Why is it.....

  • We had an issue with background services between march 10th and 15th or there about. This meant the payment services were not linking to automatic upgrades. If you paid for premium membership and are still seeing ads please let me know and the email you used against PayPal and I cam manually verify and upgrade your account.

tugga8

Member
Before I start this, let me just say, I love a "blue" in a game of rugby league.
Can some explain to me that a tackle like Matai's last week or any other where a tackler makes contact with the head is charged for "attacking the head of an opponent". This is whether it is accidental or deemed deliberate. BUT a player can come in and intentionally punch someone in the head and it is not treated the same way. There is no more obvious example of "attacking the head of an opponent" than throwing a punch. At worst they get binned for being 3rd man in??????
 
tugga8 said:
Before I start this, let me just say, I love a "blue" in a game of rugby league.
Can some explain to me that a tackle like Matai's last week or any other where a tackler makes contact with the head is charged for "attacking the head of an opponent". This is whether it is accidental or deemed deliberate. BUT a player can come in and intentionally punch someone in the head and it is not treated the same way. There is no more obvious example of "attacking the head of an opponent" than throwing a punch. At worst they get binned for being 3rd man in??????

It depends. if the guy getting punched has a maroon and white jumper on its ok. If the guy doing the punching has a maroon and white jumper then it's penalty, sin bin and on report.
 
I would very much like to see what answer Rothfield would come up with to the good question posed by tugga8.

No offense to you tugga8, but I do believe Rothfield is more of a professional tugga.
 
Jatz Crackers said:
I would very much like to see what answer Rothfield would come up with to the good question posed by tugga8.

No offense to you tugga8, but I do believe Rothfield is more of a professional tugga.

Haha. Nice one Jatz. ;) Never a truer word spoken.
 
Everyone loves a good dust up women, kids the fellas everyone loves it.
I know when I see one I'm like yeah how goods this.
And the next day men and women love it except when it's at The Cross at 3am in the morning.
 
I think it's because a tackle is part of what's considered "normal play", so if contact with the head is made in that context, it will be deemed "attacking the head of an opponent". However, fighting isn't part of normal play and falls under a different set of circumstances (most likely foul play) and therefore is adjudicated on differently.

Having said all of that though, you make a very good point.
 
Seems to me that tugg8s question is valid. The charge of "attacking the head" should be reserved for the act of striking while in the act of foul play ie fighting.

Matais' tackle at worst should have been "accidental contact"
 
Team P W L PD Pts
3 3 0 48 6
4 3 1 28 6
3 2 1 10 6
4 2 2 39 4
3 2 1 28 4
3 2 1 15 4
3 2 1 14 4
2 1 1 13 4
2 1 1 6 4
3 2 1 -3 4
3 1 2 0 2
3 1 2 -5 2
3 1 2 -15 2
3 1 2 -22 2
3 1 2 -36 2
2 0 2 -56 2
3 0 3 -64 0
Back
Top Bottom