The "Choke" Tackle

Players wrap their arm around a player's neck from behind. I have seen it repeatedly in every game I have watched so far. Sometimes it is then followed either by a flip to hurl the player to the ground, or a strangle as they try and keep the player up. Half the commentators seem to be calling it a choke tackle.

How is this not foul play?

LT,

I have seen this more and more now and thought that its dangerous and could cause serious injury but it seems to go unpunished and is accepted.

A choke tackle could be illegal in the same way that an orthodox tackle could be high. That does not mean that all choke tackles are illegal.

Whether or not its a choke tackle or an orthodox tackle if its high its illegal but usually they arent.

Artful_Dodger wrote:A choke tackle could be illegal in the same way that an orthodox tackle could be high. That does not mean that all choke tackles are illegal.

Whether or not its a choke tackle or an orthodox tackle if its high its illegal but usually they arent.

Agreed.
There seems to be a misunderstanding about what a "choke tackle" is. Grabbing someone round the neck is a high tackle. A choke tackle aims to legally wrap the players arms so the ball cant be released and hold him up to work a turnover. It does not target the head / neck.

I agree, I thoroughly dislike it, along with the judo cleanout

The "choke" refers to choking off the ability to off-load or recycle the ball.

It is nothing to do with tackling a player around the head or neck. In fact, usually you want to wrap your arms around their arms and chest to prevent the off load.

I think you are talking about a completely different type of tackle.

OK,

It must have just been co-incidence that amongst the huge number of (renamed) strangle tackles i saw that some were described as chokes.

Either way, why is it only stiff arm high tackles that are penalised? Even then not always. Paul Ringer would feel hard done by if he played today.

More and more the upper body wraps that come in as part of the choke tackle are around the neck. How Munster didn't concede multiple high tackle penalties was beyond me. Ulster were similar last night. Then again if it works and the ref isn't pinging you then why stop?

Add this to the list of things the refs are supposed to stop but don't. Same as feeding at the scrum.

Well, it's not at all the same as feeding the second row of a scrum!

If you feel dangerous tackles are being made that is totally different from squint feeds!

I'm not sure if you mean that Munster and Ulster players in particular are tackling players high or that you think they are particularily skiiled at effecting a turnover by holding a player to prevent an off load?

I just meant there were a few incidents in those games.

It is like a dodgey feed in that the refs have decided en masse to ignore them.

Same again to the new top level fad of dragging players out of rucks by their head.

The thing is, a high tackle pretty much negates the purpose of the Choke Tackle.

The whole point is to wrap up the players arms and you can't do that if you have the hold of their head.

I think we are talking about totally different things here and calling them both "Choke Tackles".

The whole point is to wrap up the players arms and you can't do that if you have the hold of their head.

If you come in high from behind and drag the players head back it opens up his middle as a target for the second man which helps the targeting of the ball. There on in there is one player on the ball and one player controlling the attackers movements. Makes it nigh on impossible for the attacking team to retrieve the ball.

formerly known as Sam wrote:

The whole point is to wrap up the players arms and you can't do that if you have the hold of their head.

If you come in high from behind and drag the players head back it opens up his middle as a target for the second man which helps the targeting of the ball. There on in there is one player on the ball and one player controlling the attackers movements. Makes it nigh on impossible for the attacking team to retrieve the ball.

This is not what I see as a choke tackle.

formerly known as Sam wrote:

The whole point is to wrap up the players arms and you can't do that if you have the hold of their head.

If you come in high from behind and drag the players head back it opens up his middle as a target for the second man which helps the targeting of the ball. There on in there is one player on the ball and one player controlling the attackers movements. Makes it nigh on impossible for the attacking team to retrieve the ball.

Hmmm right, and can you give examples of when this happened in the Ulster and Munster matches which you alluded to earlier?

Not really as I don't have them on record nor do I have the time or inclination to trawl through the games to find the relevant 2 or 3 instances. I remember thinking they were lucky to get away with it at the time but that was about it. I'm not being anti-Irish I had just happened to see instances whilst watching those two games probably because all four teams in those games were keen to use the forwards and the maul.

It's the judo roll I really hate

ChequeredJersey wrote:It's the judo roll I really hate

This is the "grab a player by their head from above and twist" thing to remove them from a ruck?

Fully agree with your view on that! If that is what some are meaning by a "Choke Tackle" then we have a difference in nomenclature not opinion!

As MrsP said, the 'choke' in the term 'choke tackle' refers to choking off possession for the other team by use of the smother tackle in conjunction with holding them up off the ground. Therefore preventing the attacking team from offloading or going to ground which should result in defending teams ball.

However, FKAS, I do think I know what you're talking about with regards to a tackle being high when a fairly stationary attacking player is taken from behing by the tackling player's arm over the shoulder which links up (or try's to) with that tackling player's other arm. I should mention that the other arm of the tackling/defending player i am talking about does not go round the neck but under the armpit of the other arm of the player being tackled.

Sorry that probably doesn't make sense but I'm on de old vino

Oh and by the way, think i may have meant to write 'jibberish' in my edit reason instead of 'jibbering'. Please accept my apologies for that!

Yeah Mrs P, that's what I mean by Judo Roll. Rugby needs to stay a physical game but on or off the ball there is no place for contact on players throats or necks. That (someone grabbing my neck in any situation) is one of few things that will make me lose my rag

I know exactly what you mean there, one of the tacklers arms goes around the attackers throat, the other around the torso. They then have total control over the ball carrier and control the maul.

I think the only reason it's highlighted by the Irish clubs is that they use it so well and so effectively, I def noticed Quins and Saracens impliment it in their games and i'm sure everyone else does this too.

it also happens more and more in classic mauls, as the defenders grapple around the ball carriers throat, again the first guy that comes to mind doing this is Paul O'Connell but all teams do do it i'm sure.

ChequeredJersey wrote:Yeah Mrs P, that's what I mean by Judo Roll. Rugby needs to stay a physical game but on or off the ball there is no place for contact on players throats or necks. That (someone grabbing my neck in any situation) is one of few things that will make me lose my rag

That and players dragging others out by their scrum caps. Both need to be stamped out.

yappysnap wrote:I know exactly what you mean there, one of the tacklers arms goes around the attackers throat, the other around the torso. They then have total control over the ball carrier and control the maul.

I think the only reason it's highlighted by the Irish clubs is that they use it so well and so effectively, I def noticed Quins and Saracens impliment it in their games and i'm sure everyone else does this too.

it also happens more and more in classic mauls, as the defenders grapple around the ball carriers throat, again the first guy that comes to mind doing this is Paul O'Connell but all teams do do it i'm sure.

Not sure if you were replying to me Yappysnap but not so much around the throat but over the shoulder (resting on the neck/throat I guess) and diagonally down across the chest/torso. Torso was probably the word i was looking for when I said 'under the armpit'. But yes essentially what you're saying is what I mean, much easier to hold someone up off the ground if you use that technique.

Irishhoneymonster wrote:

yappysnap wrote:I know exactly what you mean there, one of the tacklers arms goes around the attackers throat, the other around the torso. They then have total control over the ball carrier and control the maul.

I think the only reason it's highlighted by the Irish clubs is that they use it so well and so effectively, I def noticed Quins and Saracens impliment it in their games and i'm sure everyone else does this too.

it also happens more and more in classic mauls, as the defenders grapple around the ball carriers throat, again the first guy that comes to mind doing this is Paul O'Connell but all teams do do it i'm sure.

Not sure if you were replying to me Yappysnap but not so much around the throat but over the shoulder (resting on the neck/throat I guess) and diagonally down across the chest/torso. Torso was probably the word i was looking for when I said 'under the armpit'. But yes essentially what you're saying is what I mean, much easier to hold someone up off the ground if you use that technique.

Bingo that's what I meant- it's the diagonal arm across the shoulder/throat that's the issue here not so much that they're tackled high but that they're gang tackled and then grabbed above the shoulders.

I should probably also say that I don't think that this move I have described (the choke tackle) is in any way dangerous or illegal. Afterall it usually happens from behind when the attacking player has become stationary because of some other form of smother tackle.

However as you guys have alluded to, I do think the Judo roll that is used to take a 'bridge' player out of a ruck is not a good development in Rugby. Having said that the reason it has emerged is probably because players are getting away with bridging in a ruck using their feet and head as supports (as well as using the tackled player for support) which probably isn't completely legal but is something that alot of refs overlook.

Definitely agree that dragging a player out of a ruck by his scrumcap is quite simply out of line and should be stamped down on.

Irishhoneymonster wrote:I should probably also say that I don't think that this move I have described (the choke tackle) is in any way dangerous or illegal. Afterall it usually happens from behind when the attacking player has become stationary because of some other form of smother tackle.

However as you guys have alluded to, I do think the Judo roll that is used to take a 'bridge' player out of a ruck is not a good development in Rugby. Having said that the reason it has emerged is probably because players are getting away with bridging in a ruck using their feet and head as supports (as well as using the tackled player for support) which probably isn't completely legal but is something that alot of refs overlook.

Definitely agree that dragging a player out of a ruck by his scrumcap is quite simply out of line and should be stamped down on.

We'll have none of that either thank you very much!!!!

yappysnap wrote:

Irishhoneymonster wrote:

yappysnap wrote:I know exactly what you mean there, one of the tacklers arms goes around the attackers throat, the other around the torso. They then have total control over the ball carrier and control the maul.

I think the only reason it's highlighted by the Irish clubs is that they use it so well and so effectively, I def noticed Quins and Saracens impliment it in their games and i'm sure everyone else does this too.

it also happens more and more in classic mauls, as the defenders grapple around the ball carriers throat, again the first guy that comes to mind doing this is Paul O'Connell but all teams do do it i'm sure.

Not sure if you were replying to me Yappysnap but not so much around the throat but over the shoulder (resting on the neck/throat I guess) and diagonally down across the chest/torso. Torso was probably the word i was looking for when I said 'under the armpit'. But yes essentially what you're saying is what I mean, much easier to hold someone up off the ground if you use that technique.

Bingo that's what I meant- it's the diagonal arm across the shoulder/throat that's the issue here not so much that they're tackled high but that they're gang tackled and then grabbed above the shoulders.

Glad I wasn't fighting with shadows then Not that this is fighting in any way to be fair

Anyway, like I have said above, I don't really have a problem with this tackle with regards to legality or safety.

MrsP wrote:

Irishhoneymonster wrote:I should probably also say that I don't think that this move I have described (the choke tackle) is in any way dangerous or illegal. Afterall it usually happens from behind when the attacking player has become stationary because of some other form of smother tackle.

However as you guys have alluded to, I do think the Judo roll that is used to take a 'bridge' player out of a ruck is not a good development in Rugby. Having said that the reason it has emerged is probably because players are getting away with bridging in a ruck using their feet and head as supports (as well as using the tackled player for support) which probably isn't completely legal but is something that alot of refs overlook.

Definitely agree that dragging a player out of a ruck by his scrumcap is quite simply out of line and should be stamped down on.

We'll have none of that either thank you very much!!!!

maybe that's it MrsP, maybe that's what we need to bring back to get rid of all this fighting about safety and dangerous play Although to be fair, the old style rucking wasn't particularly dangerous, we did away with that because it looked bad and we wanted to appeal more to the masses. Even in the days of rucking, a stamp was severly frowned upon!

I always thought of it as a choke tackle as if the ball carrier wanted to go to ground he would choke himself as the defending player was holding him around the neck. I first recall it in the NH during the 2011 6N, a tactic employed by IReland. I can't see how it can be legal?

sheephead wrote:I always thought of it as a choke tackle as if the ball carrier wanted to go to ground he would choke himself as the defending player was holding him around the neck. I first recall it in the NH during the 2011 6N, a tactic employed by IReland. I can't see how it can be legal?

sheephead wrote:I always thought of it as a choke tackle as if the ball carrier wanted to go to ground he would choke himself as the defending player was holding him around the neck. I first recall it in the NH during the 2011 6N, a tactic employed by IReland. I can't see how it can be legal?

It has nothing to do with a player choking himself if he manages to go to ground. If that was the case then we might as well allow defending players to stop attacking players from crossing the tryline by brandishing a knife It's all about preventing the attacking player from going to ground while at the same time stopping him from offloading. The choking is the choking of possession/offloading of the other team. It is simply using a smother tackle in conjunction with a style that allows you to better hold the attacking playing up off the ground at the same time. At least this is my view of it and always has been.

I should also say that the 'style' I talk of when I say "using a smother tackle in conjunction with a style that allows you to better hold the attacking playing up off the ground at the same time", doesn't have to be the over the shoulder and diagonally across the chest style I mentioned earlier. It could also be any style of smother tackle that prevents an attacking player from going to ground.

I understand what your saying irish but most of the times these tackles are executed there is an arm going around the attacking players throat. Im not saying the idea is illegal but the execution of it sometimes is (or should be). I eemember the Wales v Ireland game 2011 it happened a few times. The attacking player being held up, in most cases with an arm around his throat. He could only go down if he was willing to cause himself injury.

A proper choke tackle is when the ball is sealed to the attacker by the defense, nothing wrong with that. That said, a large portion of the time, an attackers head and neck get into some aweful positions when defenders are attempting choke tackles and those are the ones that should be penalised.

On a side note, high tackles are not being punished as hard they were in years gone by. I was watching the Leinster - Exeter match yesterday and Leinster really lived a charmed life with the amount of high tackles that went unpunished.

And some naughty tripping too...

Talking about stamping out foul play, has anyone noticed that rucking has slowly edged back in to the game anyway, there's def a lot more boot being used then there was last year to clear rucks.

True Yappy, also during the Leinster - Exeter match there was some 'rucking'. Towards the end of the match v/d Merwe? looked to have his head rucked and was left with a rather nasty head wound.

In the Saints/Glagow match a player has just been wrapped in a neck lock and flipped to the ground. Ball carrier almost went blue dur to being strangled - and ref stands there as if it is OK. Looks far more dangerous than some of the tip tackles that get 6 week bans.

However, FKAS, I do think I know what you're talking about with regards to a tackle being high when a fairly stationary attacking player is taken from behing by the tackling player's arm over the shoulder which links up (or try's to) with that tackling player's other arm. I should mention that the other arm of the tackling/defending player i am talking about does not go round the neck but under the armpit of the other arm of the player being tackled.

A good example of what I mean can be seen around the 49th minute of the Glasgow vs Saints game. Swinson on Oakley. The tackle was not malicious but by trying to hold the player up around the shoulders the arms slip round the throat.

'Choke' tackle should be renamed 'Spoon' tackle or 'Big cuddly bear' tackle. That is all.

eirebilly wrote:A proper choke tackle is when the ball is sealed to the attacker by the defense, nothing wrong with that. That said, a large portion of the time, an attackers head and neck get into some aweful positions when defenders are attempting choke tackles and those are the ones that should be penalised.

On a side note, high tackles are not being punished as hard they were in years gone by. I was watching the Leinster - Exeter match yesterday and Leinster really lived a charmed life with the amount of high tackles that went unpunished.

2 high tackles by Cullen immediately spring to mind. The first could have been a yellow card (but the ref seemed reluctant to go to his pocket, maybe a more experienced ref would have), the second time he did it the referee put his hand towards his pocket to get the card, but then paused as an Exeter player gave a bit of lip. If that Exeter player had stayed quiet, I reckon Cullen would have been gone for 10 minutes.

On the choke tackle, there is a fairly easy answer to it. When a player is isolated and the choke tackle commences, his support shouldn't enter the then mall and try to gain possession of the ball, but should instead start driving the mall forward building up enough momentum to drive over the ball when it goes to ground (and in going to ground, inevitably a number of tacklers will fall away when hitting the deck). The grey line in all of this is the arm over someones shoulder going for the ball. The guy from behind gets best purchase on the tackle by having, say his left arm under the left arm of the player in possession with his hand on the ball, and his right arm over the right shoulder of the player in possession which his hand on the other side of the ball. That diagonal clench should allow the defender to hold player in possession still. Next player in goes straight for the ball and the player in possession is kept upright, forming a mall which the defending side has orchestrated. The arm over the shoulder though should only ever go towards the ball, not under the jaw. Even on the old old rules, arms around the neck can be pinged by the referee in a mall (you see ref's inforce it from lineout drives).

Mrs P, what are you scratching your head at? I think the irish in here are pro "choke tackle" as their teams use the tactic regularly . Other nations are following. The biggest problem I have with the" tackle" is that's its not done bu the book often. By that I mean the only reason the player is kept from going to ground before others come to compete for the ball is that the ball carrier is in a head lock. I've recently had this done to me in a game.

eirebilly wrote:True Yappy, also during the Leinster - Exeter match there was some 'rucking'. Towards the end of the match v/d Merwe? looked to have his head rucked and was left with a rather nasty head wound.

Yea noticed that, not nice at all. Scrum halfs are doing it a lot to highlight naughtiness to refs which is all well and good on hands/arms but anything on the head should be seeing yellow.

yappysnap wrote:

eirebilly wrote:True Yappy, also during the Leinster - Exeter match there was some 'rucking'. Towards the end of the match v/d Merwe? looked to have his head rucked and was left with a rather nasty head wound.

Yea noticed that, not nice at all. Scrum halfs are doing it a lot to highlight naughtiness to refs which is all well and good on hands/arms but anything on the head should be seeing yellow.

A measured kick to the head should be an automatic red card and suspension.