Manu Tuilagi hit with citing

First topic message reminder :

Here's the link: http://www.espnscrum.com/england-tour-2012/rugby/story/164738.html

In my opinion I didn't think it was that bad but if he is cited and misses the tests against South Africa then it gives Jonathan Joseph a chance. I hope he's not cited though.

Sam, dont take my comments as a dig at Tuilgi, I really like him, he could do with a guiding hand at times though from someone like Scott Gibbs, a no nonsense sort of player who brought that physical hardness to his game without going over the mark, which on occasion Tuilagi has been adjudged too.

Thats all, but hes young, and he'll get better with that side of his game as he matures, and think of the hits hes gonna be putting in over the next couple of years, ouch.

formerly known as Sam wrote:

Also Sam you mention Barnes. If he only yellow cards M.Tuilagi for a clear punch you would hardly expect him to punish him for a lesser offence ( an illegal tackle).

Barnes didn't see the punches though did he. He asked the TJ for his recomendations and he told Barnes it was a YC to the pair of them. Barnes can't over rule what he can't see and just as with the Davies incident in the 6N if the TJ says it's only a YC then that's what you give.

It would be a strange twist of a fate if he gets a 4 week ban for an illegal tackle that sounds like it would have been a yellow card at most.This in comparison he got 5 weeks ban for a clear punch.

He got 12 weeks for the punch which was halved for previous good behaviour and remorse and then there was another week knocked off due in mitigation for the aggrevation (Ashton's tap with the knee to Manu's face).

That, and he's starting to build up a bit of a record with these citings and stupid incidents

This will be the first citing since the Ashton punch. In that time he jumped off a ferry (stupid), got fined for wearing a mouth guard he'd originally been given by the RFU when he was an England Under 20s player (the England team have kit specialists what were they doing?) and then there was a YC against Clermont which was a tad harsh but understandable from the refs point of view and lack of slow mo replay.

Nothing for the off the ball dodgy looking tackle then? If you can call that a tackle..... Ashton pushes Manu Tuilagi's back. That's it. Doesn't hit Manu's face. The incident would have been brushed under the carpet if Manu didn't punch Ashton 3 times in retaliation.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mYUqAM9nrMg

I mention this incident because this is the one that will always come up whenever Manu gets thrown in front of the citing commission rightly or wrongly.

This is going to be an interesting decision. Last evening, I watched the match again. Here are the facts, at least as I saw them:

Barnes saw the tackle and clearly decided it was not yellow.
Care was lifted off his feet and his body was past horizontal.
Tuilagi did not drive Care into the ground.
The landing did not seem rough, but certainly Care's body position was part of that.
No injury occurred.

I think this could be the point in time where a solid precedent is established. If a tackler picks anyone up past horizontal regardless of what happens next, will there be an automatic citing and suspension? That would take virtually all subjectivity out of the penalty process. Only decision for the referee is Yellow or Red.

Personally, I don't think there was anything malicious in that tackle. But, I also think it is important for the citing process to be as clear as possible.

Barnes can't catch a break.

First he gets dropped from elite pannel for failing to red card for a tip tackle, then for yellow card for one that is not tip tackle, and now he is in again the hot water for not yellow card a tip tackle that will lead to citing and ban!

He is in tip tackle hell.

doctor_grey wrote:This is going to be an interesting decision. Last evening, I watched the match again. Here are the facts, at least as I saw them:

Barnes saw the tackle and clearly decided it was not yellow.
Care was lifted off his feet and his body was past horizontal.
Tuilagi did not drive Care into the ground.
The landing did not seem rough, but certainly Care's body position was part of that.
No injury occurred.

I think this could be the point in time where a solid precedent is established. If a tackler picks anyone up past horizontal regardless of what happens next, will there be an automatic citing and suspension? That would take virtually all subjectivity out of the penalty process. Only decision for the referee is Yellow or Red.

Personally, I don't think there was anything malicious in that tackle. But, I also think it is important for the citing process to be as clear as possible.

From your description it doesn't sound like Manu deserves a ban.

You are right though. It has to be clear in writing what is allowed and what isn't. There have been too many incidents of inconsistency in regards for bans for tackles.

sadly the lad should be banned and i say that as an england fan- because they need hard lines on this

That's right, mate, on both points. In the absence of any prior history with tip tackles, I would let that tackle go. Didn't appear anything in it. But tip tackles are in the forefront, and consistency with how they are refereed is critical. I think it takes a borderline play like this one to help draw the line between what is acceptable and what is not. I like to keep it simple and would clearly establish taking any player past horizontal is an offense. Regardless of how the tackled player lands. The only decision by the referee is Yellow or Red and then everything else is up to the citing officials.

Nothing for the off the ball dodgy looking tackle then? If you can call that a tackle..... Ashton pushes Manu Tuilagi's back.

I won't open up that arguement again, the tackle by Manu hits the chest and then bounces up. The tackle wasn't cited because of the line Ashton was running and the attempted interception pass knocked on by Castro. Had Castro not knocked on then Ashton would have caught it before being smashed by Manu (with Manu probably being pinged for a high tackle). Nothing malicious or intentionally off the ball about the tackle, though it was certainly a clumsy one that would have yielded a penalty.

If you watch the footage carefully you'll see Ashton step forward over Manu and push his knee into his face as he yells at him. In Manu's trial he says that he thought someone had tried to hit him as he didn't see it just felt it and so reacted. Blackett allowed for the aggrevation from the knee but still smacked a big (deserved) ban on Manu. Manu is certainly not in the realm of Delon Armitage though.

Are any of you guys sarting to arrive at the conclusion that these "tip tacklaes" are a lot to do about nothing?

anotherworldofpain wrote:How can this be when just last week was saw the tip tackle on Victor Vito which one I post about. In that game tackle was worst one and only sanction was penalty.

One rule for the white man, different rule for the polynesian?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kangq4Y20z0

The fact is hooper just too little to making the full lift but all is there. Lift the knees, tip and driving the head.

whadda ya mean? Vito's Polynesian.

You are trying now to blame Vito for being tackle?

Is Hooper polynesian?

formerly known as Sam wrote:

Nothing for the off the ball dodgy looking tackle then? If you can call that a tackle..... Ashton pushes Manu Tuilagi's back.

I won't open up that arguement again, the tackle by Manu hits the chest and then bounces up. The tackle wasn't cited because of the line Ashton was running and the attempted interception pass knocked on by Castro. Had Castro not knocked on then Ashton would have caught it before being smashed by Manu (with Manu probably being pinged for a high tackle). Nothing malicious or intentionally off the ball about the tackle, though it was certainly a clumsy one that would have yielded a penalty.

If you watch the footage carefully you'll see Ashton step forward over Manu and push his knee into his face as he yells at him. In Manu's trial he says that he thought someone had tried to hit him as he didn't see it just felt it and so reacted. Blackett allowed for the aggrevation from the knee but still smacked a big (deserved) ban on Manu. Manu is certainly not in the realm of Delon Armitage though.

You are right we could argue about this on and on with no definitive conclusion. There's the if and buts but this incident happened. It means that when Manu is thrown in front of the citing commission he has this on his record. Manu is not in the same realm of Delon Armitage but he's got to be very careful. Once you get one ban they can rack up as your actions are followed more closely.

From what doctor grey says Manu doesn't deserve a ban. That's fine with me. As doctor grey also says it has to be clear what is allowed and what isn't though.

aucklandlaurie wrote: Are any of you guys sarting to arrive at the conclusion that these "tip tacklaes" are a lot to do about nothing?

No. I think tip tackles can be dangerous if players are driven down into the ground, although I don't think there was any malicious intent in the Tuilagi tackle. And I don't think Care was driven down. It is, however, something which needs to clearly defined in the Laws. We have enough complexity in Rugby and this is a chance to make something simple to referee.

Doc grey
If " tip tackles" are so much more dangerous than any other form of tackle then how come they dont result in more injuries? Or are you saying that if a player gets injured by any other form of tackle then it doesnt really matter, and isnt that Important?

Tip tackles have the potential to be more dangerous, especially when players land on their head, neck or shoulders. If they are dropped that is also potentially dangerous. The citing commissions at the minute are just throwing out bans with no real consistency at present though and that is hard to follow. There was a similar hit on Ford later in the game that was almost identical and in no way dangerous but that has not been cited.

There needs to be a public statement of "you lift the hips past the horizontal then expect a ban", if that's the case make it clear cut. Potential for injury because of how dangerous it is will effect the ban but anything above horizontal is immeadiate citing. At the minute it's unclear and the players are unsure.

I believe tip tackles are more dangerous than conventional tackles. Any time a player is lifted offf the ground he has no control over how he goes down and being in the air makes it more likely he will hit the ground harder. Moreover, there is a greater possibility of hitting the ground with the head or shoulder which can cause serious injury.

I think it is hard to say there are decent stats about the relative injury rate of tip tackles v. conventional tackles. Although we are discussing tip tackles a lot and they are widely publicised, I think they are quite rare. Many games can go by without seeing one. So the data set is quite small.

Having operated on a few shoulders caused by presumed tip tackles, those players on the receiving end agree tip tackles should be banned.

Look mate, Rugby is a physical game. It is part of what makes Rugby a great sport. But when there is an opportunity to make it a little safer, then I think we should do it.

DOC
If "tip tackles"are so rare then how come so many players are being sent off for them in the last year or so? even though in New Zealand lately a lot more are just being treated as a penalty, and get on with the game.

I perhaps should explain that I see a speartackle as something different to a "tip tackle"

A lot of players are being sent off for tip tackles because most tip tackles are being penalised, at least from the matches I see. If there are 200 tackles in a match, there might be one tip tackle amongst them all, but frequently none at all. This is why I say they are rare. The problem is how a referee is able to decide if one specific tip tackle is dangerous and the next one is not.

Can you tell me how you define a spear tackle? Just so I am clear.

Doc

Speartackles have been around in rugby for over a hundred years, Thats where a player picks up a nother and drives him head down into the ground. a "tip tackle" is some thing new, it has only been around for the 3 or 4 years, its a manufactured offence (by way of legislation) and includes a speartackle to give it some credibility.

Spear tackles were always treated under the crieria of dangerous play for the last 40 years that I know of, the sysstem worked fine.

It all start when Umaga and Mealamu spear tackle O'Driscoll and no action is taken.

Then there was witch hunt and special interpretation added. When the real was that just because no video evidence found in the citing window.

Better solution was fix the problem with citing window, but instead we get new much confusion and inconsistency like we see in the Ferris issue and so on.

The door was fix after the horse already gone. Now the door keep swinging in the wind and hit everyone on the ass.

You never stable the ass with the horse!

AWOP
So are you saying that its the Irish that we have to blame for all this "Tip Tackle " rubbish? or is it anyone thats anti McCaw and Umaga.

When I first saw it I thought of Warbs similar tackle, the lift the realise and the drop, although Manus body follows care to the ground.

I think he should be looking at 6 weeks with 2 off maybe? But I get the feeling it'll be 3 with 2 off...

I havent seen the tackle, but it sounds like you'd get less for eye gouging.

You get less for man slaughter these days!!

I was at a game recently at U15 level where every big hit was claimed as a 'tip' by the one coach...

Bluesman
that comment about the u15 coach is not only tragic and sad, but can you imagine the utter garbage he is putting into those kids heads?
And its all so unnecessary.

thebluesmancometh wrote:When I first saw it I thought of Warbs similar tackle, the lift the realise and the drop, although Manus body follows care to the ground.

I think he should be looking at 6 weeks with 2 off maybe? But I get the feeling it'll be 3 with 2 off...

No way - Warbs tackle was far worse

Why was Warbs far worse? They both lifted, they both let go, and Tuilagi's body followed Care to the ground, they are very similar in my view.

Auckland
He was spoken to a few times at half time by the ref and a WRU representitive, then his team got a 50/50 tip decision in the 2nd half ironically.

Neither can be at training sessions though, he will instill a number of kids with the wrong values, but that happens all over the world, coaches trying to hard to win!!

Considering Hayman only got 4 weeks for a much more dangerous tackle where he drove Ngwenya into the ground, Tuilagi should get less but he won't. Will probably get c. 4 weeks - just like Afoa even though neither his or Tuilagi's tackle were that bad. Fact that Hayman only for 4 weeks for a tip tackle that warranted a straight red card just an example of the lack of consistency.

I haven't even seen the tackle yet but I don't agree with the citing.

The whole tip tackle thing is nonsence, political correctness gone mad. Its a tough sport and 9 times out of 10 a player goes of the ground as a result of a perfectly legitimate tackle.

Spear tackles or deliberately dropping a player on the head/neck are dangerous and as Laurie said were already illegal under dangerous play.

For all the citings and bannings under this tip tackle rule I've only seen one that was genuinely dangerous and intentional and that was Davies on Donnacha Ryan. The rest have been much ado about nothing.

Laurie,
OK, I just wanted to make sure we are on the same page, mate. Agree the term tip tackle is a relatively new expression, at least to you and me.

Maybe where we part company is that I don't think spear tackles have been well or consistently officiated in the past, but that's just my observation. I think that kind of play is being highlighted now because of the recent focus on serious injury. As a doc who is also involved with Rugby I am invited to a number of conferences to discuss ways to make Rugby safer. The way the IRB and some Unions present their strategy to prevent a 'tip tackle' from becoming a spear tackle is to eliminate the picking up and taking the tackled player to horizontal altogether. I really can't disagree with that approach. Especially as it is a very uncommon occurance.

The way I would handle this is to call an immediate penalty, the question of simple penalty, Yellow or Red is up to the referee. But all plays like this go to the citing committee for judgement and they will decide whether there was any dangerous play or not. If not, the player's record remains unblemished. The difference between the recent past and now is I would clearly add to the Laws taking a player to horizontal is illegal. This gives players a clear direction.

One thing which is a little funny is that I started hearing the term tip tackle, and I had no clue what was meant. Almost everyone I was with was in the same boat but no one wanted to act like they didn't understand.

rodders wrote:Its a tough sport and 9 times out of 10 a player goes of the ground as a result of a perfectly legitimate tackle.

I would suggest 99 out of 100 or, more probably 999 out of 1000 are perfectly legal. The tip tackle, as I said in my conversation with aucklandlaurie, is a very rare occurrance. So, in the big scheme of things, a small issue. But one which gets a lot of attention because of the increased possibility of injury. Eliminate the picking up a player to horizintal and all is done.

thebluesmancometh wrote:I was at a game recently at U15 level where every big hit was claimed as a 'tip' by the one coach...

Both my lads play at U15 level and I am one of the coaches. I saw only one tip/spear tackle all season long, by anyone. The tip tackle was by the other team, and the first person on the pitch was the other coach who after making sure our lad was OK, then apologised profusely. As did the kid who made the tackle.

I think the message is making it to the youth levels. Any coach who claims every tackle is dangerous should probably be coaching synchronised swimming.

rodders wrote:I haven't even seen the tackle yet but I don't agree with the citing.

The whole tip tackle thing is nonsence, political correctness gone mad. Its a tough sport and 9 times out of 10 a player goes of the ground as a result of a perfectly legitimate tackle.

Spear tackles or deliberately dropping a player on the head/neck are dangerous and as Laurie said were already illegal under dangerous play.

For all the citings and bannings under this tip tackle rule I've only seen one that was genuinely dangerous and intentional and that was Davies on Donnacha Ryan. The rest have been much ado about nothing.

Rodders
Even without you having seen MT's tackle on Care you've nailed it.

Care took the ball up to the line and tried to jink as Manu nailed him with a good hit - shoulder in the midriff and arms wrapped around the back / top of legs. Obviously, when a Tuillagi hits a scrum half like that, there's only going to be one winner. Care went back and through the horizontal without really being lifted upwards (Manu's drive through the tackle was a little upward, but no more than usual for a tackle made from a slightly crouched position). Care twisted slghtly in the air so that he could present the ball well, and the result was that he landed on his shoulder and chest, while still in contact with Tuillagi's shoulder. From recollection, Care was never much above waist level, and certainly wasn't lifted high in the air and intentionally tipped over by MT, nor was he dropped from any height (it may be that in slow motion MT loses his grip before Care lands).

I think Barnes had it spot on - by the current letter of the law it was an illegal tackle but with no intent and so no further sanction. The problem for me is that this shouldn't be an illegal tackle as it was nothing more than the result of a good hit.

Obviously, spear tackles and the nonsense like Davies's dump of Dannacha Ryan are an entirely different kettle of fish and should be penalised under the general rules of dangerous play, including red cards and long suspensions.

GeordieFalcon wrote:BUt Yappy...why is it that so many of the Engliand coaches appear to have selection issues....

Its so blatantly obvious to all England fans that Farrell and Barritt is just not good enough...so why even play it v the baa baas....

Depressing isn't it. Depressing and infuriating. It's always safety first.

Whenever a young English coach is described as progressive I think - perhaps, but we'll see how progessive they are if/when they become involved with England.

As I said Rodders just think Afoa against Munster and you have the picture

I trust SL. what ever he does- and i fully expect a win in SA

When I first saw it I thought of Warbs similar tackle, the lift the realise and the drop, although Manus body follows care to the ground

There's no release, Manu holds on all the way down. Warbs tackle is similar in no way, Warburton dropped Clerc on his neck whilst Manu puts Care down on his side. One left the player needing treatment the other left the player to carry on playing without so much as a complaint to the ref. If you're going to draw similarities it's closer to the Ferris vs Wales tackle.

aucklandlaurie wrote: AWOP
So are you saying that its the Irish that we have to blame for all this "Tip Tackle " rubbish? or is it anyone thats anti McCaw and Umaga.

I don't understanding what is doing with McCaw. But just state fact that the spotlighting on "tip tackle" originate in the media frenzy at Umaga and Mealamu tacklegate. If you think that is Irish to blame then is your decision. But I blaming Alistar Campbell and maybe SCW for take him along.

aucklandlaurie wrote: So are you saying that its the Irish that we have to blame for all this "Tip Tackle " rubbish? or is it anyone thats anti McCaw and Umaga.

I've only seen tip tackles in since the advent of MMA to be honest. I used to train for that (i was bad, so i got hit a lot, and dumped on my head a lot! ) and it is almost identical to a high double leg take down/wrestling slam where the idea is to bring your opponent up over centre of gravity with legs above the head so you gain ground position when you land. That and a good one with driving force will knock a man out cold.

There's also the gym factor in the modern game as well, pro players are now so much stronger now than at any point through history, making it that much 'easier' to pick a man up for the tip tackle. I think there needs to shades of grey in rules changes about tip tackles though as opposed to a clear cut black & white of it all. If there is driving force/malicious intent then the player is cooling his heels. If there is no malicious intent and the player takes due dilligence and puts them down carefully then let it ride.

That would leave it predominantly in the hands of the ref though which opens up another can of worms!

Sam

No chance, Manu's left arm is connected to nothing, and Tuilagi pulls out of the drive on the way down. Warbs pulled out of the tackle mid air, slightly earlier than Manu, and Clerc wasn't as quick to respond as Care was.

They are both deemed 'tips' and Ferris's was much less than Manu's!

Grey

Don't get me wrong I'm not saying all age grade coaches are bad, most are great, but I have seen a small minority looking to gain any advantage they can in order to win.

anotherworldofpain wrote:

aucklandlaurie wrote: AWOP
So are you saying that its the Irish that we have to blame for all this "Tip Tackle " rubbish? or is it anyone thats anti McCaw and Umaga.

I don't understanding what is doing with McCaw. But just state fact that the spotlighting on "tip tackle" originate in the media frenzy at Umaga and Mealamu tacklegate. If you think that is Irish to blame then is your decision. But I blaming Alistar Campbell and maybe SCW for take him along.

Can you fill the gaps for me? The lions incident was in 2005, the IRB tip tackle directive issued in 2011 pre World cup. In that 6 year gap i heard almost nothing of the "tip tackle". Are the two related? And if so, why did the IRB take 6 years to act?

thebluesmancometh wrote:Grey
Don't get me wrong I'm not saying all age grade coaches are bad, most are great, but I have seen a small minority looking to gain any advantage they can in order to win.

Sorry, I misunderstood. Apologies, my bad.

But it does raise two interesting points. First, if a season goes by with only one tip tackle, then kids on many/most/nearly all teams are being taught proper technique (I am patting myself on the back here a little bit as well).
Second, the other coach needs to take his medication. Trying to wind up the referee or get him on your side at U15 level is a bit sad.

Sam

No chance, Manu's left arm is connected to nothing, and Tuilagi pulls out of the drive on the way down.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L95ELSw0Vs0#t=9m12s

10.16. Manu's right arm never leaves the player and his left leaves on the way down only to get a better grip before contact with the ground. It's a controlled landing and Care is completely uneffected. Barnes is right to give the penalty and no more. There is no drop and Care lands on his side as opposed to shoulder joint, neck or head. As I said, it's closer to the Ferris yellow more than anything else.

thebluesmancometh wrote:When I first saw it I thought of Warbs similar tackle, the lift the realise and the drop, although Manus body follows care to the ground.

I think he should be looking at 6 weeks with 2 off maybe? But I get the feeling it'll be 3 with 2 off...

It's not even nearly as bad as Warburton's. Tuilagi's left arm comes off Care just before hitting the ground, but he's still holding with his right and Care only goes slightly beyond horizontal. Sam's was a complete drop from height onto the guy's kneck. Manu will possibly get a ban and rightly so, but it's far less dangerous than the Warburton one.

Sam - Care only landed on his side because he stuck his arm out. If he hadn't done that then he'd have landed on his shoulder.

If care hadn't reacted and twisted in the air I'd argue it's much closer to a spear than a tip.

The fact that Manu follows Care to the ground putting his body weight on top of Care makes it just as bad as Warbs, who clumsily pulls out of a big hit mid air.

It's Cares reaction that save Tuilagi from a big old ban there, not his 'control' on the way down!!!

Sam - Care only landed on his side because he stuck his arm out. If he hadn't done that then he'd have landed on his shoulder.

Actually I'd gues his chest judging from his body angle, with the ball tucked in tight that would have been a quick way to lose your breath. His arm pushes him onto his side so he can present the ball (good concentration that).

The fact that Manu follows Care to the ground putting his body weight on top of Care makes it just as bad as Warbs, who clumsily pulls out of a big hit mid air.

Now you're just talking rubbish because your last statement was proved to be inaccurate. In any tackle you are supposed to land on top of the player you just tackled that's because them landing on you would hurt. Warburton earnt himself a red card for a piece of foul play this was not a piece of foul play.

thebluesmancometh wrote:

The fact that Manu follows Care to the ground putting his body weight on top of Care makes it just as bad as Warbs, who clumsily pulls out of a big hit mid air.

Sorry, that's just not true. As Sam says, that's how you're meant to finish up a tackle if performed properly. I was always taught it's always safer to complete a tackle than to stop halfway, for both parties involved.
What was Manu meant to do, let go of him in mid-air and let him fall to the ground? Or at least try and rectify the situation by returning him to the ground under slightly more controlled circumstances....?

Actually at every level of coaching you are never taught to tackle and end up on top!

At lower levels and junior you are coached to bring the opposing player over your shoulder, and use their momentum to bring them down.

At Elite level every front on tackle is coached to hit at the hip or below, bringing the player down faster to nullify the offload (wrap up aside)

Manu Tuilagi couldve stayed on his feet and lowered Care down, or kept Care on his feet and wrapped him up, at no point does he have to lift Cares hips into the air, then go off his feet, and put his weight on top of Care!

I have said Warbs was a panic, realising he's lifted a small player too high and bailing out in a clumsy attempt to avoid getting in trouble. Because Care landed better means nothing!

So basically you would like to take all of the hard hitting out of rugby? I'm not defending spear tackles at all, but when you say:

thebluesmancometh wrote:

Manu Tuilagi couldve stayed on his feet and lowered Care down, or kept Care on his feet and wrapped him up, at no point does he have to lift Cares hips into the air, then go off his feet, and put his weight on top of Care!

I think that sums up the way rugby is going. Manu made a mistake by lifting Care's legs too high and taking him past horizontal. In my eyes, he then returned him to the ground. Yes he landed on top of him (which quite frankly, I still do not see a problem with), but is that any more dangerous than a scrum collapsing or being stuck at the bottom of a ruck?

At every level of coaching, I was taught to get the guy down. You can't always get yourself into a position whereby you'll be able to tackle a player over your shoulder. Additionally, if you can get in a position where you can drive a player backwards and tackle into them rather than let them roll over your shoulder, you save ground. That's a good hard tackle. In that instance, you'll probably land on top of the tackled player.