Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 20

Thread: Another stand-up tackle

      
  1. #1

    ELRA/Club Referee


    Soc/Assoc
    None
    Grade
    Select Grade
    Join Date
    08 Nov 18
    Posts
    242

    Default Another stand-up tackle

    https://twitter.com/PremierSportsTV/...94776003448835

    The more guidelines are issued the less it all seems to make sense. I think Iain Henderson articulates the situation perfectly.

  2. #2

    Resident Club Coach
    didds's Avatar

    Soc/Assoc
    N/A
    Grade
    Club Coach
    Join Date
    27 Jan 04
    Posts
    10,419

    Default Re: Another stand-up tackle

    why wa sthe ref fixated on the shoulder to the head query? Does he think that head to head woudnt matter ? the TMo was clearly not mentioning any body parts making potential contact. And even after that the ref continued with the shoulder to head line.

    (rhetorical question).

    FWIW I think that the decsion was correct wrt head contact ie there was none.

  3. #3

    Referees in England
    chbg's Avatar

    Soc/Assoc
    D&WRURS, HRURS & ARURS
    Grade
    Level 8
    Join Date
    15 May 09
    Posts
    1,123

    Default Re: Another stand-up tackle

    "Head contact includes neck and throat area". (World Rugby Head Contact Process)

    I will assume that this has not been overlooked in the officials' process and terminology.
    Be reasonable - do it my way.

  4. #4

    Referees in England
    Balones's Avatar

    Soc/Assoc
    Leics
    Grade
    NP Performance Reviewer
    Join Date
    24 Oct 06
    Posts
    1,035

    Default Re: Another stand-up tackle

    This appeared to be one of those situations where the tackler actually made contact with his head on the ball carrier’s shoulder. Penalise the ball carrier for not getting his shoulder out of the way? I couldn’t see anything in the replays that would have given Mike A cause to penalise. The nature of the dialogue between ref and TMO would suggest that they knew it didn’t look good but there was nothing they could do.

  5. #5

    Resident Club Coach
    didds's Avatar

    Soc/Assoc
    N/A
    Grade
    Club Coach
    Join Date
    27 Jan 04
    Posts
    10,419

    Default Re: Another stand-up tackle

    I dont see what the issue is. the laws/regs/guidelines etc require head contact (including neck and throat "area" - Whatever TF "area" means in this context being the ONLY caveat) for cards.

    It seems there is no contact at all with the head, neck or throat. QED, no card.

    Its very simple.

    The rider is whatever "area" means ... which is so wooly as to needing to be ignored.

    Meanwhile if "the game" doesnt like the look of it given it "fails" the head/neck/thrat criteria it needs to rethink what "the game" actually wants to acheive.

    Until such time as that rethink... Next!

  6. #6

    ELRA/Club Referee


    Soc/Assoc
    None
    Grade
    Select Grade
    Join Date
    08 Nov 18
    Posts
    242

    Default Re: Another stand-up tackle

    The answers so far only serve to emphasise what is becoming clearly ridiculous. In this case no head contact occured so play on, nothing to see here. If either head is 2 or 3 cms further over than they are and there is contact, that's a red card and a ban, even though the action is exactly the same. It's all very well issuing guidelines regarding procedures around head contact but it took a team of four several minutes to determine whether or not head contact had occured. How does that help me at the weekend? I get a one off, quick glance at the action and have to make a decision. In this case, I'm pretty sure I would have seen that as a dangerous tackle, penalty white and yellow card blue. The point I think I'm making is that issuing guidelines and procedures that can only be fully followed if you have a TMO is a cop out and does the wider game a diservice. It raises unrealistic expectations of players and coaches that the referee will be able to follow them. In this instance Henderson's phrase "that can't be a nothing" resonates.

  7. #7

    Referees in England
    Phil E's Avatar

    Soc/Assoc
    Staffordshire and Royal Navy
    Grade
    8
    Join Date
    22 Jan 08
    Posts
    15,158
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default Re: Another stand-up tackle

    I think in our situation with one view only, no AR's or TMO, we would all have given something (wouldn't we) for that tackle based on the uprightness/height of the tackle and the whiplash effect on the ball carriers head.

    The Head contact guideline say

    The Head Contact Process is a Law Application Guideline. Under 9.11, the referee is
    always entitled to issue a red or yellow card for anything deemed to be reckless or
    dangerous
    . However, this process is intended to aid consistency in the application of
    sanctions by providing guidance on how contact with the head should be approached by
    match officials and disciplinary personnel.

    Follow my Award Winning blog The Rugby Ref


  8. #8

    Referees in Australia
    Dickie E's Avatar

    Soc/Assoc
    VRRA
    Grade
    Level 2
    Join Date
    19 Jan 07
    Posts
    13,079

    Default Re: Another stand-up tackle

    Quote Originally Posted by Phil E View Post
    I think in our situation with one view only, no AR's or TMO, we would all have given something (wouldn't we) for that tackle based on the uprightness/height of the tackle and the whiplash effect on the ball carriers head.
    I would have played on
    I, for one, like Roman numerals

  9. #9

    ELRA/Club Referee


    Soc/Assoc
    None
    Grade
    Select Grade
    Join Date
    08 Nov 18
    Posts
    242

    Default Re: Another stand-up tackle

    I agree withPhil but here's where the procedure is a mess and I think Didds was alluding toit earlier.

    In this instance the team of 4 rightly concludedthat no head contact had taken place. The referee decided on that basis to goback for the previous offence and so it is reasonable to assume that he didn’tsee the tackle as reckless or high otherwise he would have penalised it. On thebasis that he saw no foul play, if head contact had occurred and he followedthe head contact process accurately, the only action available to him wouldhave been play on. Question 2 in the process asks was there foul play? if no,play on. His actions therefore appear correct and in accordance with theprocess. I can't help feeling though that had head contact taken place he wouldnot have done this and would have penalised the tackle and issued a red card. Ican't of course prove this but it would certainly have been the path of leastresistance and I suspect to do otherwise would have caused a certain amount ofconsternation.

    I realise this dilemma has always existed in rugbybut is even more relevant now because outcome rather than actions are leadingto more red cards being issued which has a disproportionate effect on thegame.




  10. #10

    Referees in Australia
    Dickie E's Avatar

    Soc/Assoc
    VRRA
    Grade
    Level 2
    Join Date
    19 Jan 07
    Posts
    13,079

    Default Re: Another stand-up tackle

    Quote Originally Posted by Jz558 View Post
    I agree withPhil but here's where the procedure is a mess and I think Didds was alluding toit earlier.

    In this instance the team of 4 rightly concludedthat no head contact had taken place. The referee decided on that basis to goback for the previous offence and so it is reasonable to assume that he didn’tsee the tackle as reckless or high otherwise he would have penalised it. On thebasis that he saw no foul play, if head contact had occurred and he followedthe head contact process accurately, the only action available to him wouldhave been play on. Question 2 in the process asks was there foul play? if no,play on. His actions therefore appear correct and in accordance with theprocess. I can't help feeling though that had head contact taken place he wouldnot have done this and would have penalised the tackle and issued a red card. Ican't of course prove this but it would certainly have been the path of leastresistance and I suspect to do otherwise would have caused a certain amount ofconsternation.

    I realise this dilemma has always existed in rugbybut is even more relevant now because outcome rather than actions are leadingto more red cards being issued which has a disproportionate effect on thegame.



    what is Question 1 in the process? If it is "was there head contact?" then the 'no' answer means you never go to Question 2.
    I, for one, like Roman numerals

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •