Where are you this weekend - 2023/24?

[WombleRef]

Expand on that? Seems a slightly different spin from what I heard at our training

We've been told that while if a second tackler wants to go for a ball, as long as it's a single 'rip' then it's fine. There's not likely to be a degree of danger in terms of head to head collision so we can usually allow it to happen. Obviously if there is a degree of danger then they are liable to be pinged still though.

 

[crossref]

We've been told that while if a second tackler wants to go for a ball, as long as it's a single 'rip' then it's fine. There's not likely to be a degree of danger in terms of head to head collision so we can usually allow it to happen. Obviously if there is a degree of danger then they are liable to be pinged still though.

i think the thing is : he can't be a 'tackler' if he is tackling then he has to be below the sternum.
on the other hand if is not a tackler, but an arriving player, he may be able to attempt a rip that is not a tackle - ie without an impact.

If there is an impact + rip, - which is normally what happens then now it stats to feels like a tackle and so sternum comes in

I think this is going to a key tricky area for everyone

 

[WombleRef]

i think the thing is : he can't be a 'tackler' if he is tackling then he has to be below the sternum.
on the other hand if is not a tackler, but an arriving player, he may be able to attempt a rip that is not a tackle - ie without an impact.

If there is an impact + rip, - which is normally what happens then now it stats to feels like a tackle and so sternum comes in

I think this is going to a key tricky area for everyone

I imagine it's where I'm not using the correct terminology well, but its not like we've been given the best ways to describe it.
My briefing on Sunday was 'if you are the second player going in, you can go for the ball, but you can't go through the ball' - players seemed to get that and respond positively.

 

[crossref]

I like that better as you haven't called him a tackler

 

[crossref]

Of course they do. fortunately still more or less at my playing days weight.

Didn't bother with them but at least 8 pairs, all 32" waist

Ciaran is doing well, but not as well as this guy !

I'm Britain's oldest rugby referee - I stay ahead thanks to my Guinness diet

BRITAIN’S oldest rugby referee Nando Di Matteo is preparing for the new season at the ripe old age of 87 – on a diet of Guinness and bananas. During the past 40 years he has officiated at more than…

www.thesun.co.uk

 

[didds]

My briefing on Sunday was 'if you are the second player going in, you can go for the ball, but you can't go through the ball' - players seemed to get that and respond positively.

so red is tckled by blue #1, but the tackjle only stops red in his/her tracks, doesnt floor them. red is left standing unsteadily.
Blue #2 arrives and cannot now go for the ball still held by the upright red ? He has to wait for red to end up on the ground in ordere to play the ball on the ground?

Is that what is meant ?

 

[crossref]

Didds I would explain it that

- if blue 2 piles in with impact he is likely a tackler and therefore needs to be wrapping and below the sternum
- but if blue 2 is careful, it's possible for him to try and wrestle the ball from red, legally, without becoming a tackler

But it's tricky. Come in with impact and the ref will consider you a tackler . Come in with no impact and you are not a tackler but likely you won't actually be able to prise away the ball. So what's the point ?

 

[Balones]

You would be able to prise the ball by exerting vertical or downward force as opposed to ‘through’ force?

 

[Phil E]

There is some confusion over this aspect of the DLV, especially in different Unions.

The RFU advice I have had (as a Tackle Height Champion) is that you can compete for the ball (blue 2 in the example above) providing you don't make a tackle, and with the proviso that it must not be dangerous or reckless. So if you make contact with the head in the act of trying to wrestle the ball away, then you are "liable" to sanction.
You can also legally grab the arm of the ball carrier in an attempt to dislodge the ball (as opposed to inserting your arm between player and ball).

I have been told (but have no proof) that in Wales they originally said you could try to rip the ball from below, but not above?

So yes, this aspect of the DLV/Trial is confusing.

What you do need to remember is the reason for the new tackle height, which was Safety, Safety, Safety. So if an action is not safe it may be penalised. If it is safe, play on.

 

[Balones]

There is some confusion over this aspect of the DLV, especially in different Unions.

I have been told (but have no proof) that in Wales they originally said you could try to rip the ball from below, but not above?

So yes, this aspect of the DLV/Trial is confusing.

It’s in the link I posted earlier in the thread. Hence my comment about ‘subtle differences’.

 

[Ciaran Trainor]

Well, a nice gentle start, L 9 Kirkby Lonsdale 2 v Eccles 2.

 

[didds]

Didds I would explain it that

- if blue 2 piles in with impact he is likely a tackler and therefore needs to be wrapping and below the sternum
- but if blue 2 is careful, it's possible for him to try and wrestle the ball from red, legally, without becoming a tackler

But it's tricky. Come in with impact and the ref will consider you a tackler . Come in with no impact and you are not a tackler but likely you won't actually be able to prise away the ball. So what's the point ?

thats fine.So what does " you can't go through the ball' -" mean then?

 

[crossref]

thats fine.So what does " you can't go through the ball' -" mean then?

That wasn't my phrase

 

[didds]

That wasn't my phrase

no idea why the site decided it was.

It was wonblerefs.

i didn't edit my reply quote etc - left it as is that the site presented.

Wierd.

anyway - like what i said - it was womble ref apparently.

 

[Balones]

I should have said #34 in the other thread.

 

[Balones]

It’s in the link I posted earlier in the thread. Hence my comment about ‘subtle differences’.

Post #34 in the thread about tackle height.

 

[WombleRef]

There is some confusion over this aspect of the DLV, especially in different Unions.

The RFU advice I have had (as a Tackle Height Champion) is that you can compete for the ball (blue 2 in the example above) providing you don't make a tackle, and with the proviso that it must not be dangerous or reckless. So if you make contact with the head in the act of trying to wrestle the ball away, then you are "liable" to sanction.
You can also legally grab the arm of the ball carrier in an attempt to dislodge the ball (as opposed to inserting your arm between player and ball).

I have been told (but have no proof) that in Wales they originally said you could try to rip the ball from below, but not above?

So yes, this aspect of the DLV/Trial is confusing.

What you do need to remember is the reason for the new tackle height, which was Safety, Safety, Safety. So if an action is not safe it may be penalised. If it is safe, play on.

This is way better than my explanation. It is 100% about safety. I’m also speaking as one of the tackle height champions, but I’ve tried to tweak the RFU guidance to make more sense to how players actually talk; without changing the substantive content.

The challenge is communicating that to players in the way they understand. Going for the ball, not through the ball is my attempt at communicating that and it seems to work…

 

[Lee Lifeson-Peart]

Well, a nice gentle start, L 9 Kirkby Lonsdale 2 v Eccles 2.

I assumed KL only had one team based on that result against Blackburn last year!

 

[Lee Lifeson-Peart]

Another vexicological performance coming up this weekend in N2N.

Sheffield Tigers v Sheffield.

Should be nice weather and a decent crowd so looking forward to it.

It was warm on Saturday - I was the same colour as my orange shirt. 52-24 didn't help!

 

[Marc Wakeham]

There is some confusion over this aspect of the DLV, especially in different Unions.

The RFU advice I have had (as a Tackle Height Champion) is that you can compete for the ball (blue 2 in the example above) providing you don't make a tackle, and with the proviso that it must not be dangerous or reckless. So if you make contact with the head in the act of trying to wrestle the ball away, then you are "liable" to sanction.
You can also legally grab the arm of the ball carrier in an attempt to dislodge the ball (as opposed to inserting your arm between player and ball).

I have been told (but have no proof) that in Wales they originally said you could try to rip the ball from below, but not above?

So yes, this aspect of the DLV/Trial is confusing.

What you do need to remember is the reason for the new tackle height, which was Safety, Safety, Safety. So if an action is not safe it may be penalised. If it is safe, play on.

Not really confusing. re different unions. We have a history at age grade of different varriations. And these are sanctioned (WR) trial withing individual nations. So in RFU take guidence from the RFU in WRU land listen to the WRU etc. It is pretty simple really. The issue will come whne WR bring it all together and makethe long term changes. Presumable they will then make a call.