Dylan Hartley rehabilitation setback

First topic message reminder :

Red-carded tonight for a swinging arm tackle against Leinster.

Saints were behind on the scoreboard but on the attack when Hartley came off the bench. Two scrum penalties later, Leinster were on the Saints goal line and duly scored. a try. Not long afterwards, Hartley was sent off, and Saints promptly crumbled. Not really an effective contribution.

It's the sort of thing Hartley has done before but seemed to have left behind under Jones. Poetically, both Lancaster and Jones were at the ground to bear witness.

This red happened in a club match but it has international implications. Jones might stand by his man, or he might take it as a cue to start looking elsewhere for captaincy options. The 6N match against Ireland could be a crucial encounter, and the referee will be Jerome Garces, who just sent Hartley off the field.

If Hartley doesn't lead England during the 6N, then his Lions chances will take a hit.

Steve_rugby wrote:

Rubbish.

SOB is being tackled and is moving towards Hartley. Hartley fully extends his right arm behind his shoulder. Doesn't drop his own shoulder and commit his own body preparing to tackle SOB, no he remains upright and having extended his arm fully behind the plane of his shoulders then throws his arm forwards and keeps it straight, making contact with the back of SOBs head.

Essentially he threw a perfect haymaker making contact with his arm.

Rubbish.

It was a clear attempt at a tackle. From the comments on here either the posters haven't seen it or are just jumping on the knock Hartley bandwagon.

Rubbish

Anyone suggesting otherwise clearly hasn't seen it or is unwilling to accept Hartley straight armed SOB and got red carded.

In case anyone genuinely hasn't seen the incident.

Similar to the Cane no arm tackle in the Hartley aims the tackle and then Wood (I think) tackles as well making it go pear shaped. Clear red but I strruggle to see the intention some otthers do.

Ta RF, in real speed it's going to be a tackle against a standing or upright player and O'Brien goes down at the wrong moment for both of them.

My view - reckless not intentional.

I'm sorry, I play and I wouldn't think to tackle swinging my arm without aiming to hit somebody. I'd tend to tackle with my shoulder first and then use an arm, not like he has. SOB has his back to him and the ball is pretty protected. He can't realistically hope to dislodge the ball like that, so what else can he be trying to achieve? I accept he probably didn't want to connect with the head, but he has a perfect example within his own club side of how to tackle from behind in Lawes (Plisson).

What does not 'intentiona'l mean?

1. He didn't mean to tackle him
2. He didn't mean to tackle him illegally
3. He didn't mean to use a straight arm
4. He didn't mean to hit him on the head
5. He didn't mean to cause him to have to be removed from the game

His arm comes from behind the plane of his shoulders. At no point in tackling a player is a swinging straight arm part of the motion to tackle legally.

Not reckless, intentional

Watched it for the first time, thanks RF.

Contact with the head was clearly not intentional, given that Hartley's arm was at a height well below SOB's standing head height. SOB fell quite suddenly into the path of Hartley's arm.

However, the rules this year require the tackler to anticipate that that could happen and prepare for it. It's a red, and a ban. If the benchmark is Mat Luamanu, who got banned for a similar "go chest high but the ball carrier comes in lower" offence, it'll be 5 weeks or so.

Presuming Ed wrote:It was a clear attempt at a tackle. From the comments on here either the posters haven't seen it or are just jumping on the knock Hartley bandwagon.

No it wasn't. Some are calling it a straight arm tackle, if that's what you mean?

Hartley had no intention of holding the player. He used a straight arm with maximum force, and aimed at the players back. The intent, I believe, was to dislodge the ball, but he managed to contact the head. So, as much as I don't believe he intended to strike the head, I do believe he intended the straight arm hit. Not by actually hitting the ball but by hitting SOB so hard he would release it.

Hes trying to wrap him up an attempted choke tackle. Sob goes down- ends up a bit ugly. Contact spot-get on with it.

Presuming Ed wrote:Hes trying to wrap him up an attempted choke tackle. Sob goes down- ends up a bit ugly. Contact spot-get on with it.

I would be amazed if anyone agrees with you. That's not even close to being true!

Methinks you're on a wind-up

No wind up judt a different opinion. Watch the clip.

Presuming Ed wrote: Hes trying to wrap him up an attempted choke tackle. Sob goes down- ends up a bit ugly. Contact spot-get on with it.

He maybe should have asked O'Brien how to do it first. Leave the choke tackling to the professionals Dylan That was a 1 out of 10 effort.

Presuming Ed wrote:No wind up judt a different opinion. Watch the clip.

You're right, of course. My thinking will change if only I watch the clip. Why didn't I think of doing that in the first place? Just lazy, I guess.

Anywho, if you would like a change of career, Sputnik are looking for Journalists ....

O'Brien looked like he may have been choking on something when Hartley moved in to dislodge the obstruction with a firm slap on the back. It may have ended up a little messy but it's the thought that counts.

It reminds me of when O'Brien tried to pull up Papé's shorts and accidentally clouted him in the midriff last year.

Gents both.

Cyril wrote:

It reminds me of when O'Brien tried to pull up Papé's shorts and accidentally clouted him in the midriff last year.

Gents both.

You were wearing your wife's glasses that day, Cyril?

Anyway, that's why Hartley approached from behind... safer outcome for him.

Cyril wrote:O'Brien looked like he may have been choking on something when Hartley moved in to dislodge the obstruction with a firm slap on the back. It may have ended up a little messy but it's the thought that counts.

It reminds me of when O'Brien tried to pull up Papé's shorts and accidentally clouted him in the midriff last year.

Gents both.

Pape the diver.

You will like this, Cyril:

Pray4Pape

Munchkin wrote:

Cyril wrote:O'Brien looked like he may have been choking on something when Hartley moved in to dislodge the obstruction with a firm slap on the back. It may have ended up a little messy but it's the thought that counts.

It reminds me of when O'Brien tried to pull up Papé's shorts and accidentally clouted him in the midriff last year.

Gents both.

Pape the diver.

You will like this, Cyril:

Pray4Pape

You've got to love the French and their hysterical ways.

Cyril wrote:

Munchkin wrote:

Cyril wrote:O'Brien looked like he may have been choking on something when Hartley moved in to dislodge the obstruction with a firm slap on the back. It may have ended up a little messy but it's the thought that counts.

It reminds me of when O'Brien tried to pull up Papé's shorts and accidentally clouted him in the midriff last year.

Gents both.

Pape the diver.

You will like this, Cyril:

Pray4Pape

You've got to love the French and their hysterical ways.

It's brilliant and fully deserved

You people are sick!  Christ, 606 needs to be taken down right now.

A French international rugby player is shot dead during a game and all you people can do is laugh about it?

SecretFly wrote:You people are sick!  Christ, 606 needs to be taken down right now.

A French international rugby player is shot dead during a game and all you people can do is laugh about it?

Well there were tears in my eyes when I first watched it. Does that count?

Munchkin wrote:

Presuming Ed wrote:Hes trying to wrap him up an attempted choke tackle. Sob goes down- ends up a bit ugly. Contact spot-get on with it.

I would be amazed if anyone agrees with you. That's not even close to being true!

Methinks you're on a wind-up

Clear wind up. You don't wrap without a shoulder first.

Cyril wrote:O'Brien looked like he may have been choking on something when Hartley moved in to dislodge the obstruction with a firm slap on the back. It may have ended up a little messy but it's the thought that counts.

It reminds me of when O'Brien tried to pull up Papé's shorts and accidentally clouted him in the midriff last year.

Gents both.

Good point. I did not consider that angle

If O'Brien doesn't go down Hartley hits him with a hard tackle around the chest area. Just saying...

Saints seem to be in such a state though. Apart from Wasps and Sarries all the English teams seem to be going through some rough times.

lostinwales wrote:If O'Brien doesn't go down Hartley hits him with a hard tackle around the chest area. Just saying...

Saints seem to be in such a state though. Apart from Wasps and Sarries all the English teams seem to be going through some rough times.

You call that a back though.  Just saying.....

I'd be interested seeing this back against what everyone said about Cane.

I don't think it was intentional, but I have no qualms about the red, certainly reckless. I actually think it says more about Northampton than Hartley, they seem to have some discipline issues and clearly not all is rosy. Hartley has 78 caps for England and I can't remember any incidents of note, let alone cards.

I don't watch much Super Rugby but I'd bet NZ (with their "no d***heads" policy) will have someone in the side who's discipline is poor at provincial level but who behaves themselves in a black shirt.

No 7&1/2 wrote:I'd be interested seeing this back against what everyone said about Cane.

My position is consistent. Both recipients were falling into the tackle so any notion that DH or SC were targeting the head doesn't add up to me.

And I differ slightly as I thought Canes was a yellow and this red.

Well I was really only talking about the intent to hit the head part. I thought Canes possibly wasn't even a pen (as he blatantly wraps for me) and Hartleys still a red. It's a swinging arm and that's against the rules!

Not sure about leading with the shoulder into someone's back ad suggested by many on here. No,if you're trying to hold someone up who is backing in to you is to put all your force in to you arm to wrap him up. If he falls at the last moment then this is what made it look bad. Leading with the shoulder in to a players back would be very dangerous.

Munchkin wrote:

Presuming Ed wrote:It was a clear attempt at a tackle. From the comments on here either the posters haven't seen it or are just jumping on the knock Hartley bandwagon.

No it wasn't. Some are calling it a straight arm tackle, if that's what you mean?

Hartley had no intention of holding the player. He used a straight arm with maximum force, and aimed at the players back. The intent, I believe, was to dislodge the ball, but he managed to contact the head. So, as much as I don't believe he intended to strike the head, I do believe he intended the straight arm hit. Not by actually hitting the ball but by hitting SOB so hard he would release it.

This sums it up for me, he may not have been aiming for the head but he was clearly going in with a hit rather than a tackle, no place in rugby for any kind of deliberate hit regardless of where it is aimed.

It had a degree of recklessness that was always going to be yellow or red. The interesting question is why he gets himself in these situations. Maybe he just doesn't want to be a Lion. On the other hand he might be just the sort to deal with the ABs?

cascough wrote:I don't think it was intentional, but I have no qualms about the red, certainly reckless. I actually think it says more about Northampton than Hartley, they seem to have some discipline issues and clearly not all is rosy. Hartley has 78 caps for England and I can't remember any incidents of note, let alone cards.

I don't watch much Super Rugby but I'd bet NZ (with their "no d***heads" policy) will have someone in the side who's discipline is poor at provincial level but who behaves themselves in a black shirt.

Its a fair point...the vast majority of Hartleys disciplinary issues have come with his club ( the same club which tried to back Clarke).
The bite was with England, and he got hung out to dry on that one.

He caught him, it looked bad but lets be frank... a lot of players do it but Hartley simply got his timing wrong.

JW made a career out of tackles like that... its just his execution was a little calmer. We saw about a dozen tackles such as that in the Ireland vs. NZ match 2.

He has a bit of bite in him, so did Jonno, so did bakkies. Sometimes you need guys like this. He should serve a time ban for this but nothing crazy.

If people think NZ are going to be playing nice flowing rugby are living in a dream world. NZ are never out muscled.. and like in 05, like in Ireland in the 2nd match when they are pumped they are brutal. You have to be prepared to take the fire to them... and guys like Hartley are the type the Lions need.

fa0019 wrote:We saw about a dozen tackles such as that in the Ireland vs. NZ match 2.

You said it ...

That looked a bit wild. It's a shame because I just said only last week that he's made a believer out of me in terms of turning a corner.

It was reckless and dangerous. However I'm not entirely convinced it was deliberate.

Red card yes, I'd say 4-5 weeks for a ban is suitable penance. What a silly billy.

Presuming Ed wrote:Hes trying to wrap him up an attempted choke tackle. Sob goes down- ends up a bit ugly. Contact spot-get on with it.

Have you ever seen a choke tackle? When was the last time anyone used one swinging arm to do it?

It's one of those irregular verbs, isn't it?

I went for a hard but fair tackle that the ball carrier stumbled into
You made an effort to wrap but were reckless
He went in with a deliberate swinging arm and should be banned.

I am increasingly sceptical of what people judge to be a swinging arm. I've seen enough cases where a player gets carded for a mistimed tackle (or one where the ball carrier is falling) and everyone nods and goes "oh yes, swinging arm" but if you took the arm away it would have been a shoulder charge.

A good example would be James Horwill who was carded for a swinging arm when he made contact with George Kruis's head in a maul last season. It looked to me at the time like a genuine attempt to bind that went wrong because Kruis (like SOB) fell suddenly into Horwill's path. The citing commissioner eventually agreed - but this year the burden is on the Horwils, Hartleys, Luamanus, Dalys and, erm, Canes to anticipate that opponents might fall and come in lower.

I think this is the right move for the sport, but it will take a period of adjustment as players and coaches get used to it. In the meantime, we need some genuine effort from the authorities to be consistent in enforcing it coupled with a sensible approach to sanctions that incentivises players to be more careful but doesn't hand out long bans for tackles that would have been legal last year.

As a final aside, I've been watching a Jonny Wilkinson coaching DVD from a few years back (pre Toulon) with my kids. It has good coverage of the basic skills - but the clips of Jonny in action include some trademark tackles that today would be at least a yellow. For me it's a big reminder that our standards evolve.

It amazes me how some come up with ridiculous defences of him, not only was it an illegal swinging arm he also made contact with the head so even without the new regulations it would still be a red.

Hartley isn't a problem when everything is going well and its plain sailing but when there are problems or pressure he snaps and loses his head, I've said it here before and he keeps proving me right

I don't think I've seen anyone say it wasn't a red have they? Don't think he snapped in this instance though, looks as if he's trying to put in a hard tackle and circumstances went against him. I'm assuming he;ll be let off if he goes for Canes defence!

There are some on here and also Ian McGeechan saying its a poorly timed tackle, my point is it doesn't matter about the timing the original intent was to swing his arm which is still illegal so the poorly timed defence is irrelevant

The only question is was he aiming for the head

Poorly timed, not for me as it would have been fine if Wood hadn't brought him down. Whether you want to term that as timing is up for debate I suppose. Really doubt he could be aiming at the head as he fell suddenly after he looked as if he had got away from the 1st tackle. Clear red by the rules (unless he does get away with the same citing panel as Canes).

fa0019 wrote:

If people think NZ are going to be playing nice flowing rugby are living in a dream world. NZ are never out muscled.. and like in 05, like in Ireland in the 2nd match when they are pumped they are brutal. You have to be prepared to take the fire to them... and guys like Hartley are the type the Lions need.

fa....look all is fair in love and war if the opponents want to play a ref free game too.  If it's a fight with no rules then I think the Irish or any other side could meet NZ toe to toe in a war game and we'd see how that 'game' panned out.  I'm not so certain NZ would always (or ever) come out tops in the 'brutal' stuff if the ref was taken off the pitch and tied up.

Thus why the game needs a ref.  Thus why a ref needs to blow a whistle now and again..................................

No 7&1/2 wrote:Poorly timed, not for me as it would have been fine if Wood hadn't brought him down. Whether you want to term that as timing is up for debate I suppose. Really doubt he could be aiming at the head as he fell suddenly after he looked as if he had got away from the 1st tackle. Clear red by the rules (unless he does get away with the same citing panel as Canes).

It wouldn't have been fine as it was not an attempt to tackle, to be a tackle within the laws you have to use both arms or attempt to there was none on Hartleys part it was pure thuggery that was made worse by making contact with the head. If he wasn't going for the head he was going for his back which is still bloody dangerous

It's weird that Hartley has a clean record with Jones in charge but just can't help himself when back at Saints.


https://www.sportsjoe.ie/rugby/dylan-hartley-definitive-rap-sheet/8333

Though saying that he's had 3 YCs for England - 3 in 78 games isn't bad to be fair.


As a Jamie George supporter I can't say I would be too upset if Hartley gets a hefty ban.

It's not the worst thing that Hartley has done but he just keeps on racking up the incidents.

beshocked wrote:It's weird that Hartley has a clean record with Jones in charge but just can't help himself when back at Saints.

Eddie Jones strokes the cat. Others kick it or bite at it or bench it. The cat likes to be stroked.

marty2086 wrote:the original intent was to swing his arm which is still illegal so the poorly timed defence is irrelevant

The only question is was he aiming for the head

Funny how some people on here can read minds.

Poorfour wrote:

marty2086 wrote:the original intent was to swing his arm which is still illegal so the poorly timed defence is irrelevant

The only question is was he aiming for the head

Funny how some people on here can read minds.

No mind reading ability required, its clear in the video there was no attempt to use his left arm hence the swinging arm was intended though where contact was made may not have been not exactly rocket science

It was 100% cynical and dirty play, throw the book at the scumbag. No attempt to tackle at all, it was a wild swinging arm. Perhaps aimed for the upperback/lower neck/ ball arrying arm, but he knew SOB was being tackled and would be dropping to the floor and still went chest high. He didn't care if he caught him in the head, otherwise he wouldn't have gone that high. Coward.