• Help Support The Rugby Forum :

Rugby is being ruined

Also I forgot to add that intention is no longer relevant. The potential for serious injuries is so high that WR can't afford to distinguish between whether a high tackle is intended or not. Instead they all get a card (barring the seatbelt/neck tackle) and then longer punishments are determined after the game in the form of bans (which WR still has some work to do on as they have not been consistent). It's simply a question of player safety and if your pleasure at watching huge men knock each other out is more important then that says it all really.
 
People seem to be missing some key points.

Tackling so you make contact with the head has never been legal. However it was not really enforced and so people became used to big hits, which have developed majorly over the last 10-15 years, where the player is forced back and momentum is stopped. Majority were around the chest, but quite a few hit the head. However unless it was serious it was seen as part of the tackle. However (and this is the key point) it also led to an increase in concussions and serious head injuries with extensive research highlighting that the majority of concussion occurred as a result of the tackle. Therefore WR had to act to protect the players and so they wouldn't be left open to law suits. (You choose which they cared more about). So they implemented their new rules and hoped things would change. It didn't and over the last 2 years players have continued to hit hard and around the chest, which can lead to high tackles and more concussions. Therefore because it wasn't changing WR had to get tough and didn't want to be seen to be soft on head injuries. So they made the new framework and asked the refs to rigidly enforce it during the world cup. The intention was that if players are aiming for the chest and end up hitting the player they will get a card of some kind and therefore players will realise they can't take the risk and will tackle lower. However players have been coached this way since they were young and so it's hard to change habits easily hence the number of cards. On top fans are so used to these big hits going unpunished (pundits too) that they seem to think they are acceptable.

There is no controversy about high tackles and the enforcement of the law ruining the game. It is not about stopping players tackling hard, but getting players to tackle lower and correctly to avoid the increasing number of head injuries. The controversy is that WR stupidly decided to get strict during the world cup and so detract from the main event. Instead of people discussing the games, they ended up discussing the high tackles.

I cant argue with any of that, seems pretty spot on
 
So they made the new framework and asked the refs to rigidly enforce it during the world cup. The intention was that if players are aiming for the chest and end up hitting the player they will get a card of some kind and therefore players will realise they can't take the risk and will tackle lower....
The controversy is that WR stupidly decided to get strict during the world cup and so detract from the main event. Instead of people discussing the games, they ended up discussing the high tackles.

The controversy in my view is that referees are still majorly inconsistent. Some high tackles went unnoticed in the first week or so of the tournament, then all of a sudden the flurry of yellows and reds we saw toward the middle and end of the pool stage. They're stricter with tackles resulting in contact with the head, yet the tackler can still get away with it based on "mitigating circumstances" which seem wholly subjective. So in truth, this "new framework" is nothing to get excited about. They've solved nothing.
 
People seem to be missing some key points.

Tackling so you make contact with the head has never been legal. However it was not really enforced and so people became used to big hits, which have developed majorly over the last 10-15 years, where the player is forced back and momentum is stopped. Majority were around the chest, but quite a few hit the head. However unless it was serious it was seen as part of the tackle. However (and this is the key point) it also led to an increase in concussions and serious head injuries with extensive research highlighting that the majority of concussion occurred as a result of the tackle. Therefore WR had to act to protect the players and so they wouldn't be left open to law suits. (You choose which they cared more about). So they implemented their new rules and hoped things would change. It didn't and over the last 2 years players have continued to hit hard and around the chest, which can lead to high tackles and more concussions. Therefore because it wasn't changing WR had to get tough and didn't want to be seen to be soft on head injuries. So they made the new framework and asked the refs to rigidly enforce it during the world cup. The intention was that if players are aiming for the chest and end up hitting the player they will get a card of some kind and therefore players will realise they can't take the risk and will tackle lower. However players have been coached this way since they were young and so it's hard to change habits easily hence the number of cards. On top fans are so used to these big hits going unpunished (pundits too) that they seem to think they are acceptable.

There is no controversy about high tackles and the enforcement of the law ruining the game. It is not about stopping players tackling hard, but getting players to tackle lower and correctly to avoid the increasing number of head injuries. The controversy is that WR stupidly decided to get strict during the world cup and so detract from the main event. Instead of people discussing the games, they ended up discussing the high tackles.

As much as I hate to agree with an Englishman this is true.
 
The problem is there is too much rugby. In the olden days, you would get smacked in all ways, still get up and play on. The incredible amount of rugby has made the game soft and the players soft.

Plus i don't care what anyone says, technology has ruined the game for me.

I still love the game dearly, so i watch despite all the problems.
Too much rugby is probably the issue, you get concussed and you should probably have a longer enforced stand down.

I do fail to see how the protocols will stop the big hit. Ball carriers running full pace will still create a hell of a lot of force, no matter how soft a defender attempts to stop them.

If you don't want to get whacked in the melon, dont run head first??? 90% of the blokes getting hit in the head are running low and head first.
 
it's sad, i use to really like your posts, remember liking lots of them, but you seem to have developed a real chip on your shoulder against kiwis since the cricket final

I expect no reply other than to be blasted as stupid again
If you suggest stupid things like carding defenders I'm going to call them out as stupid. I'm sorry if that makes me a lesser poster in your eyes.

And if you think I have issue with most kiwi fans because of the Cricket you are sadly mistaken. They've had a superiority complex that makes the English Arrogance look like mild support and have done since I can remember.
 
The controversy is that WR stupidly decided to get strict during the world cup and so detract from the main event. Instead of people discussing the games, they ended up discussing the high tackles.
Sorry going to have to pick up on my point of contention.

This isn't true they've decided to get consistent in their strictness. We've all seen ******** like Farrell not being carded for some quite dubious hits. But they were controversial because we have seen them carded.

The controversy this tournament has been they said they'd be strict and in the first weekend of anything they more lenient.
 
Two questions if you don't mind me asking. How old are you? (A 5/10 year range will do) and do you play the game?


And also:
https://theblitzdefence.wordpress.c...ayers-forced-to-retire-due-to-brain-injuries/

Opinions like yours are dangerous and not welcome in the sport.
You don't just get head knocks on the field or from opposition tacklers.

Going through that list there were a couple that got injured in training and having a head clash with a team mate?

Does anyone think these rules will eradicate concussion? I'm going to say they probably won't even reduce the number of concussions.

If we want to stop concussion we need to go to ripper rugby for all levels, or maybe a form of touch rugby.

Rugby as we know it is a contact sport, players at the highest level train too hard and play too much.
The body wasn't meant for that kind of punishment.
 
Last edited:
[QUOTE="ncurd, post: 968156, member: 72205"]If you suggest stupid things like carding defenders I'm going to call them out as stupid. I'm sorry if that makes me a lesser poster in your eyes.

And if you think I have issue with most kiwi fans because of the Cricket you are sadly mistaken. They've had a superiority complex that makes the English Arrogance look like mild support and have done since I can remember.[/QUOTE]

I said the opposite, does that mean im not stupid now? also, can you show me where i have acted superior to anyone else? or at least enough to justify a complex.
 
My only concession is i hope WR are ready to card someone who ducks into a tackle for putting themselves in a dangerous position, i dont think the ball carrier should have so much protection,
Sounds like carding defenders to me.
 
Sounds like carding defenders to me.
it does? i apologise if it wasn't clear i was referring to to a ball runner who might have the balls to try and milk a penalty by ducking their head into a tackle
 
How can you be a defender and duck into a tackle?
This is actually a good point. Either way I think me and Jabby are referring to the ball carrier who is being tackled so whilst there might be some crossed wires.
 
it does? i apologise if it wasn't clear i was referring to to a ball runner who might have the balls to try and milk a penalty by ducking their head into a tackle
ummm still no and still kinda dumb. I should be clear the one incident I disagree with was a tackler who got down low and the ball carrier had a sudden dip which resulted in a yellow. It should of been a penalty at most and struggle with that. But the ball carrier shouldn't be carded for it that's just nonsense.

This is sperate from diving where a player fakes being hit in the head they absolutely should be carded.


Look and the whole tackles in the air, I do think that players who jump for the ball are being wreckless. And the tackler or as in some high profile incidents catcher in the ground should be given some mitigation. You don't card the person being tackled though. However this is pretty much sorted now and a fairly uncontroversial part of the game.
 
ummm still no and still kinda dumb. I should be clear the one incident I disagree with was a tackler who got down low and the ball carrier had a sudden dip which resulted in a yellow. It should of been a penalty at most and struggle with that. But the ball carrier shouldn't be carded for it that's just nonsense.

This is sperate from diving where a player fakes being hit in the head they absolutely should be carded.


Look and the whole tackles in the air, I do think that players who jump for the ball are being wreckless. And the tackler or as in some high profile incidents catcher in the ground should be given some mitigation. You don't card the person being tackled though. However this is pretty much sorted now and a fairly uncontroversial part of the game.

I guess i'll just have to live with you thinking im dumb/stupid

I did explain WR should be prepared for deliberately ducking into tackles to milk a penalty which i see as very close to diving, not where a runner has slipped or tackled by another player first

agree that penalising rather than carding contact to the head the tackler had little control over would still make people think twice without having such a huge impact on the game
 
Sorry to be clear I was referring to tackler should of got a penalty at most. The ball carrier should of got nothing.
 

Latest posts

Top