The send off's .. and tackle technique ..

[SeaEagleRock8]

Riki only gets a fine for the head lunge towards Lionel but will be gone for 2 weeks for the crusher on Haumole.

 

[stoodamire]

Keep it simple. See attached. I like it from Robbo.

national Robbo league or national roosters league haha

 

[Blucky]

Keep it simple. See attached. I like it from Robbo.

Does that make him the Better-er Robbo ?

 

[AlxFromNthNarra]

Quite a lot of talk on NRL360 last night about the need to reward the legs only tackle. Jake's name came up repeatedly.

This.

There is never 'Tackle Dominancy' ascribed to classic grass-cutters anymore, and the tackled person just shakes their ass and legs around the moment they hit the deck before the tackler has even disentangled themselves. It has been exacerbated with 6-agains now as the tackler puts them down super-fast (can't run without legs) and due to the impact type the player tackled is usually able to get straight to their feet unrattled if the ref allows it.

If the NRL wants to discourage the RISK of a head-high tackle, then a Dominant Tackle at least for a 1-on-1 legs-tackle needs to be rewarded with a 3-4 sec hold allowance by the tackler, to enable all players to get back on-side and actually get something good from the play.

As it is, there is already a huge benefit to the attacking team through the ability to offload out of a grass-cutter - you compound that by giving them a fast play-the-ball opportunity with 6-again rule which makes the upper-body wrestle-fk technique superior in every case. Thing is going for the upper-body results in more accidental head-hits - see Tedesco falling into a head-high (with regularity mind you...) for how this might work to influence a game's outcome.

I am all for this crackdown on head-knocks. The amount of HIA rulings was a super bad look for the game given what we medically know now about repeat trauma to the head.

And agree that Jake would absolutely excel if those grass-cutter tackles were rewarded.

 

[Woodsie]

This.

There is never 'Tackle Dominancy' ascribed to classic grass-cutters anymore, and the tackled person just shakes their ass and legs around the moment they hit the deck before the tackler has even disentangled themselves. It has been exacerbated with 6-agains now as the tackler puts them down super-fast (can't run without legs) and due to the impact type the player tackled is usually able to get straight to their feet unrattled if the ref allows it.

If the NRL wants to discourage the RISK of a head-high tackle, then a Dominant Tackle at least for a 1-on-1 legs-tackle needs to be rewarded with a 3-4 sec hold allowance by the tackler, to enable all players to get back on-side and actually get something good from the play.

As it is, there is already a huge benefit to the attacking team through the ability to offload out of a grass-cutter - you compound that by giving them a fast play-the-ball opportunity with 6-again rule which makes the upper-body wrestle-fk technique superior in every case. Thing is going for the upper-body results in more accidental head-hits - see Tedesco falling into a head-high (with regularity mind you...) for how this might work to influence a game's outcome.

I am all for this crackdown on head-knocks. The amount of HIA rulings was a super bad look for the game given what we medically know now about repeat trauma to the head.

And agree that Jake would absolutely excel if those grass-cutter tackles were rewarded.

The other negative consequence of a good legs tackle is ... that even if he is allowed to hold for longer .. he is still behind the attacker and will still not get back to marker in time .. so he is effectively out of the defence for the next play ...

 

[Woodsie]

@AlxFromNthNarra .. maybe that is the answer .. the attacker has to wait for the defender to come around and mark up ... will be weird but will work

 

[Kevinward777]

Rule changes to the legs tackle are worth exploring - as long as they are well thought out. Although there has been a number of blokes knocked the feck out because their heads get smashed by a hip or a stray knee.

Some of the worst HIA's can be directly attributed to lower body tackles gone wrong. Fatigue plays a part when players get their technique wrong. Going low isn't a picnic when a massive human is running at you full tilt.

Maybe they can punish the ball runner who inadvertently causes one of these instances - by getting him to play in one boot for ten minutes.

Who knows?

 

[AlxFromNthNarra]

@AlxFromNthNarra .. maybe that is the answer .. the attacker has to wait for the defender to come around and mark up ... will be weird but will work

That actually makes a lot of sense mate - the tackled player has to stay on the ground until the tackler is up and in marker position, giving enough time for the defensive line to reset and halting the momentum of the bucking-bronco style fast play-the-ball.

Might need some tweaking on enforcement so the tackler isn't just lying in the ruck to milk more time - but i'm sure they can work around that.

Main thing I feel though is that at the moment there is no reward for a classic legs-and-all 1-on-1 tackle with Ref interpretation - and that should definitely change, especially if they are looking to encourage tackles not targeting near the head!

 

[47MVEagle]

the upper-body wrestle-fk technique

 

[The better Robbo]

Does that make him the Better-er Robbo ?

There is only one better Robbo

 

[The Who]

Jurbo is the best tackler in the comp and I can't recall him every being chipped for a high tackle. He should help train the rest of our squad.
Get rid of the mindset that you have to hurt the opposition in every tackle; just bring them to the turf and allow the tackler time to become the marker before a play-the-ball is allowed.
I think the days of the "enforcers" are at an end. There is too much to lose if you try to be too rough. I fear a player like Tenterfield may not be able to last in the NRL these days because he invariably gets involved in argy-bargy. The rules are all about eliminating aggro from the sport.

 

[deanm]

Perhaps we may hear " Jaaaakkkke Mooooovvve" less now ?? Great low tackles are not currently rewarded with slower play the balls, hence why teams gang tackle to slow them down and go up high to stop offloads.

 

[Will on the hill]

No team lost a game they would've otherwise won due to any of the sin bins/send offs for high tackles, the closest anyone came was the Cows V Roosters but I believe Roosters were still the better team.

The risk of concussion will never be completely eliminated in Rugby League but if the NRL are strong enough to stay the course this stance will drastically reduce it.

If they couple this with rewarding 1on1 legs tackles then it will lead to a more entertaining, safer game.

 

[47MVEagle]

Perhaps we may hear " Jaaaakkkke Mooooovvve" less now ?? Great low tackles are not currently rewarded with slower play the balls, hence why teams gang tackle to slow them down and go up high to stop offloads.

It was really getting on my nerves on Friday night how much I was hearing the ref shouting "JAAAAAAKKKE!!!" then realised it disappeared almost completely when Walters hooked Turpin haha

 

[maxta]

Been a believer that the legs tackle should be rewarded and I still am....but gunna be tough.
Why ?
So you make the low tackle and there are 2 ways of rewarding it...
1st and best is give some latitude, but how much 2-3 seconds - this will create another grey area as "the other team were allowed to hold on longer....will come down to common sense and I reckon the best option.
2nd idea...I Heard an interesting idea that on initial thought was perfect, where as reward for leg tackle, the attacker has to wait for that defender to mark up before playing the ball....we'll get this scenario- a winger heads for the corner and is cut down in cover by Turbo....a quickish play ball and there's a 4 man overlap....that's until Turbo gets up and basically stands there with a sore toe till his team mates are all back....no thanks

 

[Will on the hill]

Been a believer that the legs tackle should be rewarded and I still am....but gunna be tough.
Why ?
So you make the low tackle and there are 2 ways of rewarding it...
1st and best is give some latitude, but how much 2-3 seconds - this will create another grey area as "the other team were allowed to hold on longer....will come down to common sense and I reckon the best option.
2nd idea...I Heard an interesting idea that on initial thought was perfect, where as reward for leg tackle, the attacker has to wait for that defender to mark up before playing the ball....we'll get this scenario- a winger heads for the corner and is cut down in cover by Turbo....a quickish play ball and there's a 4 man overlap....that's until Turbo gets up and basically stands there with a sore toe till his team mates are all back....no thanks

Yeah it's tough. Can't let the tackler get back to marker, too easy to exploit. Can't let the Ref hold the PTB back for a count of 2 or 3 as it disadvantages teams in a linebreak scenario. I've been thinking of how to do it fairly and maybe call it dominant to allow an extra second for the tackler to hold on and have the ref take 2 steps forward to shorten the 10m to 8m, bit convoluted but fairest I can come up with.

 

[Kevinward777]

Just got sent this by a mate - mirrors my thoughts exactly about players going lower in tackles. The worst HIA's are from tackles gone wrong. It ain't easy tackling 110kg blokes around the legs when they are running at speed.

 

[Will on the hill]

Just got sent this by a mate - mirrors my thoughts exactly about players going lower in tackles. The worst HIA's are from tackles gone wrong. It ain't easy tackling 110kg blokes around the legs when they are running at speed.

I agree to some extent but I wonder how many players would be knocked out from going low if they spent as much time practicing a "lower tackling technique" as they currently spend on the "2 up top, 1 down low, slowly wrestle the ball carrier to his back" technique.

 

[Kevinward777]

I agree to some extent but I wonder how many players would be knocked out from going low if they spent as much time practicing a "lower tackling technique" as they currently spend on the "2 up top, 1 down low, slowly wrestle the ball carrier to his back" technique.

Knees at speed are not going to magically stop - tired heads in the wrong places. Jake Friend.

 

[Will on the hill]

Knees at speed are not going to magically stop - tired heads in the wrong places. Jake Friend.

It's not actually knees, if you're tackling knees you are doing it wrong. HIAs that come low tackles are generally from hips and elbows (from low bumpers). If they actually trained for low tackles these would be reduced.