PDA

View Full Version : Ankle Taps/Trips



Mike Whittaker
17-08-05, 09:08
Simple, because to be in the position of having a penalty try awarded, you must of (have?) been "likely" to score anyway.. dont you agree?

I agree that a PT can be awarded because of the actions of one idiot...
I also believe that a PT could be disallowed because of the actions of one idiot...

It is the first penalty (the one that prevented the try from probably being scored) that is reversed. i.e. that penalty award (the try) does take not place.

The team must suffer the consequences of any players thuggery....

didds
19-08-05, 19:08
ahhh... ankle taps.... permitted - but not (IIRC) by anything in the law book legal... no attempt to grasp etc.

didds

Ian_Cook
19-08-05, 23:08
Is not a player swiping the heel of the runner just as dangerous? but yet is still perfectly legal?

I hear the distinct but unmistakable sound of a can of worms being opened!

Robert Burns
20-08-05, 00:08
yep, same can as the is a penalty try a try before you blow the whistle to give it!! lol

Mike Whittaker
20-08-05, 00:08
I hear the distinct but unmistakable sound of a can of worms being opened!


Which is of course even more dangerous than a trip.. if left on the pitch.

"The referee decides whether or not a tackle is dangerous"

Whilst the law book specifies a number of tackles that are to be considered dangerous. e.g. stiff arm it does not preclude other unspecified tackles from being deemed dangerous by the referee. Factors such as nature of the tackle, defencelessness of tackled and, even more interesting, the intention of the tackler!!!

So folks, whatever you consider dangerous....... penalise!!

Jacko
20-08-05, 10:08
As far as I'm concerned, a swipe at the heels is not dangerous. But then I would swear blind that neither is a trip. For my evidence I can only point you in the direction of my old school playing fields where some of the most foul-strewn football matches ever took place. The sight of someone clean through on goal going full length after a cheeky little trip is one of the more satisfying memories from back then. It happened all the time, and we never had an injury more serious than bruised ego.
Is that really just a year ago? We seemed so young and care-free. *sigh*

OB..
20-08-05, 11:08
Last season Betsen tripped Abbott, who suffered a broken right leg.

Mike Whittaker
20-08-05, 19:08
Last season Betsen tripped Abbott, who suffered a broken right leg.

You are not wrong to point this out but unfortunately one can produce anecdotal evidence to support just about any contact action on the rugby pitch as being 'dangerous'. I have twice witnessed serious spiral fractures in the leg arising from perfectly good tackles round the leg. That proves little either.

We really do have to encourage new and experienced referees not only to know the laws (and well at that!) but to be able to apply commonsense in applications. I think that is what is meant by... "The referee decides whether or not a tackle is dangerous" and this cannot always be proscribed.

didds
20-08-05, 22:08
wheras I recall a similar injury in my 4th year (ie football trip) that led to a double leg break.

same same - but hugely different.

didds

OB..
20-08-05, 22:08
Mike Whittaker - I agree, but my reference to Betsen does rather undermine Jacko's claim that a trip is not dangerous.

Whether it is dangerous or not, it is not an action that has a legitimate function in the game. In fact it is one of the fundamental principles of the game that tripping is not allowed.

Blackheath was one of the founder members of the FA in 1863, but resigned when the final version of the laws not only outlawed running with the ball but also "hacking" ie tripping. Hacking had been a major part of the game throughout early part of the century, and was much praised as "manly" by the Victorian equivalents of those who praise the rucking of players today.

Ironically, when the RFU came to frame its own laws in 1871, the mood had changed, and hacking was banned with very little outcry.

robertti
21-08-05, 08:08
I certainly agree ankle taps are an interesting part of the law. In the Australian Football League (AFL) the action of tackling a player below the knees is illegal. I have often wondered and been bemused why but now it is clear its due to those ankle taps. Do you think tackling in this way will ever be outlawed by the IRB. I don't really think any referee would have the guts to penalise an ankle tap, unless of course an intend of malice could be established.

Mike Whittaker
21-08-05, 09:08
Do you think tackling in this way will ever be outlawed by the IRB. I don't really think any referee would have the guts to penalise an ankle tap, ......

Well Tim, if that is what you think, why not do it? :)
If you think it is dangerous, next time you see it happen, penalise. The law is on your side. Who knows, you may set the precedent that reverberates around the world until all ankle taps are stopped.

Personally, if I was flying down the touchline at high speed (just a bit of imagination required here) and Ben Cohen or the like was heading to cut me off and I had the choice of being ankle tapped or taken out with full body chest high, I know which I would prefer!! :eek: ( I would of course kick ahead and avoid both, but that evades both the tackle and issue......)

Seriously though folks, it really does all come down to good management and communication in the end, which is why that section on the Assessors report form (for most games anyway) is more important than all the rest put together.

Unlike rules (as in soccer) which are there for the guidance of the wise and the obeyance of the fool, laws (which we have) are for application and interpretation.

Robert Burns
21-08-05, 11:08
I can see this:

Ankle tap occurs, referee penalises for dangerous tackle, coaches and players can't believe what they are hearing, you get the sittuation under control but at the end get politely accused of ruining the game.

Aseesor, may or may not back you up on why you did it, and there lies the problems, whilst maybe Mike you would, I bet i could name 10 that wouldn't.

OB..
21-08-05, 12:08
I see a clear distinction between ankle-tapping and tripping. The latter is an action that forms no part of the game, and is very close to kicking. Boots are hard.

Ankle-tapping is akin to a normal tackle and can easily occur by accident when you are making a desperate effort. The tap itself will cause no harm. A problem might arise from the way a player falls (as with any tackle), or from causing him to trip himself up. It is little different from managing to grasp the ankle. There is nothing specific in the law against it, so Dangerous Play is the only option, and I think that would be pushing it.

Penalising it would certainly fly in the face of conventional refereeing.

Ian_Cook
21-08-05, 12:08
I see a clear distinction between ankle-tapping and tripping. The latter is an action that forms no part of the game, and is very close to kicking. Boots are hard.

Ankle-tapping is akin to a normal tackle and can easily occur by accident when you are making a desperate effort. The tap itself will cause no harm. A problem might arise from the way a player falls (as with any tackle), or from causing him to trip himself up. It is little different from managing to grasp the ankle. There is nothing specific in the law against it, so Dangerous Play is the only option, and I think that would be pushing it.

Penalising it would certainly fly in the face of conventional refereeing.

OB You have hit the nail right on the head here.

The only harm that can come from an ankle tap (even a mistimed or poorly executed one) is injury caused by the player being unbalanced and falling awkwardly. This is just as likely to happen with any tackle below the waist.

On the other hand, a poorly executed foot-trip could cause the lower leg bones (above the ankle) to come together with considerable force, resulting in broken legs.

Simon Griffiths
21-08-05, 12:08
I think OB is quite right - the problem with tripping is a similar action to kicking (in no way the same thing, but has basic elements). The problem is the 'impact'. If you are running hard and someone sticks their foot out then your leg hits their's with great force due to your speed - i.e. it's like running into a bar which has been placed at mid shin height (very painful - and due to the force, is where the possibility for breaks comes from).

On the other hand, an 'ankle tap' tends to be from behind (so any force is automatically reduced). Of course, what's in the brackets is of little relevence due to the action - by tapping the ankles you are using little force, and what you do use is lateral and thus is far less than the combined force of a head on trip (as the energy/momentum of the running is not involved).

By suggesting that ankle taps are dangerous, perhaps we shoulf start blowing up tackles from behing as well? And then after a few years, perhaps we would consider banning all tackling. Then when this becomes hard to patrol then we'll give the players belts with little tags on! :D

Jacko
21-08-05, 13:08
I now see why people think that tripping is dangerous. When I was talking of tripping I meant performing an action similar to a tap tackle, but using your fot instead of your hand. I think this is relatively safe (although there may have been freak accidents). I wasn't talking about tripping where you just kick the leg to make them fall over. I think the FA's term of hacking sums this up nicely. That can't be allowed.

Robert Burns
21-08-05, 13:08
Please note I do not consider tap tackles as dangerous, and would not penalise them, but was just trying to obtain a distinct difference, which OB has successfully done.

Mike Whittaker
21-08-05, 19:08
And the point I was trying to make was that even if an act is not specified as being foul play it does not automatically preclude the referee from judging it as dangerous. It is up to the referee to take account of all factors and make the valued judgement.

Example (and I haven't double checked this in the law book)

A) A player of red team grabs hold of the sleeve of an opponents blue shirt and pulls him to the ground and this is in a senior, say level 5, match.

Nothing wrong with this... OK?

B) A player of red team grabs hold of sleeve of an opponent blue shirt, swings him round vigorously hurling him to the ground, and this in an under 13s match.

Would suggest that this not covered specifically in law and yet I would stop for dangerous play. (At U16 and below I never allow tackling by grabbing the shirt)

Between A and B there are a whole range of possibilities where the referee has to use his judgement, and realise his responsibilities.

I may not be completely accurate with the above but I hope the principle is clear?

Robert Burns
21-08-05, 21:08
Yep, I have no problems agreeing with that statement!

ExHookah
22-08-05, 14:08
Mike,

I think you provided a classic quote back there!


Unlike rules (as in soccer) which are there for the guidance of the wise and the obeyance of the fool, laws (which we have) are for application and interpretation.

That might have to go into a signature!

Mike Whittaker
22-08-05, 20:08
Mike,

I think you provided a classic quote back there!



That might have to go into a signature!

Thanks Hookah ... I only used the other one as a one off....

ExHookah
23-08-05, 04:08
I have incorporated it into my signature in profiles I use on other forums, with credit to you, of course.

Mike Whittaker
23-08-05, 09:08
I have incorporated it into my signature in profiles I use on other forums, with credit to you, of course.


If only it was an original...... I first heard it as a quote in 1964 from an enlightened minister of the church.... :)

Simon Thomas
23-08-05, 13:08
Sorry to be anally retentitive but soccer like rugby has Laws, NOT rules. Rules (again as with rugby) apply to competition formats and regulations.

see for FIFA Laws of the Game http://www.thefa.com/TheFA/RulesAndRegulations/FIFALawsOfTheGame/Postings/2002/05/12103.htm

ExHookah
23-08-05, 16:08
Simon,

You get a yellow card for jumping in to defend football/soccer!

Mike Whittaker
23-08-05, 20:08
Sorry to be anally retentitive .....]


No problem Simon, it can happen to the best... :rolleyes:

You are of course right... but that would not have enabled my attempt at humour... which failed, clearly! :(

I will of course correct my signature.... later! :)