Wallabies 28 vs All Blacks 49, July 31st 2010, Fourth Tri Nations Test FT

[wjd23104]

I to am ignorant of the meaning of this word Gyypo.

 

[woodward]

Love how gyppos show up here and label established and highly knowledgeable members 'ignorant'.

He admitted ignorance and I offered enlightenment (if the link had worked, thanks smartcooky). I'm guessing you mean gypsy. We can at least agree that music is horrible

 

[William18]

Your youtube link doesn't work!

EDIT: OK, fixed it for you




The only criticism I have of this video is, I wish they would just leave the commentary alone instead of overdubbing it with that f**king horrible screeching noise which is allegedly supposed to be trying to pass itself off as "music"!

There are thousands of videos spoiled on youtube because of bad music.

 

[Quadecooper#1]

Well done ABs. convincing and well deserved win. Why is it that every year the IRB decides that they have to take a physical aspect away from the game? They took rucking and now you can't even lift a bloke in a tackle. I'm against going past the horizontal but some tackles that have been charged this year have been soft yet there are sin binnings and suspensions. And Owen franks tackle on Richard brown should have been applauded not sin binned, well at the most a penalty. The IRB is ruining rugby. Drew Mitchell deserved his red for the second yellow because the ref made clear what was going to happen before his brain fart but I bet the first yellow wasn't warranted.
Any who I thought that we did real well to lose the second half by 3 points with 14 men against a rampaging ABs team. And in my mind we couldn't have played much worse in a lot of facets of the game. Restarts were horrendous, one on one tackles were terrible, line speed was woeful. It's time to drop Brown as a no8 should not get fended by a winger (not taking anything from Jane, for a back he has a great fend), I'd bring in Higginbotham and play him at 6 with rocky at 8.
We need a bigger outside (geeze I hope mortlock rediscovers himself at the rebels next year). We need to bring in more variation rather than our one out flatfooted hit ups from the ruck.
If we can do the simple things right, play the full 80 and take our chances I can see us posting a respectable score against the ABs and maybe even an upset.

 

[smartcooky]

Why is it that every year the IRB decides that they have to take a physical aspect away from the game? They took rucking and now you can’t even lift a bloke in a tackle. I'm against going past the horizontal but some tackles that have been charged this year have been soft yet there are sin binnings and suspensions. And Owen franks tackle on Richard brown should have been applauded not sin binned, well at the most a penalty. The IRB is ruining rugby.

I think there is a bigger issue at stake here.

Rugby Union used be considered a "contact" sport, but as our Rugby League cousins have allowed their game to be come more and more brutal in the tackle, so we have followed. Rugby Union is no longer a "contact" sport, it is a "collision" sport, and frankly, I don't know whether that is a good thing or not.

One thing is for sure, and that is the IRB are very concerned at the high level of injuries, particularly in European Club rugby. While our domestic teams here in NZ and Australia typically have squad of 30 to cover them for the season, it is not uncommon for teams in the Top 14 and The Premiership to have squads of 50 players or more just to cover the level of injuries. It is not uncommon for these teams to have 12-15 players on the injury list at any one time. Many of these injuries come from the continual bashing the players' bodies get in the collisions that occur frequently in every match. This was one of the core issues (player management and safety) that came up in the Woking Conference in 2007. It was agreed that players did not get enough rest and that the collisions that were happening in the game were a prime cause of many injuries.

Admittedly, the Europeans play more domestic rugby than we do, nonetheless a 25-30% injury rate is very high. I don't think that the IRB means to take the big hits out of the game altogether but they are targeting the high-end dangerous ones where players are lifted and turned over or shoulder charged.

There is no good reason to lift a player off his feet. If you are intending to put him on the ground, then just an ordinary "ball-and-all" tackle is more effective.

Remember that if you put the ball carrier to ground and go to ground as well, you are a tackler (Law 15.4), so you can release, get to your feet and grab the ball without having to go through the gate. However, if you put the player on the ground and remain standing (which is what is likely to happen if you lift him) then you are NOT a tackler (Law 15.6) so you must release him, move away from the tackle zone and go back around and through the gate, which takes longer

 

[woodward]

Too many cards for me, they haven't only been for dangerous tackles anyway. Question, if they're keen on cracking down on something ie dangerous tackles, do the players get a warning?

 

[Sam Owen]

Admittedly, the Europeans play more domestic rugby than we do, nonetheless a 25-30% injury rate is very high. I don't think that the IRB means to take the big hits out of the game altogether but they are targeting the high-end dangerous ones where players are lifted and turned over or shoulder charged.

There is no good reason to lift a player off his feet. If you are intending to put him on the ground, then just an ordinary "ball-and-all" tackle is more effective.

Remember that if you put the ball carrier to ground and go to ground as well, you are a tackler (Law 15.4), so you can release, get to your feet and grab the ball without having to go through the gate. However, if you put the player on the ground and remain standing (which is what is likely to happen if you lift him) then you are NOT a tackler (Law 15.6) so you must release him, move away from the tackle zone and go back around and through the gate, which takes longer

Yea I love the 'dump' tackle its a very dominant tackle but now you've made the laws clear I now understand why you dont really see it in union. I love big hits its a defensive spectacle. M Jones, Z Brooke, B Lima (only name these guys because they did hits quite a few times not just one) when they smashed people
the victims didnt run so fast and straight anymore or just didnt take part in that game anymore. I hate to see spear tackles though, head highs player safety is no doubt an important issue but like Tana says it aint tiddlywinks.

 

[nickdnz]

What do people think a "dump" tackle is?

I've always known it as a tackle in which your feet go above the horrizontal. That is banned for a reason. It injures players. There is no law against hard tackles, Brian Lima's tackle in the 2003 World Cup, would still be completely legal. You are just not allowed to spear tackle. I have been spear tackled, and unlike just getting thumped really hard, it puts you in a position in which you could break your neck. People thow Tana's quote around, but the context of his quote is often lost. He made a tackle during a Hurricanes vs Crusaders match, which was penalised when it wasn't really dangerous. That's fine. Spear tackles have never been a part of the game. They harm player, and when they are intentional, yellow or red cards are fine and appropreate.

I'm all for big hits. If a player gets thumped, great. Just don't lift a player beyond the horrizontal. It's simple! League can keep their dump tackles, and when League players get paralized, the NRL can look like fools.

 

[Hurricane Nate]

Man I can't wait to see a game with no dam cards. AB's lookin like their in a class of their own at the moment. Most well rounded team ever? considering they thrashed France (end of last year), Ireland, Wales, South Africa, Aussie. Will count for little come world cup, as all NZ'ers should know, but the other contenders have alot of ground to make up.

 

[Sam Owen]

What do people think a "dump" tackle is?

Was someone asking what a 'dump' tackle was for you to explain it nick?...lol maybe you should read my post fully it also agrees with you about spear tackles too.

You know Colin Meads, Brian Lochore a lot of the old school, myself have survived dump tackles. We didnt get paralised but if you nick feel its too much for you then fair enough hehe. I think more players get paralised from union scrums anyway than league hits and dumps, most of the paralised union players are wheelchaired and my heart goes out to them.

Ive never been spear tackled and hope I never will.

My 100th post I'll make me a hot chocolate.

 

[Amobokoboko]

I reckon that if Deans/ Rocky can get more discipline in the squad, the Wallabies should be able to get a bonus point in the next game.

 

[Hurricane Nate]

I reckon that if Deans/ Rocky can get more discipline in the squad, the Wallabies should be able to get a bonus point in the next game.

For losing within 7 haha? I'd more worried about gettin the win and 4 points, stuff the bonus points. They're just bonuses.

 

[allblacksfreak]

I reckon that if Deans/ Rocky can get more discipline in the squad, the Wallabies should be able to get a bonus point in the next game.

Any team with even half a respect will gun for the win, and not just a losing bonus point. I'm sure the Wallabies will hit back and although I think they will still lose the next one, will give the AB one heck of a game.

 

[nickdnz]

Was someone asking what a 'dump' tackle was for you to explain it nick?...lol maybe you should read my post fully it also agrees with you about spear tackles too.

You know Colin Meads, Brian Lochore a lot of the old school, myself have survived dump tackles. We didnt get paralised but if you nick feel its too much for you then fair enough hehe. I think more players get paralised from union scrums anyway than league hits and dumps, most of the paralised union players are wheelchaired and my heart goes out to them.

Ive never been spear tackled and hope I never will.

My 100th post I'll make me a hot chocolate.

I realized that your post said dump tackles can be banned, I was just extending it, and then telling you the players you referenced who "dump tackled" didn't really dump tackle.

You know Colin Meads, Brian Lochore a lot of the old school, myself have survived dump tackles. We didnt get paralised but if you nick feel its too much for you then fair enough hehe.

I love how you put yourself in the same league as them.
A dump tackle is a spear tackle. "Dump tackle" is another word for spear tackle, just often without the negative connetation. It is when your legs go beyond the horrizontal while being lifted. If you think it has anything to do with physical toughness, I suggest you climb on top of your kitchen tackle, go for a nose dive onto the floor, snapping your neck backwards, and then come and tell me you think it's a safe tackle.

Spear tackles obviously put people at risk. People have been paralized by spear tackles. It is unsafe. The IRB realizes this is unsafe. "the act of lifting an opponent off his feet in a tackle AND dropping or 'spearing' that player so that his head and/or upper body comes into contact with the ground first, is a dangerous tackle".

As someone who plays prop, I'd rather have a scrum collaps, than get lifted in the air past the horrizontal, and then driven into the ground...

Though, if those are my options, I'm becoming a back.

 

[Sam Owen]

Nope 'dump' tackle as far as I know it has a different name from the 'spear' tackle for a reason. Spear is when you head first them, with their legs in the air, to the ground. Dump is lifting their legs up by your hips and dumping them on to their backs.

I think this is where the confusion is between you and me nick lies (mind you you seem to always disagree with my posts lol I dont know why) Ive always thought of the dump tackle as how Ive just wrote up ahead and you've always known it as another name for spear tackle if thats the case I agree with you a hundred per cent on the dangers of the spear but how Ive described the dump as I know it is my reasons for saying 'Colin Meads, Brian Lochore have survived dump tackles' cos it happens to every rugby player its not a matter of being in their league.

 

[TRF_Olyy]

Yeah, i think of a dump tackle as a tackle where the attackers feet leave the floor in contact and they are lifted, a spear tackle is the same but the player is rotated past horizontal and hits the ground head/neck/shoulder first

 

[allblacksfreak]

I thought dump tackled is when your girlfriend breaks up with you.. LoL.. jk

 

[Sam Owen]

Yeah, i think of a dump tackle as a tackle where the attackers feet leave the floor in contact and they are lifted, a spear tackle is the same but the player is rotated past horizontal and hits the ground head/neck/shoulder first

Thats exactly what I thought too. Here I got this from wikipedia..

'A similar tackle to the dump tackle is the spear tackle, a more dangerous (and illegal) move. This can be done by adding rotation to the player being tackled, causing the player to hit the ground head or neck first.'

Maybe from nicks neck of the woods they're the same. Im willing to give nickdnz the benefit of the doubt despite what he gives me lol..

 

[nickdnz]

Thats exactly what I thought too. Here I got this from wikipedia..

'A similar tackle to the dump tackle is the spear tackle, a more dangerous (and illegal) move. This can be done by adding rotation to the player being tackled, causing the player to hit the ground head or neck first.'

Maybe from nicks neck of the woods they're the same. Im willing to give nickdnz the benefit of the doubt despite what he gives me lol..

That's generous of you, but I honestly have nothing against you at all. I disagree with some of your posts because I genuinly disagree with them, it's not a personal thing.

I told you what I thought a dump tackle is from the start.

What do people think a "dump" tackle is?

I've always known it as a tackle in which your feet go above the horrizontal.

Because the "dump tackle" is not an official term according to the IRB, the definition will vary. I have no problem with tackles in which a player is lifted, so long as it is not past the horizontal. I'm pretty sure there is no rule against your definition of a dump tackle, providing the head or upper torso does not hit the ground before the lower torso or back.


I think this could be legal (and awsome), because if you look where his back hit the ground, it was his lower torso, despite his legs leaving the horozontal for a short period of time. This is sort of a grey area tackle.


This however, not legal (or awsome). Being on the receiving end of this is pretty terrifying, because you can't do much to protect yourself.

I guess this has mainly been a conflict in terms, so I think we can agree to agree. That's why my original post was what it was, as I genuinly thought people must have had a different opinion to what a dump tackle is.

 

[smartcooky]

Dump tackle, spear tackle, shoulder charge. Whatever!!

Shoulder charging and lifting/driving tackles are a legitimate part of Rugby League, and it actually makes sense for them because they have NO contest for the ball at the tackle (other than a one-on-one strip, or dislodging the ball, which both must be done with the ball carrier still on his feet).

However, these are not necessary in Rugby Union because we DO have a contest, and there are better ways to get the ball. In fact lifting the ball-carrier almost always gives him the opportunity to offload the ball, whereas the ball-and-all tackle does not.

Spear tackling has no place in either code as they are likely to cause serious injury and the margin for error is so narrow.

The Laws of the game outlaw any kind of contact with a player who is off his feet, both in the tackle and in the line-out - Law 10.4(i) - so I cannot see how it can make sense allowing a ball carrier to be tackled by lifting him off the ground. Its effectively the same thing. If I had my way, lifting the ball carrier off the ground would be illegal. That is not to say that I don't think you should be allowed to knock a player off his feet with a big hit (legal with wrapped arms etc), but IMO, actually grasping and lifting the ball carrier up should be illegal.