Scarlet Fever Llanelli Rugby Sport Wales Tickets Homepage
Forum Home Forum Home > RUGBY > ARE YOU BLIND REF.... OR ARE WE WRONG ???
  New Posts New Posts
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login


This "no arms" chop tackle

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <123>
Author
Message
aber-fan View Drop Down
Veteran
Veteran
Avatar

Joined: 25 October 2004
Location: Wales
Status: Offline
Points: 12246
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote aber-fan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 September 2015 at 7:26pm
As a more general point regarding laws (here, I'm including all laws, not just rugby ones) - it sometimes happens that clearly unfair or unworkable laws are passed, usually because the legislators haven't thought things through properly. 

What invariably happens in these cases is that the laws are widely ignored, and are quietly ditched.

We'll see where we go with tackling around the legs. Either everyone will apply a stricter interpretation, leading to lots of yellow cards - or we'll go back to a more common sense position where penalties will only be awarded if the tackle seems dangerous.

BTW - no-one has answered my Q about ankle-taps - are they legal, or not? You can't wrap your arms around one leg with one hand!
I share no-one's ideas. I have my own.
(Ivan Turgenev)
Back to Top
Sponsored Links


Back to Top
Havard Fan View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: 30 May 2012
Location: Llanelli
Status: Offline
Points: 572
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Havard Fan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 September 2015 at 7:40pm
I think we are forgetting that we already gave a penalty away for a no arms tackle minutes before Pete was sent off. The ref warned our capt who should have filtered that warning through the team. The second was stupid and as we were already warned about it, deserved a yellow. It feels harsh to us as it was against us and it was a hit on Jim Williams who seems to get away with a lot.
I'm glad they are more strict on it as it is dangerous. Basically shoulder barging someone's legs and knees is going to put someone out of the game for a while.
With regards that ankle tap question, not sure the comparison as by definition you are using your hands or arms in a tackle. If you tripped them with your feet that would be different, penalty possible yellow card dependant on the situation.
Back to Top
Havard Fan View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: 30 May 2012
Location: Llanelli
Status: Offline
Points: 572
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Havard Fan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 September 2015 at 7:43pm
A big concern of mine though is the no arms clear out. This has the potential of causing life changing injuries. However as pointed out, it happens frequently but should be clamped down on.
Back to Top
aber-fan View Drop Down
Veteran
Veteran
Avatar

Joined: 25 October 2004
Location: Wales
Status: Offline
Points: 12246
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote aber-fan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 September 2015 at 7:48pm
Originally posted by Havard Fan Havard Fan wrote:

I think we are forgetting that we already gave a penalty away for a no arms tackle minutes before Pete was sent off. The ref warned our capt who should have filtered that warning through the team. The second was stupid and as we were already warned about it, deserved a yellow. It feels harsh to us as it was against us and it was a hit on Jim Williams who seems to get away with a lot.
I'm glad they are more strict on it as it is dangerous. Basically shoulder barging someone's legs and knees is going to put someone out of the game for a while.
With regards that ankle tap question, not sure the comparison as by definition you are using your hands or arms in a tackle. If you tripped them with your feet that would be different, penalty possible yellow card dependant on the situation.

1. I agree that Pete was stupid to do something that had just been penalised by the ref when someone else did it.

2. I didn't think Pete's tackle (or any similar tackle) was likely to injure Williams, and think he was more likely to hurt himself. I haven't seen any evidence that tackles of this sort have caused injuries - as opposed to spear tackles or the clearly dangerous 'neck twist'. 

3. I hold to my point - if this sort of tackle hasn't been penalised for 55 years or more, why start now?
I share no-one's ideas. I have my own.
(Ivan Turgenev)
Back to Top
Havard Fan View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: 30 May 2012
Location: Llanelli
Status: Offline
Points: 572
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Havard Fan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 September 2015 at 8:33pm
Shoulder charges have always been penalised. The last 8 years or so has seen the development of effective chop tackle. Chop tackles are great where arms are used. What you have started to see the last couple of years especially, is the player not even making an attempt to use the arms. I think jake ball was pinged for this type of tackle for Wales last year. With regards injuries, I think it's quite clear. As an attacker, if you are shoulder barged to the knee area and your studs are locked in, you can say goodbye to your ligaments. I know this has happened. This can happen also in a legal chop tackle, however you can add a lot more force and weight to a hit if you don't use your arms.
Back to Top
aber-fan View Drop Down
Veteran
Veteran
Avatar

Joined: 25 October 2004
Location: Wales
Status: Offline
Points: 12246
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote aber-fan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25 September 2015 at 12:25pm
Originally posted by Havard Fan Havard Fan wrote:

Shoulder charges have always been penalised. The last 8 years or so has seen the development of effective chop tackle. Chop tackles are great where arms are used. What you have started to see the last couple of years especially, is the player not even making an attempt to use the arms. I think jake ball was pinged for this type of tackle for Wales last year. With regards injuries, I think it's quite clear. As an attacker, if you are shoulder barged to the knee area and your studs are locked in, you can say goodbye to your ligaments. I know this has happened. This can happen also in a legal chop tackle, however you can add a lot more force and weight to a hit if you don't use your arms.

You could not be more wrong. Have you ever seen the classic JPR smash on French wing Gourdon, just as he was preparing to dive over in the corner? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KXY6Wfk0Vyg

There was also the famous tackle by Haydn Mainwaring on Avril Malan, which knocked the Springbok captain cold and in no small way led to the Barbarian's defeat of the previously unbeaten tourists: 
"The tackle against South Africa, 1961: Swansea full-back Haydn Mainwaring was the last hope as Springbok Avril Malan charged for the line. No bother, Mainwaring took him out with the most perfectly timed shoulder charge - "like a comet burying itself into earth", reported The Sunday Times.

So I have to assume that you are (relatively) young. The shoulder body check was not banned for very many years after I started watching and playing rugby - and I, for one, used to thoroughly enjoy using it!Thumbs Up

As for Meat's tackle - it was to the shins, not the knee - and as it was head-on, a knee in the shoulder would far more likely dislocate the shoulder than damage the knee. Knees are vulnerable to side tackles or to twists when players are caught in rucks/mauls - see Webb's recent injury.

There is no way to make rugby or any other sport 100% safe. Refs need to judge whether the tackles were risky or not. I happen to disagree with that particular ref, on that occasion anyway.


I share no-one's ideas. I have my own.
(Ivan Turgenev)
Back to Top
KID A View Drop Down
Moderator Group
Moderator Group
Avatar

Joined: 16 August 2004
Location: Cardiff
Status: Offline
Points: 25504
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote KID A Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06 October 2015 at 3:33pm
I've seen at least 5 or 6 of these no arms chop tackles now since the Ulster game. None have been penalised, let alone yellow carded.

This one was by an all black. Using his head. On his own try line.

https://vine.co/v/ePKrB6JuM6I
Back to Top
Eastern outpost View Drop Down
Veteran
Veteran
Avatar

Joined: 13 March 2012
Location: South Suffolk
Status: Offline
Points: 13896
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Eastern outpost Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06 October 2015 at 7:01pm
Plus the Romanian replacement scrum half looked to have nutted a Canadian who came in at the side of the maul that lead to their last try. The panellists chatted about it afterwards and said had it been spotted, it could've been a red card plus probably prevented Canada losing.
Any offence taken on board is only a literate/cy consequence. Every attempt at humour is just that. No personal insult intended. Standards lowered for trolls.
Back to Top
KID A View Drop Down
Moderator Group
Moderator Group
Avatar

Joined: 16 August 2004
Location: Cardiff
Status: Offline
Points: 25504
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote KID A Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06 October 2015 at 8:07pm
JP Doyle's just given one. And a penalty try. That's more like it.
Back to Top
Eastern outpost View Drop Down
Veteran
Veteran
Avatar

Joined: 13 March 2012
Location: South Suffolk
Status: Offline
Points: 13896
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Eastern outpost Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06 October 2015 at 8:09pm
At last.

JP Doyle rides to the rescue and enforces the law.

Wonder if Fiji will pay attention to that?
Any offence taken on board is only a literate/cy consequence. Every attempt at humour is just that. No personal insult intended. Standards lowered for trolls.
Back to Top
KID A View Drop Down
Moderator Group
Moderator Group
Avatar

Joined: 16 August 2004
Location: Cardiff
Status: Offline
Points: 25504
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote KID A Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 November 2015 at 8:34pm
From games this weekend : One of these is penalised. One is not. Can you refs tell me why? Thanks.



Back to Top
aber-fan View Drop Down
Veteran
Veteran
Avatar

Joined: 25 October 2004
Location: Wales
Status: Offline
Points: 12246
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote aber-fan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 November 2015 at 7:02am
Because it's a stupid law in the first place?

Not clear how much contact is made in the first tackle - looks more like an ankle-tap. I did ask a while ago if these were also banned, as they are clearly 'no-arm' tackles. Don't think I got an answer.


Edited by aber-fan - 22 November 2015 at 7:04am
I share no-one's ideas. I have my own.
(Ivan Turgenev)
Back to Top
scarletman View Drop Down
Veteran
Veteran
Avatar
Married with Kids - Close to Bankruptcy

Joined: 18 August 2004
Location: Costa del Tondu
Status: Offline
Points: 12141
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote scarletman Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24 November 2015 at 2:21pm
Originally posted by aber-fan aber-fan wrote:

Because it's a stupid law in the first place?

Not clear how much contact is made in the first tackle - looks more like an ankle-tap. I did ask a while ago if these were also banned, as they are clearly 'no-arm' tackles. Don't think I got an answer.

If you're referring to an "ankle tap" then I have commented on this before on a number of times. An "ankle tap" is NOT  a tackle as invariably the ball carrier is not held and brought to ground as defined in Law. (See below) In rugby the hand is included in "the arm" but the shoulder is not !

"A tackle occurs when the ball carrier is held by one or more opponents and is brought to ground.

A ball carrier who is not held is not a tackled player and a tackle has not taken place.

Opposition players who hold the ball carrier and bring that player to ground, and who also go to ground, are known as tacklers.

Opposition players who hold the ball carrier and do not go to ground are not tacklers.

15.3 Brought to the ground defined

(a)

If the ball carrier has one knee or both knees on the ground, that player has been ‘brought to ground’.

(b)

If the ball carrier is sitting on the ground, or on top of another player on the ground the ball carrier has been ‘brought to ground’.

http://laws.worldrugby.org/?law=15&language=EN

Herman Tours ... Still the best way to travel !
Back to Top
aber-fan View Drop Down
Veteran
Veteran
Avatar

Joined: 25 October 2004
Location: Wales
Status: Offline
Points: 12246
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote aber-fan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24 November 2015 at 3:03pm
Originally posted by scarletman scarletman wrote:

Originally posted by aber-fan aber-fan wrote:

Because it's a stupid law in the first place?

Not clear how much contact is made in the first tackle - looks more like an ankle-tap. I did ask a while ago if these were also banned, as they are clearly 'no-arm' tackles. Don't think I got an answer.

If you're referring to an "ankle tap" then I have commented on this before on a number of times. An "ankle tap" is NOT  a tackle as invariably the ball carrier is not held and brought to ground as defined in Law. (See below) In rugby the hand is included in "the arm" but the shoulder is not !

"A tackle occurs when the ball carrier is held by one or more opponents and is brought to ground.

A ball carrier who is not held is not a tackled player and a tackle has not taken place.

Opposition players who hold the ball carrier and bring that player to ground, and who also go to ground, are known as tacklers.

Opposition players who hold the ball carrier and do not go to ground are not tacklers.

15.3 Brought to the ground defined

(a)

If the ball carrier has one knee or both knees on the ground, that player has been ‘brought to ground’.

(b)

If the ball carrier is sitting on the ground, or on top of another player on the ground the ball carrier has been ‘brought to ground’.

http://laws.worldrugby.org/?law=15&language=EN


Thanks for that.

Presumably, then, a no-arm chop tackle is NOT a tackle under the laws. So how can refs justify penalising players for "not using their arms in a tackle" - if it isn't a tackle in the first place?

(I really am sorry about this, but the laws need to be clearer IMHO. We'll be in "How many angels can dance on a pinhead" territory soon!)

Seems to me the 'dangerousness' of a tackle (or non-tackle) should be the important thing, but I readily admit that drafting laws is a difficult and thankless task... which is why some 'legal' tackles result in nasty injuries, and some 'illegal' ones do not in any way risk the limbs of the 'tackled' player, but get penalised anyway...
I share no-one's ideas. I have my own.
(Ivan Turgenev)
Back to Top
John View Drop Down
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 15 August 2004
Status: Offline
Points: 3859
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote John Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 December 2015 at 3:12pm
Originally posted by KID A KID A wrote:

From games this weekend : One of these is penalised. One is not. Can you refs tell me why? Thanks.



 
In the top one, Williams attempts to avoid the tackle by jumping sideways and the Sarries player does, sort of, move his left arm forward immediately prior to contact. So perhaps that should not be penalised These do not apply in the second one but the "tackler" gets kneed in the head for his sins.
But I am not a referee.... And I see that the referees have not answered the point that a no-arms "tackle" is not a tackle.
 
 
Back to Top
scarletabroad View Drop Down
Veteran
Veteran
Avatar

Joined: 12 July 2011
Location: Hertfordshire
Status: Offline
Points: 3700
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote scarletabroad Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 December 2015 at 6:16pm
incompetence??
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <123>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 11.04
Copyright ©2001-2015 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.063 seconds.