Height of tackle

Forum to discuss everything that is Tigers related

Moderators: Rizzo, Tigerbeat, Tigers Press Office, Tigers Webmaster

drc_007
Super User
Super User
Posts: 3171
Joined: Wed Feb 06, 2008 9:28 am

Height of tackle

Post by drc_007 » Tue Mar 27, 2018 10:20 am

There is a report in the Telegraph (https://www.telegraph.co.uk/rugby-union ... le-number/) regarding the analysis of injuries in professional rugby. Concussion is clearly a major concern accounting for 22 per cent of all match injuries, including 43 per cent of all injuries to tacklers.

The proposal is

“Put simply, we need to avoid head-to-head contact, head-to-knee contact and head-to-hip contact,” said Simon Kemp, the RFU’s medical services director. “The way we do that is by looking for the tackler to make contact with the ball-carrier between their waist and the line of their shoulders."

Does this mean no tackles below waist height, no tap tackles?

TigerCam
Super User
Super User
Posts: 3619
Joined: Mon Dec 20, 2004 5:41 pm
Location: Cambridge

Re: Height of tackle

Post by TigerCam » Tue Mar 27, 2018 11:45 am

drc_007 wrote:
Tue Mar 27, 2018 10:20 am
There is a report in the Telegraph (https://www.telegraph.co.uk/rugby-union ... le-number/) regarding the analysis of injuries in professional rugby. Concussion is clearly a major concern accounting for 22 per cent of all match injuries, including 43 per cent of all injuries to tacklers.

The proposal is

“Put simply, we need to avoid head-to-head contact, head-to-knee contact and head-to-hip contact,” said Simon Kemp, the RFU’s medical services director. “The way we do that is by looking for the tackler to make contact with the ball-carrier between their waist and the line of their shoulders."

Does this mean no tackles below waist height, no tap tackles?
No you will just need to get within touching distance and shout "you're tackled, now fall over". The TMO will then judge if you were close enough and tell the ref to shout "ruck" and the time the ball will be in play will only be 20 of 80 mins, so no player injuries and no fatigue - simples!!

WirralExile
Senior Member
Senior Member
Posts: 262
Joined: Mon May 15, 2006 5:39 pm
Location: Houghton-on-the-Hill (ex-Wirral)

Re: Height of tackle

Post by WirralExile » Tue Mar 27, 2018 11:46 am

This goes against the coaching messages I and others gave. The phrases “eye to thigh” to focus where to tackle, “cheek to cheek” and “what smells to what smells” to make sure the tackler’s head was in the right place, will be consigned to history.
Surely tackling the ball carrier around the thigh will slow or stop forward movement. A powerful player being tackled that way will go to ground. Tackling between waist and shoulders does not guarantee the player being stopped.
Will this change Tag rugby too? The lead into contact had the tags hanging from the waist to get the tackler to focus on tackling below the waist. Will the tags now hang around the chest?
Wirral Exile
Same birthplace as Oz, but not quite as lippy!

jgriffin
Super User
Super User
Posts: 6646
Joined: Sun Jan 08, 2012 5:49 pm
Location: On the edge of oblivion

Re: Height of tackle

Post by jgriffin » Tue Mar 27, 2018 12:06 pm

This happens, I'm gone. The changes to rugby have mullered the game (ruck, scrum, offside) and that would be the last straw.
Leicester Tigers 1995-
Nottingham 1995-2000
Swansea (Whites) 1988-95
A game played on grass in the open air by teams of XV.

strawclearer
Super User
Super User
Posts: 3576
Joined: Thu Feb 07, 2013 11:13 am

Re: Height of tackle

Post by strawclearer » Tue Mar 27, 2018 7:36 pm

jgriffin wrote:
Tue Mar 27, 2018 12:06 pm
This happens, I'm gone. The changes to rugby have mullered the game (ruck, scrum, offside) and that would be the last straw.
Like you, I'm running out of straws to clear. The game gets more like League every year. :smt011
Happy days clearing straw from the pitch before the Baa-Baas games! KBO
Help save the Oceans - #RefuseTheStraw!

mol2
Super User
Super User
Posts: 3100
Joined: Wed May 02, 2007 5:48 pm
Location: Cosby

Re: Height of tackle

Post by mol2 » Tue Mar 27, 2018 8:12 pm

So all the ball carrier has to do is bend horizontally and there will be no gap between shoulders and hips to tackle!

There has been a trend for front on "hits" rather than technically proper tackles with the inevitable result of the head being in the wrong place more often and with it concussions.

Better to restrict tackles to below the waist, immediate release once the tackled player has put a knee to the ground (rolling, crawling, squeeze ball etc penalized) and allow rucking, with any player diving over the ball (from either side penalized) - pick it up or drive over it remaining on your feet.

jgriffin
Super User
Super User
Posts: 6646
Joined: Sun Jan 08, 2012 5:49 pm
Location: On the edge of oblivion

Re: Height of tackle

Post by jgriffin » Tue Mar 27, 2018 9:30 pm

mol2 wrote:
Tue Mar 27, 2018 8:12 pm
So all the ball carrier has to do is bend horizontally and there will be no gap between shoulders and hips to tackle!

There has been a trend for front on "hits" rather than technically proper tackles with the inevitable result of the head being in the wrong place more often and with it concussions.

Better to restrict tackles to below the waist, immediate release once the tackled player has put a knee to the ground (rolling, crawling, squeeze ball etc penalized) and allow rucking, with any player diving over the ball (from either side penalized) - pick it up or drive over it remaining on your feet.
Amen
Leicester Tigers 1995-
Nottingham 1995-2000
Swansea (Whites) 1988-95
A game played on grass in the open air by teams of XV.

BFG
Super User
Super User
Posts: 2415
Joined: Fri Oct 14, 2016 11:19 pm

Re: Height of tackle

Post by BFG » Tue Mar 27, 2018 10:24 pm

jgriffin wrote:
Tue Mar 27, 2018 9:30 pm
mol2 wrote:
Tue Mar 27, 2018 8:12 pm
So all the ball carrier has to do is bend horizontally and there will be no gap between shoulders and hips to tackle!

There has been a trend for front on "hits" rather than technically proper tackles with the inevitable result of the head being in the wrong place more often and with it concussions.

Better to restrict tackles to below the waist, immediate release once the tackled player has put a knee to the ground (rolling, crawling, squeeze ball etc penalized) and allow rucking, with any player diving over the ball (from either side penalized) - pick it up or drive over it remaining on your feet.
Amen
Agree with it all apart from restricting tackles to below the waist.
Low tackles are just as prone to going wrong.
I was injured twice playing rugby which on both occasions was by the outside of a knee on the side of the head, and you just can't account for ball carriers switching angles on you after you have committed to the tackle, and a much earlier commitment is required when tackling low.
I'd add that tackling should go back to trusting the players judgement and skill on the best way to tackle in individual contact situations.
Once you take away the instincts of the players to make decisions then you are taking away their ability to do the right thing at the right time in my opinion.

Tiglon
Gold Member
Gold Member
Posts: 998
Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2011 8:54 pm
Location: Bath

Re: Height of tackle

Post by Tiglon » Wed Mar 28, 2018 10:44 am

I think it's worth noting that this is an independent report which has been asked to report on safety only - it is not for them to take into account anything else when making recommendations, only player safety. They are looking at statistics and concluding which kinds of tackles are most and least safe.

I think most of you are overreacting just a bit.

h's dad
Super User
Super User
Posts: 2396
Joined: Mon Jun 02, 2008 4:19 pm
Location: In front of pc

Re: Height of tackle

Post by h's dad » Wed Mar 28, 2018 5:43 pm

Tiglon wrote:
Wed Mar 28, 2018 10:44 am
I think it's worth noting that this is an independent report which has been asked to report on safety only - it is not for them to take into account anything else when making recommendations, only player safety. They are looking at statistics and concluding which kinds of tackles are most and least safe.

I think most of you are overreacting just a bit.
Except that if you commission and receive a report on player safety and then fail to deal comprehensively with its recommendations you open yourself up to paying out a huge amount of money. What is needed is a report saying that competent and legal tackling is perfectly safe and that it is the responsibility of coaches to ensure that their players are fully competent in this aspect of the game before taking to the field. Flippancy aside, it is certainly something to be concerned about.
I am neither clever enough to understand nor stupid enough to play this game

Tiglon
Gold Member
Gold Member
Posts: 998
Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2011 8:54 pm
Location: Bath

Re: Height of tackle

Post by Tiglon » Wed Mar 28, 2018 6:42 pm

h's dad wrote:
Wed Mar 28, 2018 5:43 pm
Tiglon wrote:
Wed Mar 28, 2018 10:44 am
I think it's worth noting that this is an independent report which has been asked to report on safety only - it is not for them to take into account anything else when making recommendations, only player safety. They are looking at statistics and concluding which kinds of tackles are most and least safe.

I think most of you are overreacting just a bit.
Except that if you commission and receive a report on player safety and then fail to deal comprehensively with its recommendations you open yourself up to paying out a huge amount of money. What is needed is a report saying that competent and legal tackling is perfectly safe and that it is the responsibility of coaches to ensure that their players are fully competent in this aspect of the game before taking to the field. Flippancy aside, it is certainly something to be concerned about.
Governing body asks someone to look into what is statistically the safest way to tackle.

Independent report says "X is statistically the safest way to tackle".

This does not mean governing body has to ban all other types of tackle, or face big lawsuits. That's not how the law works. The word "reasonable" is critical when it comes to tort law. It would not be reasonable for World Rugby to ban all but one very specific method of tackling, simply to lower the risk of injury by a small amount.

h's dad
Super User
Super User
Posts: 2396
Joined: Mon Jun 02, 2008 4:19 pm
Location: In front of pc

Re: Height of tackle

Post by h's dad » Thu Mar 29, 2018 1:13 am

Tiglon wrote:
Wed Mar 28, 2018 6:42 pm
h's dad wrote:
Wed Mar 28, 2018 5:43 pm
Tiglon wrote:
Wed Mar 28, 2018 10:44 am
I think it's worth noting that this is an independent report which has been asked to report on safety only - it is not for them to take into account anything else when making recommendations, only player safety. They are looking at statistics and concluding which kinds of tackles are most and least safe.

I think most of you are overreacting just a bit.
Except that if you commission and receive a report on player safety and then fail to deal comprehensively with its recommendations you open yourself up to paying out a huge amount of money. What is needed is a report saying that competent and legal tackling is perfectly safe and that it is the responsibility of coaches to ensure that their players are fully competent in this aspect of the game before taking to the field. Flippancy aside, it is certainly something to be concerned about.
Governing body asks someone to look into what is statistically the safest way to tackle.

Independent report says "X is statistically the safest way to tackle".

This does not mean governing body has to ban all other types of tackle, or face big lawsuits. That's not how the law works. The word "reasonable" is critical when it comes to tort law. It would not be reasonable for World Rugby to ban all but one very specific method of tackling, simply to lower the risk of injury by a small amount.
Is that what the governing body asked?
Is that what the report said?
Isn't it reasonable for players to expect WR to address the tackle types most likely to cause injury?
There is precedent for big lawsuits for negligence resulting in player injury. Unless you don't consider $50 million as big. The lawsuit doesn't even have to be lost for it to cost rather a lot.
I am neither clever enough to understand nor stupid enough to play this game

BFG
Super User
Super User
Posts: 2415
Joined: Fri Oct 14, 2016 11:19 pm

Re: Height of tackle

Post by BFG » Thu Mar 29, 2018 12:40 pm

Tiglon wrote:
Wed Mar 28, 2018 10:44 am
I think it's worth noting that this is an independent report which has been asked to report on safety only - it is not for them to take into account anything else when making recommendations, only player safety. They are looking at statistics and concluding which kinds of tackles are most and least safe.

I think most of you are overreacting just a bit.
What is the conclusion?
It appears that the recommendations from the stats could be a hip to shoulders target area is wanted.
That is interesting because just a few days ago we witnessed Malouf aim for and miss that area, and May get banged by a ball carrier who's forearm was in that hip to shoulders target area.
There is cause and effect in moving target areas.
Personally I believe that WR are missing the most important factor in safety which is that in setting limited tackle target areas they are limiting the players ability to react in individual situations to try and avoid injury.
That forearm on May would've done no damage had May been able to lift his head and wrap Wade up, but May could not try and mitigate the risk factor because of the head on head rule, and if May with some of the quickest reactions in the sport can get caught out then that does not bode well.

mol2
Super User
Super User
Posts: 3100
Joined: Wed May 02, 2007 5:48 pm
Location: Cosby

Re: Height of tackle

Post by mol2 » Fri Mar 30, 2018 8:48 am

Technically the waist starts immediately below the ribs (at least that's the definition used by other sports) rather than the belt or hip line.

strawclearer
Super User
Super User
Posts: 3576
Joined: Thu Feb 07, 2013 11:13 am

Re: Height of tackle

Post by strawclearer » Fri Mar 30, 2018 1:14 pm

mol2 wrote:
Fri Mar 30, 2018 8:48 am
Technically the waist starts immediately below the ribs (at least that's the definition used by other sports) rather than the belt or hip line.
As the late, great Victoria Wood once said...

"I haven't got a waist. I've just got a sort of.......place - a bit like an unmarked level crossing."
Happy days clearing straw from the pitch before the Baa-Baas games! KBO
Help save the Oceans - #RefuseTheStraw!

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Dr H Flashman MBE, Google [Bot], kpj tiger, Leicestertinytiger, longlivethecrumbie, Mark62, Mr Bean, simoscribbler and 2 guests