cant go anywhere. initial hit unsettles but doesnt bring to gro0und - no further drive/push available. This is simple, basic stuff too.

didds

Its also gives the ability to adjust if the BC adjusts, and to at least attempt to pull out and mitigate the hit if you misjudge.

 

[didds]

yup. basically its all about control.

 

[Arabcheif]

I can't see the video on twitter (I'm on a work PC). I can see the Sun's one though. If it's the same tackle, the the still pic from the Sun's link clearly shows one of the tackler's feet is on the ground at point of contact. I can't see if there's head contact but it does look like it. I don't think it's direct as the again the still shows shoulder to shoulder, to me it looks like it slid up.
While he has time to line him up initially, the "brace" lowers the height of the head at the last moment. Again in the still shot you can see the knees are bent and the catcher is leaning slightly forward. So the tackler had lined up correctly at chest height I'd argue then at the last split second the catcher drops in height by bending his kness and leaning forward.

For me that's enough to mitigate the red to a yellow.

 

[Phil E]

I can't see the video on twitter (I'm on a work PC). I can see the Sun's one though. If it's the same tackle, the the still pic from the Sun's link clearly shows one of the tackler's feet is on the ground at point of contact. I can't see if there's head contact but it does look like it. I don't think it's direct as the again the still shows shoulder to shoulder, to me it looks like it slid up.
While he has time to line him up initially, the "brace" lowers the height of the head at the last moment. Again in the still shot you can see the knees are bent and the catcher is leaning slightly forward. So the tackler had lined up correctly at chest height I'd argue then at the last split second the catcher drops in height by bending his kness and leaning forward.

For me that's enough to mitigate the red to a yellow.

You can't use any mitigation because there were aggravating factors.

 

[Marc Wakeham]

I can't see the video on twitter (I'm on a work PC). I can see the Sun's one though. If it's the same tackle, the the still pic from the Sun's link clearly shows one of the tackler's feet is on the ground at point of contact. I can't see if there's head contact but it does look like it. I don't think it's direct as the again the still shows shoulder to shoulder, to me it looks like it slid up.
While he has time to line him up initially, the "brace" lowers the height of the head at the last moment. Again in the still shot you can see the knees are bent and the catcher is leaning slightly forward. So the tackler had lined up correctly at chest height I'd argue then at the last split second the catcher drops in height by bending his kness and leaning forward.

For me that's enough to mitigate the red to a yellow.

If you are looking at a still you are unable to make any judgement bout sliding up or the tackled player dropping in height etc. So whilst you ASSUMPTIONS may be correct, they are no more than assumptions.

 

[thepercy]

Agree



Bracing for impact? Really?

If you were coaching a team with one of my lads in it, and you coached them to "brace for impact" by lowering their head into the path of an oncoming tackler, I'd be pulling my lad from your team and signing him up with a team that had a coach who knew what he was doing, and was not coaching them techniques that could get them seriously injured.



Not at all. I would never defend a player based on who he is playing for.


All that said, this lad does have a problem with his tackling technique that needs addressing. Nothing wrong with his positioning in the tackle; leading with the shoulder with arms out ready to wrap and hammering the opponent hard. Its his action of launching himself at the opponent that is the problem. It means he's out of control and there is no margin for error, and no way to pull out if the opponent does something unexpected.

How can you agree with SimonSmith that he initiated a safe tackle, then go on to say he was out of control and launched himself into an opponent. That sounds like he was being reckless to me. The whole point I was making and SimonSmith disagreed with was that once you are out of control, and the circumstances change, then it is your fault and you need to accept the consequence of your recklessness.

 

[Arabcheif]

If you are looking at a still you are unable to make any judgement bout sliding up or the tackled player dropping in height etc. So whilst you ASSUMPTIONS may be correct, they are no more than assumptions.

So, IF the one in the Sun's link is the same tackle as the twitter link. There is a video of the tackle too. I was using the imagery of the still to state that he hadn't launched himself, feet off the ground into the tackle. That he had 1 foot on the ground at the point of impact.

I've seen many tackles both playing and watching rugby. Most the tackler goes off their feet at some point in the tackle. Not every time but in most cases. Other wise he'd be on his feet for the duration of it and there would be no need to roll away.

 

[Ian_Cook]

How can you agree with SimonSmith that he initiated a safe tackle, then go on to say he was out of control and launched himself into an opponent......

https://lmgtfy.com/?q=initiated

 

[Treadmore]

https://lmgtfy.com/?q=initiated

https://lmgtfy.com/?q=site:laws.worldrugby.org "dangerous play"

 

[SimonSmith]

How can you agree with SimonSmith that he initiated a safe tackle, then go on to say he was out of control and launched himself into an opponent. That sounds like he was being reckless to me. The whole point I was making and SimonSmith disagreed with was that once you are out of control, and the circumstances change, then it is your fault and you need to accept the consequence of your recklessness.

Your stance leads to the inevitable conclusion that a perfectly legal chest high tackle can be turned into a red card not by any action of the tackler but by the action of the ball carrier and have no mitigation applied.

That is contrary to established principles in civil law, in criminal law, and natural justice.

 

[Ian_Cook]

https://lmgtfy.com/?q=site:laws.worldrugby.org "dangerous play"

Non sequitur. Your reply to my post is unrelated.

Can you not understand that a tackle may end up being dangerous even though it was not INITIATED in a dangerous manner?

Can you not understand that a tackle technique that is flawed may not necessarily result in a dangerous tackle?

If you and thePercy had actually read and thought about what I posted instead of firing off the first thing that came into your head, you might have stood a chance of understanding these things.

Some examples are

A tackle that starts low and rides up = technique OK, but high so ruled dangerous!
Hurdling a tackler = a flawed technique that isn't inherently dangerous play, until you end up kicking someone in the head!

I'll repeat what I said earlier; hopefully, you will actually read it this time, and understand what I'm getting at - "this lad does have a problem with his tackling technique that needs addressing. Nothing wrong with his positioning in the tackle; leading with the shoulder with arms out ready to wrap and hammering the opponent hard. Its his action of launching himself at the opponent that is the problem. It means he's out of control and there is no margin for error, and no way to pull out if the opponent does something unexpected."

A flawed tackling technique is not an infringement, but it increases the risk of something going wrong. didds gets it, a few others get it... I can't understand why you two don't.

 

[tewdric]

And red it should have been!:

"Samipeni Finau (New Zealand)

New Zealand reserve Samipeni Finau appeared at a hearing before an independent World Rugby Disciplinary Committee chaired by Wang Shao Ing (Singapore) along with John Langford (former Australia player) and Sarah Smith (former Scotland player) in Rosario on 19 June 2019 having been cited by Citing Commissioner Eugene Ryan (Ireland) for striking Wales fullback Ioan Davies with the shoulder/high tackle in breach of Law 9.13 in their match at the World Rugby U20 Championship at Rosario, Argentina on 17 June 2019. The Disciplinary Committee received evidence from Finau, Davies, the Wales team doctor and the referee as well as submissions on behalf of the player. The Disciplinary Committee considered that this was a high tackle which contacted Davies’ head and upheld the citing. They considered this a mid-range breach of Law 9.13 which carries a 6-week entry point. The Disciplinary Committee considered the player’s previously clean record, youth and inexperience to reduce the sanction by 2 weeks to 4 weeks. Finau is suspended from Saturday’s final round at the World Rugby U20 Championship until after his club’s semi-final game in Waikato on 13 July or, if his club do not qualify for the finals, Waikato’s first Mitre 10 Cup pre-season game on 26 July 2019."

 

[Dickie E]

the Wales team doctor

I wonder what a doctor's evidence brings to the process? An outcome based decision?

 

[Arabcheif]

View attachment 3891

Ok here's a still of a millisecond away from contact. Look at the position. He's clearly targeting that ball. Note, again BOTH feet are on the ground, so I'm unsure where this "launching himself" comes from. I'm not sure how to tackle a player who's standing still while as a tackler you also are standing still. Are we suggesting we should walk up to someone and slowly ask permission to tackle? Here's another still.....

Here's the point of contact, shoulder to shoulder. The only direct head contact here is from the Welsh lad's right shoulder to the tackler's head. But that's the tacklers responsibility. I point out again that the right foot is on the ground directly under his own body. If you watch the video, he slows down before the tackle. But at the last split second the catcher drops in height.

While I would probably issue a RC at my level, I don't have the benefit of TMOs, ARs slo mo replays at various angles etc. I really do feel the DC have got this wrong. So if any of you Scottish refs are reffing me in the upcoming season, I expect you to follow this up and if drop to my knee(s) and lower my head into a tackle, I expect you to issue a RC to the tackler. Thanks

 

[Pinky]

All that said, this lad does have a problem with his tackling technique that needs addressing. Nothing wrong with his positioning in the tackle; leading with the shoulder with arms out ready to wrap and hammering the opponent hard. Its his action of launching himself at the opponent that is the problem. It means he's out of control and there is no margin for error, and no way to pull out if the opponent does something unexpected.

I agree with Ian, the launching technique is IMO not a good idea as it must ramp up the danger of the tackle, and that doing so put a player at an increased risk of a higher sanction.

 

[Ian_Cook]

View attachment 3891

Ok here's a still of a millisecond away from contact. Look at the position. He's clearly targeting that ball. Note, again BOTH feet are on the ground, so I'm unsure where this "launching himself" comes from. I'm not sure how to tackle a player who's standing still while as a tackler you also are standing still. Are we suggesting we should walk up to someone and slowly ask permission to tackle? Here's another still.....
View attachment 3892
Here's the point of contact, shoulder to shoulder. The only direct head contact here is from the Welsh lad's right shoulder to the tackler's head. But that's the tacklers responsibility. I point out again that the right foot is on the ground directly under his own body. If you watch the video, he slows down before the tackle. But at the last split second the catcher drops in height.

While I would probably issue a RC at my level, I don't have the benefit of TMOs, ARs slo mo replays at various angles etc. I really do feel the DC have got this wrong. So if any of you Scottish refs are reffing me in the upcoming season, I expect you to follow this up and if drop to my knee(s) and lower my head into a tackle, I expect you to issue a RC to the tackler. Thanks

"Launching" in this context does not necessarily equate to "feet off ground"... I'm not talking about the tackler "Going Superman" here!

It is clear to me, both in the video of the tackle, and your still, that Black 21 cannot be in control of what he is doing. To contrast that, take a look at this tackle by Richard Kahui on Adam Ashley Cooper.

Note that at the beginning, at full speed, Kahui looks as if all he has done is just run up and smashed AAC. However, pay attention to the slo-mos, especially the head-on at 0:25, and the reverse angle at 0:34 on the YouTube timer. You will see that he works really hard to get himself close to the catcher, he keeps his head up and eyes on the target, then he slows down to get the timing right, head and eyes still on the target, and then accelerates to make maximum impact.

This is what I mean about being in control. Using this technique, there is hardly any chance of Kahui getting this wrong. He has almost come to a stop, so he can pull out at the last moment if he has got the timing wrong, or change the way he executes the tackle if his opponent does something unexpected. As you can see, he has been just as effective in putting his opponent on the deck as Finau, but he has done it much more safely, and has been in full control of the tackle right from the get-go.

I use this video to show my lads how to tackle an opponent who is catching the ball, or has caught the ball in the air and has just come to ground - the timing is just a bit different for the latter, but the technique is essentially the same.