New Tackle Laws
+20
nathan
R!skysports
wolfball
nlpnlp
LordDowlais
toml
Geordie
aucklandlaurie
Hammersmith harrier
The Great Aukster
Scottrf
munkian
eirebilly
Cyril
marty2086
Pete330v2
No 7&1/2
Rugby Fan
rodders
GunsGermsV2
24 posters
The v2 Forum :: Sport :: Rugby Union :: International
Page 4 of 7
Page 4 of 7 • 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7
New Tackle Laws
First topic message reminder :
http://www.irishtimes.com/sport/rugby/new-laws-to-clamp-down-on-high-tackles-could-prove-revolutionary-in-rugby-1.2924256
A lot of people concerned about the new tackle laws. My biggest concern is that it gives referees too much power to decide on intent.
I fear that his will just be another excuse for Wayne Barnes to penalise Ireland unfairly and potentially issue us more yellow cards when we play Wales. I don't trust him to apply the rules consistently or fairly.
http://www.irishtimes.com/sport/rugby/new-laws-to-clamp-down-on-high-tackles-could-prove-revolutionary-in-rugby-1.2924256
A lot of people concerned about the new tackle laws. My biggest concern is that it gives referees too much power to decide on intent.
I fear that his will just be another excuse for Wayne Barnes to penalise Ireland unfairly and potentially issue us more yellow cards when we play Wales. I don't trust him to apply the rules consistently or fairly.
GunsGermsV2- Posts : 2550
Join date : 2016-11-16
Re: New Tackle Laws
nathan wrote:Munchkin wrote:Haskell goes in low and gets knocked out: Poor-Tackle-Haskell
Expect to see an increase of this type of injury.
Goes in low? His head hit Burns rib cage, wouldn't say it was that low just bad technique
It was still low, as opposed to high. And yes, it was bad technique. I said as much.
Guest- Guest
Re: New Tackle Laws
Great. Now hometown broadcasters will have even more opportunity to skew a game to their team's advantage. Any hint of head contact by the opposition will be shown over and over and over for the crowd until the TMO or referee bites. Some away teams will go down to 10 men. If WR are going to pander to all the mums and mummies boys out there then they must look at implementing replay rules at grounds.
Guest- Guest
Re: New Tackle Laws
ebop wrote:Great. Now hometown broadcasters will have even more opportunity to skew a game to their team's advantage. Any hint of head contact by the opposition will be shown over and over and over for the crowd until the TMO or referee bites. Some away teams will go down to 10 men. If WR are going to pander to all the mums and mummies boys out there then they must look at implementing replay rules at grounds.
Dont worry the rules will not apply to New Zealand.
GunsGermsV2- Posts : 2550
Join date : 2016-11-16
Re: New Tackle Laws
Wouldn't bother me if they didGunsGermsV2 wrote:ebop wrote:Great. Now hometown broadcasters will have even more opportunity to skew a game to their team's advantage. Any hint of head contact by the opposition will be shown over and over and over for the crowd until the TMO or referee bites. Some away teams will go down to 10 men. If WR are going to pander to all the mums and mummies boys out there then they must look at implementing replay rules at grounds.
Dont worry the rules will not apply to New Zealand.
It's the desperadoes elsewhere where it'd need strict policing
Like Ireland for example
Guest- Guest
Re: New Tackle Laws
NZ will be one of the qst teams to adapt to different tackling. They like to push the rules but don't like getting pinged for breaking them too much.
No 7&1/2- Posts : 31381
Join date : 2012-10-21
Re: New Tackle Laws
ebop wrote:Portuguese for desperate
Haha, how are Ireland desperate?
GunsGermsV2- Posts : 2550
Join date : 2016-11-16
Re: New Tackle Laws
Why won't rules apply to New Zealand?GunsGermsV2 wrote:ebop wrote:Portuguese for desperate
Haha, how are Ireland desperate?
Guest- Guest
Re: New Tackle Laws
ebop wrote:Why won't rules apply to New Zealand?GunsGermsV2 wrote:ebop wrote:Portuguese for desperate
Haha, how are Ireland desperate?
because over the years there have been many instances where referees could have given the ABs a red card based on precedent, the rules, consistency etc. but haven't. Just because they are the biggest brand in rugby doesn't mean that they should be subject to more lenient rulings. However, they are.
GunsGermsV2- Posts : 2550
Join date : 2016-11-16
Re: New Tackle Laws
That's just sour grapes gunsGunsGermsV2 wrote:ebop wrote:Why won't rules apply to New Zealand?GunsGermsV2 wrote:ebop wrote:Portuguese for desperate
Haha, how are Ireland desperate?
because over the years there have been many instances where referees could have given the ABs a red card based on precedent, the rules, consistency etc. but haven't. Just because they are the biggest brand in rugby doesn't mean that they should be subject to more lenient rulings. However, they are.
Could list an equally long list of unpenalised offences against the ABs
Elbows to heads, head high tackles, eye gouges etc etc
All unpenalised
Guest- Guest
Re: New Tackle Laws
Probably won't go unpenalised any longer. So all good.
No 7&1/2- Posts : 31381
Join date : 2012-10-21
Re: New Tackle Laws
ebop wrote:That's just sour grapes gunsGunsGermsV2 wrote:ebop wrote:Why won't rules apply to New Zealand?GunsGermsV2 wrote:ebop wrote:Portuguese for desperate
Haha, how are Ireland desperate?
because over the years there have been many instances where referees could have given the ABs a red card based on precedent, the rules, consistency etc. but haven't. Just because they are the biggest brand in rugby doesn't mean that they should be subject to more lenient rulings. However, they are.
Could list an equally long list of unpenalised offences against the ABs
Elbows to heads, head high tackles, eye gouges etc etc
All unpenalised
Considering Sam Cane was cleared and WR then released a statement saying ANY contact with head is foul play it seems there is double standards
marty2086- Posts : 11208
Join date : 2011-05-14
Age : 38
Location : Belfast
Re: New Tackle Laws
And yet Sexton can attempt a try saving head high tackle and......nothingmarty2086 wrote:ebop wrote:That's just sour grapes gunsGunsGermsV2 wrote:ebop wrote:Why won't rules apply to New Zealand?GunsGermsV2 wrote:ebop wrote:Portuguese for desperate
Haha, how are Ireland desperate?
because over the years there have been many instances where referees could have given the ABs a red card based on precedent, the rules, consistency etc. but haven't. Just because they are the biggest brand in rugby doesn't mean that they should be subject to more lenient rulings. However, they are.
Could list an equally long list of unpenalised offences against the ABs
Elbows to heads, head high tackles, eye gouges etc etc
All unpenalised
Considering Sam Cane was cleared and WR then released a statement saying ANY contact with head is foul play it seems there is double standards
Guest- Guest
Re: New Tackle Laws
ebop wrote:And yet Sexton can attempt a try saving head high tackle and......nothingmarty2086 wrote:ebop wrote:That's just sour grapes gunsGunsGermsV2 wrote:ebop wrote:Why won't rules apply to New Zealand?GunsGermsV2 wrote:ebop wrote:Portuguese for desperate
Haha, how are Ireland desperate?
because over the years there have been many instances where referees could have given the ABs a red card based on precedent, the rules, consistency etc. but haven't. Just because they are the biggest brand in rugby doesn't mean that they should be subject to more lenient rulings. However, they are.
Could list an equally long list of unpenalised offences against the ABs
Elbows to heads, head high tackles, eye gouges etc etc
All unpenalised
Considering Sam Cane was cleared and WR then released a statement saying ANY contact with head is foul play it seems there is double standards
The shoulder is below the head so maybe they just have a grasp of anatomy unlike you
marty2086- Posts : 11208
Join date : 2011-05-14
Age : 38
Location : Belfast
Re: New Tackle Laws
Sextons tackle didnt make contact with Barret's head initially and wasn't particularly dangerous. There was literally no head movement from Barrett in the tackle as Sexton hit the shoulder as he tried to knock the ball out of Barrett's hands.
Any contact with Barrett's head was about as significant as a head massage. Yes, it was potentially a penalty as you cant tackle that high however, not sure how kiwis can whinge about this on one hand and ignore how much real (not imaginary) impact there was to Henshaw's head in the tackle by Cane, intentional or not.
Any contact with Barrett's head was about as significant as a head massage. Yes, it was potentially a penalty as you cant tackle that high however, not sure how kiwis can whinge about this on one hand and ignore how much real (not imaginary) impact there was to Henshaw's head in the tackle by Cane, intentional or not.
GunsGermsV2- Posts : 2550
Join date : 2016-11-16
Re: New Tackle Laws
And maybe you can't readmarty2086 wrote:ebop wrote:And yet Sexton can attempt a try saving head high tackle and......nothingmarty2086 wrote:ebop wrote:That's just sour grapes gunsGunsGermsV2 wrote:ebop wrote:Why won't rules apply to New Zealand?GunsGermsV2 wrote:ebop wrote:Portuguese for desperate
Haha, how are Ireland desperate?
because over the years there have been many instances where referees could have given the ABs a red card based on precedent, the rules, consistency etc. but haven't. Just because they are the biggest brand in rugby doesn't mean that they should be subject to more lenient rulings. However, they are.
Could list an equally long list of unpenalised offences against the ABs
Elbows to heads, head high tackles, eye gouges etc etc
All unpenalised
Considering Sam Cane was cleared and WR then released a statement saying ANY contact with head is foul play it seems there is double standards
The shoulder is below the head so maybe they just have a grasp of anatomy unlike you
"contact also applies to grabbing and rolling or twisting around the head/neck area even if the contact starts below the line of the shoulders"
Guest- Guest
Re: New Tackle Laws
Guns, you're the one whinging about ABs being above the law
I'm whinging about biased host broadcasters affecting the outcome of games and this new rule providing them with a new tool to exploit
And they will
Any teeny weeny little head tap will be blown out of All proportions
I'm whinging about biased host broadcasters affecting the outcome of games and this new rule providing them with a new tool to exploit
And they will
Any teeny weeny little head tap will be blown out of All proportions
Last edited by ebop on Tue Jan 10, 2017 8:48 pm; edited 1 time in total
Guest- Guest
Re: New Tackle Laws
ebop wrote:And maybe you can't readmarty2086 wrote:ebop wrote:And yet Sexton can attempt a try saving head high tackle and......nothingmarty2086 wrote:ebop wrote:That's just sour grapes gunsGunsGermsV2 wrote:ebop wrote:Why won't rules apply to New Zealand?GunsGermsV2 wrote:ebop wrote:Portuguese for desperate
Haha, how are Ireland desperate?
because over the years there have been many instances where referees could have given the ABs a red card based on precedent, the rules, consistency etc. but haven't. Just because they are the biggest brand in rugby doesn't mean that they should be subject to more lenient rulings. However, they are.
Could list an equally long list of unpenalised offences against the ABs
Elbows to heads, head high tackles, eye gouges etc etc
All unpenalised
Considering Sam Cane was cleared and WR then released a statement saying ANY contact with head is foul play it seems there is double standards
The shoulder is below the head so maybe they just have a grasp of anatomy unlike you
"contact also applies to grabbing and rolling or twisting around the head/neck area even if the contact starts below the line of the shoulders"
Then whats your problem? Barrett was neither twisted or rolled or are you going to try to redefine that too?
marty2086- Posts : 11208
Join date : 2011-05-14
Age : 38
Location : Belfast
Re: New Tackle Laws
It's officialmarty2086 wrote:ebop wrote:And maybe you can't readmarty2086 wrote:ebop wrote:And yet Sexton can attempt a try saving head high tackle and......nothingmarty2086 wrote:ebop wrote:That's just sour grapes gunsGunsGermsV2 wrote:ebop wrote:Why won't rules apply to New Zealand?GunsGermsV2 wrote:ebop wrote:Portuguese for desperate
Haha, how are Ireland desperate?
because over the years there have been many instances where referees could have given the ABs a red card based on precedent, the rules, consistency etc. but haven't. Just because they are the biggest brand in rugby doesn't mean that they should be subject to more lenient rulings. However, they are.
Could list an equally long list of unpenalised offences against the ABs
Elbows to heads, head high tackles, eye gouges etc etc
All unpenalised
Considering Sam Cane was cleared and WR then released a statement saying ANY contact with head is foul play it seems there is double standards
The shoulder is below the head so maybe they just have a grasp of anatomy unlike you
"contact also applies to grabbing and rolling or twisting around the head/neck area even if the contact starts below the line of the shoulders"
Then whats your problem? Barrett was neither twisted or rolled or are you going to try to redefine that too?
You can't read
Guest- Guest
Re: New Tackle Laws
ebop wrote:It's officialmarty2086 wrote:ebop wrote:And maybe you can't readmarty2086 wrote:ebop wrote:And yet Sexton can attempt a try saving head high tackle and......nothingmarty2086 wrote:ebop wrote:That's just sour grapes gunsGunsGermsV2 wrote:ebop wrote:Why won't rules apply to New Zealand?GunsGermsV2 wrote:ebop wrote:Portuguese for desperate
Haha, how are Ireland desperate?
because over the years there have been many instances where referees could have given the ABs a red card based on precedent, the rules, consistency etc. but haven't. Just because they are the biggest brand in rugby doesn't mean that they should be subject to more lenient rulings. However, they are.
Could list an equally long list of unpenalised offences against the ABs
Elbows to heads, head high tackles, eye gouges etc etc
All unpenalised
Considering Sam Cane was cleared and WR then released a statement saying ANY contact with head is foul play it seems there is double standards
The shoulder is below the head so maybe they just have a grasp of anatomy unlike you
"contact also applies to grabbing and rolling or twisting around the head/neck area even if the contact starts below the line of the shoulders"
Then whats your problem? Barrett was neither twisted or rolled or are you going to try to redefine that too?
You can't read
No I think youll find you can't
For it to be a penalty grabbing the neck alone isn't a penalty you you have to grab AND(that's the key word) twist or roll
Get it now?
marty2086- Posts : 11208
Join date : 2011-05-14
Age : 38
Location : Belfast
Re: New Tackle Laws
My humblest of apologiesmarty2086 wrote:No I think youll find you can't
For it to be a penalty grabbing the neck alone isn't a penalty you you have to grab AND(that's the key word) twist or roll
Get it now?
It turns out I was barking up the wrong tree
Sexton didn't grab Barrett's neck/head
He 'clobbered' his head with his forearm
Guest- Guest
Re: New Tackle Laws
He grabbed his neck which you have pointed isn't foul play
So now you go and just make sh*t up?
Seems AB fans turn into 4 year olds if you say anything against their team
So now you go and just make sh*t up?
Seems AB fans turn into 4 year olds if you say anything against their team
marty2086- Posts : 11208
Join date : 2011-05-14
Age : 38
Location : Belfast
Re: New Tackle Laws
No
What I actually did was I popped over to YouTube and reacquainted myself with the incident and saw with my own eyes Sexton clobbering Barrett across the head with his forearm
And low and behold
No card???
No penalty???
Did they replay it over and over and over on the big screen?
What I actually did was I popped over to YouTube and reacquainted myself with the incident and saw with my own eyes Sexton clobbering Barrett across the head with his forearm
And low and behold
No card???
No penalty???
Did they replay it over and over and over on the big screen?
Last edited by ebop on Tue Jan 10, 2017 9:09 pm; edited 1 time in total
Guest- Guest
Re: New Tackle Laws
Clobbered. Dear god. Likely be the same outcome now given the try was scored. If it wasn't scored it would be the same outcome before and after, yellow and penalty try. Cane would now be red carded while before its a yellow.
No 7&1/2- Posts : 31381
Join date : 2012-10-21
Re: New Tackle Laws
ebop wrote:No
What I actually did was I popped over to YouTube and reacquainted myself with the incident and saw with my own eyes Sexton clobbering Barrett across the head with his forearm
Like I said turning into a 4 year old
O <Head
l <Neck
Get it right!
I'd also suggest popping over to dictionary.com and acquainting yourself with the meaning of the word clobber
marty2086- Posts : 11208
Join date : 2011-05-14
Age : 38
Location : Belfast
Re: New Tackle Laws
Come on marty
No need to get all wound up and name call
Go have a look at the tackle, he 'clobbers' Barrett
No need to get all wound up and name call
Go have a look at the tackle, he 'clobbers' Barrett
Guest- Guest
Re: New Tackle Laws
And it makes no difference before the new rules or after.
No 7&1/2- Posts : 31381
Join date : 2012-10-21
Re: New Tackle Laws
ebop wrote:Come on marty
No need to get all wound up and name call
Go have a look at the tackle, he 'clobbers' Barrett
Well theres no need to make stuff up but if you get on like a child Ill call you out for being one, pretty simple
The contact was with the neck not the head and to clobber requires force which there wasn't so maybe you just need to grow up
marty2086- Posts : 11208
Join date : 2011-05-14
Age : 38
Location : Belfast
Re: New Tackle Laws
Lolmarty2086 wrote:ebop wrote:Come on marty
No need to get all wound up and name call
Go have a look at the tackle, he 'clobbers' Barrett
Well theres no need to make stuff up but if you get on like a child Ill call you out for being one, pretty simple
The contact was with the neck not the head and to clobber requires force which there wasn't so maybe you just need to grow up
You're an amateur mate
Guest- Guest
Re: New Tackle Laws
No 7.5, I think this new law will be exploited and I have reservations about it even though the intention is good. Marty on the other hand is whipping himself up into a lather on his own accord.
Guest- Guest
Re: New Tackle Laws
seems hes rewriting the dictionary and redefining body parts in an attempt to weakly defend the the holier than thou ABs
marty2086- Posts : 11208
Join date : 2011-05-14
Age : 38
Location : Belfast
Re: New Tackle Laws
ebop wrote:No 7.5, I think this new law will be exploited and I have reservations about it even though the intention is good. Marty on the other hand is whipping himself up into a lather on his own accord.
Excuse me, when pointed out Cane was let of despite the laws you made stuff up
Now you are making sick insinuations?
How very classy of a pathetic individual
marty2086- Posts : 11208
Join date : 2011-05-14
Age : 38
Location : Belfast
Re: New Tackle Laws
Don't think Canes was red and on review wasn't would be now marty.
The way round that ebop is not to tackle high.
The way round that ebop is not to tackle high.
No 7&1/2- Posts : 31381
Join date : 2012-10-21
Re: New Tackle Laws
No 7&1/2 wrote:Don't think Canes was red and on review wasn't would be now marty.
The way round that ebop is not to tackle high.
Under the directives at the time it was a penalty and yellow card at least and WR released a statement saying as much the day after Canes hearing
marty2086- Posts : 11208
Join date : 2011-05-14
Age : 38
Location : Belfast
Re: New Tackle Laws
Meltdownmarty2086 wrote:ebop wrote:No 7.5, I think this new law will be exploited and I have reservations about it even though the intention is good. Marty on the other hand is whipping himself up into a lather on his own accord.
Excuse me, when pointed out Cane was let of despite the laws you made stuff up
Now you are making sick insinuations?
How very classy of a pathetic individual
Guest- Guest
Re: New Tackle Laws
You're absolutely right. Rugby evolves and this is just another step. If there is a loop hole I just need to have faith that it'll get plugged. Hopefully not after a high stakes occasion.No 7&1/2 wrote:The way round that ebop is not to tackle high.
Guest- Guest
Re: New Tackle Laws
The way it has been reffed so far is that refs ask the two to review in play or look themselves at a break.
No 7&1/2- Posts : 31381
Join date : 2012-10-21
Re: New Tackle Laws
ebop wrote:No
What I actually did was I popped over to YouTube and reacquainted myself with the incident and saw with my own eyes Sexton clobbering Barrett across the head with his forearm
And low and behold
No card???
No penalty???
Did they replay it over and over and over on the big screen?
He hardly clobbered Barrett in the head. Barret's head doesn't move an inch in contact. You can also see from other angles that Sexton's hand/arm was on Barrett's shoulder and not neck/head.
GunsGermsV2- Posts : 2550
Join date : 2016-11-16
Re: New Tackle Laws
ebop wrote:Meltdownmarty2086 wrote:ebop wrote:No 7.5, I think this new law will be exploited and I have reservations about it even though the intention is good. Marty on the other hand is whipping himself up into a lather on his own accord.
Excuse me, when pointed out Cane was let of despite the laws you made stuff up
Now you are making sick insinuations?
How very classy of a pathetic individual
Meltdown?
OK then Cane should have been banned because he took a crowbar to Henshaws head, it was shocking
marty2086- Posts : 11208
Join date : 2011-05-14
Age : 38
Location : Belfast
Re: New Tackle Laws
Watching the Parling incident...I don't see how Barritt's swinging arm to the head is any different to the one that got Hartley some time on the sidelines.
Does beg the question how in the hell you tackle someone that's going into contact headfirst with a near horizontal upper body position under the new laws.
Does beg the question how in the hell you tackle someone that's going into contact headfirst with a near horizontal upper body position under the new laws.
mid_gen- Posts : 469
Join date : 2016-10-14
Re: New Tackle Laws
mid_gen wrote:Watching the Parling incident...I don't see how Barritt's swinging arm to the head is any different to the one that got Hartley some time on the sidelines.
Does beg the question how in the hell you tackle someone that's going into contact headfirst with a near horizontal upper body position under the new laws.
The biggest difference is Sexton didnt hit Barrett in the head. He hit his shoulder and tried to knock the ball out of Barrett's hands. As they slid forward Sexton gave Barrett the rugby equivalent of a head massage and that was to only point there was any contact with the head.
By contrast Hartley clattered SOB with full force in the back of the head. big difference.
GunsGermsV2- Posts : 2550
Join date : 2016-11-16
Re: New Tackle Laws
GunsGermsV2 wrote:mid_gen wrote:Watching the Parling incident...I don't see how Barritt's swinging arm to the head is any different to the one that got Hartley some time on the sidelines.
Does beg the question how in the hell you tackle someone that's going into contact headfirst with a near horizontal upper body position under the new laws.
The biggest difference is Sexton didnt hit Barrett in the head. He hit his shoulder and tried to knock the ball out of Barrett's hands. As they slid forward Sexton gave Barrett the rugby equivalent of a head massage and that was to only point there was any contact with the head.
By contrast Hartley clattered SOB with full force in the back of the head. big difference.
Hes talking about a different Barrit, ie Brad
marty2086- Posts : 11208
Join date : 2011-05-14
Age : 38
Location : Belfast
Page 4 of 7 • 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7
Similar topics
» When does a choke tackle become a high tackle.
» The laws a Joke?
» New laws
» Tip Tackle
» Was It A Tip Tackle?
» The laws a Joke?
» New laws
» Tip Tackle
» Was It A Tip Tackle?
The v2 Forum :: Sport :: Rugby Union :: International
Page 4 of 7
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum