Ireland v Samoa 5.45pm

First topic message reminder :

At that good man Gibbo's request and because the other thread was humongous !

COME ON IRELAND!!!!


Live on rte 2 and bbc NI. Hopefully that means rte won't scramble the signal. Have it on record there just incase.

Saint
Ging to try and avoid the Wales score and pick it up on iplayer later

That is the key issue here. He had no control at 1st, but he then tried to readjust it all mid-air and mid-consciousness. Too late. Don't even phhoking try it in the 1st place.

Punt uit.

For the record, I thought a yellow card was fair.

But a yellow card has to be the absolute minimum sanction in that situation, just to stop players doing it. Just to make coaches eradicate it from the game altogether. Rugby by its nature is a dangerous enough game, there's no need to add to the risk.

Gibson wrote:That is the key issue here. He had no control at 1st, but he then tried to readjust it all mid-air and  mid-consciousness. Too late. Don't even phhoking try it in the 1st place.
Punt uit.

Gibson, I think thats where you have to start, I dont think he was trying to spear tackle Bowe, if you look at lots of other tackle scenarios most tacklers dont have control as where/how the tacklee ends up. If you bring the technique used at the commencent of the tackle into the legislation rather than the pointless 10.4 (j), you then reduce the chances of "tip tackle" occuring.

aucklandlaurie wrote:

Gibson wrote:That is the key issue here. He had no control at 1st, but he then tried to readjust it all mid-air and  mid-consciousness. Too late. Don't even phhoking try it in the 1st place.
Punt uit.

Gibson, I think thats where you have to start, I dont think he was trying to spear tackle Bowe, if you look at lots of other tackle scenarios most tacklers dont have control as where/how the tacklee ends up. If you bring the technique used at the commencent of the tackle into the legislation rather than the pointless 10.4 (j), you then reduce the chances of "tip tackle" occuring.

That sir, is pure logic. But, mate, he knows the Laws and the high-level of attention paid to even attempted spear-tackles now. I mean...

I don't think the man really meant it either, for what its worth. But, its not the point mo chara. This is.

I totally agree with you if you are talking about coaching players how to (and how not to) tackle then technique at the start of the tackle is vital but if you are talking about what to sanction then it has to be the dangerous bit ie. the end.

Infact, if we followed your suggestion you seem to be saying that Pisi would be sanctioned anyway.

Gibson wrote:

aucklandlaurie wrote:

Gibson wrote:That is the key issue here. He had no control at 1st, but he then tried to readjust it all mid-air and  mid-consciousness. Too late. Don't even phhoking try it in the 1st place.
Punt uit.

Gibson, I think thats where you have to start, I dont think he was trying to spear tackle Bowe, if you look at lots of other tackle scenarios most tacklers dont have control as where/how the tacklee ends up. If you bring the technique used at the commencent of the tackle into the legislation rather than the pointless 10.4 (j), you then reduce the chances of "tip tackle" occuring.

That sir, is pure logic. But, mate, he knows the Laws and the high-level of attention paid to even attempted spear-tackles now. I mean...

I don't think the man really meant it either, for what its worth. But, its not the point mo chara. This is.

I like your style Gibbo, but its not even lunchtime.

I know mate. I almost feel ashamed. I love being a lapsed Kafflic. So much in-built guilt. Saves me a phhokin fortune.

MrsP wrote:I totally agree with you if you are talking about coaching players how to (and how not to) tackle then technique at the start of the tackle is vital but if you are talking about what to sanction then it has to be the dangerous bit ie. the end.

Infact, if we followed your suggestion you seem to be saying that Pisi would be sanctioned anyway.

To be honest mrsp I hadnt really considered the issue of sanctions, apart from thinking that Steve Walsh had no other option but  to do what he did at the time.

By legislating the root cause of these types of tackles then I think the IRB would then be seen as positively acting in the interests of reducing player injury. rather than just trying to put all the obligation on the tackler to control how the ball carrier lands, which is all that 10.4(j) does. and is nigh on impossible.

This is a really good convo. What these board tings are all about in fact.

Gibson wrote:I know mate. I almost feel ashamed. I love being a lapsed Kafflic. So much in-built  guilt. Saves me a phhokin fortune.

Gibbo by being a lapsed kfflic do you qualify for some drinking subsidy? Im kaflic too, just not a very good one.

I don't agree though. I think that would lead to more cards rather than fewer.

The onus is currently on the player to not put the tackled opponent in danger by lifting him. If lifting occurs, you have to bring him down safely. I think it would be very difficult for the refs to ajudicate where the tacklers hands were anyway. I can't see how this would get us any closer to being rid of dagerous tackles.

Will the full findings of the hearing be published? Let me know if you see it, would you?

aucklandlaurie wrote:

Gibson wrote:I know mate. I almost feel ashamed. I love being a lapsed Kafflic. So much in-built  guilt. Saves me a phhokin fortune.

Gibbo by being a lapsed kfflic do you qualify for some drinking subsidy? Im kaflic too, just not a very good one.

Ja to both questions bro. Or was that an answer?  

If just one of us is tip-tackled... none of us are free.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eFkmRp_G2uo

It depends on whether your focus is on sanctions (cards) etc or whether you focus on why/how the lifting occurs in the first place.

Have you ever considered how many times when these tackles occur, that one or both of the hands is between the thighs? its uusually pretty clear to me and I would suspect to most referees as well.