Crusher clampdown

[Sue]

Booze is reporting a clampdown on intentional crusher tackles which I agree with completely. There are times when it’s an accident and the penalties are frustrating but the one Fifita did and the shocker from the knights backrower need serious punishment.He needs six weeks minimum for that. You’d think with one of his mates in a wheelchair it might occur to him it’s a bad idea.

Reason I’m raising it apart from thinking it’s a good idea is my memory , which is fading , half remembers one of our boys being penalised and it would be right up Greenbergs alley to start the clampdown with some good old fashioned Manly loading in the most recent game. Anyone remember if we were penalised for that?

 

[Garts]

There was a crusher penalty on Siro I think @Sue But it was minor, attacker backed in and almost dropped down. Just unfortunate. Surely it couldn't be more than a penalty.

 

[Uk eagle]

I think the increase in this type of tackle is partly due to players backing in to tackles, this never used to happen

 

[Tragic Eagle]

Its a difficult thing to police particularly when they generally occur in circumstances where the tackled player has his back to the tackler and sits down. The players will have to change technique. The biggest difficulty will be achieving what this mob constantly fail to achieve and that is consistency. The refereeing in the NRL is bloody awful as it is. Yesterday I saw a St George player take the footy in his in goal and fall to the ground with the ball underneath his chest forcing it yet he was allowed to get up and run it out of the in goal. How on earth can they explain that decision away? Couple that with St George being permitted to be inside the 10 meters for ll of the first half whilst we were penalties four times.

 

[Woodsie]

I have no problem with the intent to crack down on "intentional" crusher tackles ... however I severely doubt the ability or wit of the NRL and the referees to discriminate between the deliberate and the accidental ....

The only way this will go will be like the nonsense we are now seeing with "spear" tackles .... and a whole lot more of players backing into tackles, keeping leg drive and milking penalties ....

 

[Normie]

I think the increase in this type of tackle is partly due to players backing in to tackles, this never used to happen

That's exactly what Blocker Roach said last night on Fox. However, the intentional ones need to have a hefty penalty of at least 6 weeks as you can do some major damage.

 

[MadMarcus]

Greenberg has said he’s in favour of clamping down on Crushers. Only problem is he thinks everyone is talking about Noel Cleal.

 

[Sue]

There was a crusher penalty on Siro I think @Sue But it was minor, attacker backed in and almost dropped down. Just unfortunate. Surely it couldn't be more than a penalty.

Ok. Thanks

 

[Chip and Chase]

It'll be like all their other clampdowns - an initial over reaction where players will milk it for all it's worth followed by a slow decline in policing of the rule until we are back to where we started. Pity the poor sods who get reported first up for this - they'll be BBQ'd in the hysteria and get 4-5 week suspensions whilst those who eye gouge someone get a fine

 

[ricardo]

Gifty's crusher on Watmough (2015) stays in my mind. Happy to never see it again in the game

 

[The Who]

I wonder if it would help reduce risk if all players wore a neck brace similar to that worn by Brent Tate after he had issues with his neck?

 

[NYEagle]

Gee, and I though this thread was about Crusher clamping on negotiations with any players from loser team such as Penrith, Parra, Dogs, Canberra, Titans, etc.

Turned out to be much more boring,

NYEagle

 

[Mitch]

I thought the Barnett tackle on Jarome Hughes on the weekend was one of the worst tackles I have seen in some time. The pressure he placed on the neck before jamming down was forceful and completely intentional. That is the stuff that needs to be out of the game and rightfully he'll be spending the next few weeks on the sideline.

 

[Stuey Davis’s Socks]

I think the increase in this type of tackle is partly due to players backing in to tackles, this never used to happen

Big Phil Daley disagrees

 

[eaglebuzz]

The problem with these safety rules is players deliberately put themselves in that position to earn the easy penalty, ala Inglis flipping himself over to get dangerous throw penalties.

 

[EaglesDontTweet]

A very serious issue and agree with a crackdown on the intentional foul (fowl if it's against the Roosters) play.

What amazes me is that someone doesn't get hurt in the post try celebrations. It's not uncommon to see a try scorer look up and wince seeing his mates running in from every direction to jump all over him.

 

[HappilyManly]

https://www.nrl.com/news/2019/06/26/nrl-to-crack-down-on-crusher-tackles/

NRL to crack down on crusher tackles
Author
Michael ChammasChief Reporter
Timestamp
Wed 26 Jun 2019, 04:23 PM


The NRL has announced an immediate crackdown on crusher tackles and late shots, empowering referees to sin bin and send off players guilty of serious offences from Thursday night.

The NRL has also decided to change its match review process, with all crusher tackles which are deemed reckless or intentional to be directly referred to the judiciary panel.

 

[Class of 96]

When crusher tackles were legal

 

[Eaglehauser]

The only legit ‘crusher’

 

[maxta]

Anything to promote less wrestling moves is good, particularly when they are seriously dangerous like these are.
Melbourne Storm are kings of most of these grub tackles....I recall a classic when they crushed Wolfmans neck near the corner and then played the saviour card as though they were trying to help after almost breaking his neck.
The commentators were commending Slater and co for great sportsmanship at the time....rewind - they caused it .....