The Official English Rugby Thread

[SaintK]

I don't think they will be.

Well it's an above waist tackle. This is such a mess. Just read this thread, everyone is suggesting more Laws to try and make this new Law workable. It's all on the referees. And what's the betting that the first the referees heard this was coming in was the same time the rest of us heard about it?!

I'm sure that if the French can manage it, so will we - just as soon as people stop being such drama queens about it.

Many people at the club you belong to being "drama queens" about it all

[Ovals]

Well it's an above waist tackle. This is such a mess. Just read this thread, everyone is suggesting more Laws to try and make this new Law workable. It's all on the referees. And what's the betting that the first the referees heard this was coming in was the same time the rest of us heard about it?!

I'm sure that if the French can manage it, so will we - just as soon as people stop being such drama queens about it.

Many people at the club you belong to being "drama queens" about it all

Haven't really spoken to anyone from the club other than my son in law who is a coach for the girls teams that my Grand Daughters play for.

[JM2K6]

Well it's an above waist tackle. This is such a mess. Just read this thread, everyone is suggesting more Laws to try and make this new Law workable. It's all on the referees. And what's the betting that the first the referees heard this was coming in was the same time the rest of us heard about it?!

When has grabbing an arm ever been considered within the tackle framework. You can grab someone's arm in a match today, have it be above shoulder height, and not be penalised for it.

You don't need to go looking for weird ways in which you think this will be refereed. They're not interested in trying to penalise players for doing their best and not hitting people in the chest.

Ok, but you agree that a fend fundamentally compromises how a defender has to tackle?

Uh, sort of? You suggested someone knocking away a fend would be a penalty. There's nothing to suggest that. You suggested that someone grabbing the arm would be a penalty. Again, that's not going to happen.

Do you know who's most likely to get fended off? An upright tackler...

[sockwithaticket]

Italy game well on course to be the lowest attendance since the South Stand was being redeveloped. Only themselves to blame for dire product on the pitch and a cheapest ticket of £93. That's over doubled in six years

Have we ever not sold out 6N home game?

Serves the RFU right for continuing to gouge with prices.

[SaintK]

I'm sure that if the French can manage it, so will we - just as soon as people stop being such drama queens about it.

Many people at the club you belong to being "drama queens" about it all

Haven't really spoken to anyone from the club other than my son in law who is a coach for the girls teams that my Grand Daughters play for.

Pop in for a pint at the weekend, I think you'll find there are quite a few. Though personally I wouldn't say they're drama queens, more confused and concerned players, coaches, refs and club officials

[Kawazaki]

When has grabbing an arm ever been considered within the tackle framework. You can grab someone's arm in a match today, have it be above shoulder height, and not be penalised for it.

You don't need to go looking for weird ways in which you think this will be refereed. They're not interested in trying to penalise players for doing their best and not hitting people in the chest.

Ok, but you agree that a fend fundamentally compromises how a defender has to tackle?

Uh, sort of? You suggested someone knocking away a fend would be a penalty. There's nothing to suggest that. You suggested that someone grabbing the arm would be a penalty. Again, that's not going to happen.

Do you know who's most likely to get fended off? An upright tackler...

I don't know if you've played or not but pushing down on a tacklers shoulders as they try to tackle you is a very effective way to stop them tackling you.

Unless you've read something I haven't, I haven't seen any detail regards the new law and hand-offs.

[JM2K6]

Ok, but you agree that a fend fundamentally compromises how a defender has to tackle?

Uh, sort of? You suggested someone knocking away a fend would be a penalty. There's nothing to suggest that. You suggested that someone grabbing the arm would be a penalty. Again, that's not going to happen.

Do you know who's most likely to get fended off? An upright tackler...

I don't know if you've played or not but pushing down on a tacklers shoulders as they try to tackle you is a very effective way to stop them tackling you.

It's really not that effective. Being able to push them away is much more effective and has more range. Pushing them down doesn't get them away from you, and you can only do it when they're essentially already tackling you. The only time it really works is when they're super low and at full stretch already.

More importantly, if you're in a position where you can effectively push down on a tackler, it's incredibly unlikely they can push your arm away or grab it so what even is this point about? You only really get a fend grabbed by an upright tackler.

Unless you've read something I haven't, I haven't seen any detail regards the new law and hand-offs.

Why would there be any detail? It's not something that's considered high or dangerous now, and arms are limbs, not the torso.

[Kawazaki]

Uh, sort of? You suggested someone knocking away a fend would be a penalty. There's nothing to suggest that. You suggested that someone grabbing the arm would be a penalty. Again, that's not going to happen.

Do you know who's most likely to get fended off? An upright tackler...

I don't know if you've played or not but pushing down on a tacklers shoulders as they try to tackle you is a very effective way to stop them tackling you.

It's really not that effective. Being able to push them away is much more effective and has more range. Pushing them down doesn't get them away from you, and you can only do it when they're essentially already tackling you. The only time it really works is when they're super low and at full stretch already.

More importantly, if you're in a position where you can effectively push down on a tackler, it's incredibly unlikely they can push your arm away or grab it so what even is this point about? You only really get a fend grabbed by an upright tackler.

Unless you've read something I haven't, I haven't seen any detail regards the new law and hand-offs.

Why would there be any detail? It's not something that's considered high or dangerous now, and arms are limbs, not the torso.

You don't need to get the tackler away from you, you only want him to miss the tackle.

I was coached to attack the fend, especially if the player is taller and heavier otherwise they simply push you down as you attempt to go under the fend (as I described). This is not a trade secret I'm revealing here. This happens a lot.

[JM2K6]

I don't know if you've played or not but pushing down on a tacklers shoulders as they try to tackle you is a very effective way to stop them tackling you.

It's really not that effective. Being able to push them away is much more effective and has more range. Pushing them down doesn't get them away from you, and you can only do it when they're essentially already tackling you. The only time it really works is when they're super low and at full stretch already.

More importantly, if you're in a position where you can effectively push down on a tackler, it's incredibly unlikely they can push your arm away or grab it so what even is this point about? You only really get a fend grabbed by an upright tackler.

Unless you've read something I haven't, I haven't seen any detail regards the new law and hand-offs.

Why would there be any detail? It's not something that's considered high or dangerous now, and arms are limbs, not the torso.

You don't need to get the tackler away from you, you only want him to miss the tackle.

OK. I'm unclear how the tackler is grabbing your arm in this scenario. Regardless, it doesn't seem to be a thing anyone else is worried about, so perhaps we should wait and see. If they do in fact start penalising it, I will be right there with you saying it's stupid.

[Kawazaki]

See my edit.

[JM2K6]

Huh, OK. I never found fends to be particularly effective when players were going for lower tackles and was never coached otherwise. Can't say it's anything I've noticed watching the pro game either - they largely put the fend away unless players are upright.

Either way - I don't think your concern will be borne out.

[Raggs]

If your argument is that grabbing a fending arm will be considered illegal (I doubt it too), I'm with JMK that I don't see how a tackler going low is going to be able to grab that arm anyway. Fending people going low is tough regardless, especially if they're already going for the thighs, don't know about you but my arms are only so long. I've been bumped off by someone dropping their weight as I go in for a low tackle, but don't think I've ever been fended like that, and even if I have, there's definitely not been any way for me to grab their arm without some serious contortions....

[Kawazaki]

That's the point, if you can't go high then you can't attack the arm trying to fend you away. I've not suggested to grab the arm by going low, that would be impossible.

[JM2K6]

OK but you understand that my point is that going for the arm has never been considered high before and there's no reason to suggest it will be now. Grabbing an arm isn't the sort of tackle they're talking about, which is body contact into the opponent.

[Kawazaki]

OK but you understand that my point is that going for the arm has never been considered high before and there's no reason to suggest it will be now. Grabbing an arm isn't the sort of tackle they're talking about, which is body contact into the opponent.

Yes, but going for the fend requires the tackler to remain upright. You can imagine the optics as the tackle develops and the two players start to come together.

I'm not picking out a rare event, it's the kind of thing that doesn't feel thought through. Unintended consequences if you like. I could default to the catch-all 'it's ok in France' I suppose but we don't know do we.

[Raggs]

So tacklers won't be in a position to grab the arm that won't be fending them off since they aren't going high now anyway? And grabbing that arm might have been illegal, even though it won't be happening, and wasn't illegal before regardless?

[Kawazaki]

So tacklers won't be in a position to grab the arm that won't be fending them off since they aren't going high now anyway? And grabbing that arm might have been illegal, even though it won't be happening, and wasn't illegal before regardless?

How much of the thread haven't you read?

I don't know if you've played or not but pushing down on a tacklers shoulders as they try to tackle you is a very effective way to stop them tackling you.

Unless you've read something I haven't, I haven't seen any detail regards the new law and hand-offs.

[Ovals]

So tacklers won't be in a position to grab the arm that won't be fending them off since they aren't going high now anyway? And grabbing that arm might have been illegal, even though it won't be happening, and wasn't illegal before regardless?

How much of the thread haven't you read?

I don't know if you've played or not but pushing down on a tacklers shoulders as they try to tackle you is a very effective way to stop them tackling you.

Unless you've read something I haven't, I haven't seen any detail regards the new law and hand-offs.

But is irrelevant since they won't be able to grab the arm if they are tackling low.

[Kawazaki]

So tacklers won't be in a position to grab the arm that won't be fending them off since they aren't going high now anyway? And grabbing that arm might have been illegal, even though it won't be happening, and wasn't illegal before regardless?

How much of the thread haven't you read?

I don't know if you've played or not but pushing down on a tacklers shoulders as they try to tackle you is a very effective way to stop them tackling you.

Unless you've read something I haven't, I haven't seen any detail regards the new law and hand-offs.

But is irrelevant since they won't be able to grab the arm if they are tackling low.

It's not irrelevant if you're the tackler getting handed off. That's the point - repeated again.

[Ovals]

How much of the thread haven't you read?

But is irrelevant since they won't be able to grab the arm if they are tackling low.

It's not irrelevant if you're the tackler getting handed off. That's the point - repeated again.

Except that you are much less likely to get handed off if you tackle low - as noted a couple of times above.

[Kawazaki]

[Kawazaki]

Here is the podcast featuring the man responsible for this law change explaining why.

[Ovals]

If you redo that Google image search you'll see that the vast majority of the hand-offs shown are on tacklers standing tall !!

But no one said it was impossible to hand off a low tackler.

[JM2K6]

Thanks for those - clear proof they're not attacking the fend when tackling at waist height or lower.

[Kawazaki]

If you redo that Google image search you'll see that the vast majority of the hand-offs shown are on tacklers standing tall !!

But no one said it was impossible to hand off a low tackler.

Yes I know, but they won't have the option to go high and attack the arm if they are only allowed to go low. And when they go low they have no defence against the hand-off.

As I said, this is one of those unforeseen consequences. Maybe they'll ban the hand-off like they are supposedly banning the dip before contact? It'll be tweak after tweak after tweak until they finally admit that playing rugby carries a risk of concussion no matter how you play it as long as there is tackling involved.

[Kawazaki]

Thanks for those - clear proof they're not attacking the fend when tackling at waist height or lower.

FFS, I never said they were. Do you cunts ever fucking read threads?

[Brazil]

Thanks for those - clear proof they're not attacking the fend when tackling at waist height or lower.

FFS, I never said they were. Do you cunts ever fucking read threads?

So your argument is that if you go low you'll be less likely to be handed off? Or that grabbing an arm and then wrapping might be a penalty if you get it wrong, like it is already?

[Ovals]

If you redo that Google image search you'll see that the vast majority of the hand-offs shown are on tacklers standing tall !!

But no one said it was impossible to hand off a low tackler.

Yes I know, but they won't have the option to go high and attack the arm if they are only allowed to go low. And when they go low they have no defence against the hand-off.

As I said, this is one of those unforeseen consequences. Maybe they'll ban the hand-off like they are supposedly banning the dip before contact? It'll be tweak after tweak after tweak until they finally admit that playing rugby carries a risk of concussion no matter how you play it as long as there is tackling involved.

But you've changed the goalposts in your argument - do you even remember what the point was in your origibal post - it was about whether grabbing the arm of a fend off would be a penalty !!

[Kawazaki]

Thanks for those - clear proof they're not attacking the fend when tackling at waist height or lower.

FFS, I never said they were. Do you cunts ever fucking read threads?

So your argument is that if you go low you'll be less likely to be handed off? Or that grabbing an arm and then wrapping might be a penalty if you get it wrong, like it is already?

Just read the fucking thread, Jesus wept!

To attack a hand-off the tackler has to remain upright which won't look good.

If a tackler tries to go under the hand-off the attacker can just fend him off by pushing him down.

[Kawazaki]

If you redo that Google image search you'll see that the vast majority of the hand-offs shown are on tacklers standing tall !!

But no one said it was impossible to hand off a low tackler.

Yes I know, but they won't have the option to go high and attack the arm if they are only allowed to go low. And when they go low they have no defence against the hand-off.

As I said, this is one of those unforeseen consequences. Maybe they'll ban the hand-off like they are supposedly banning the dip before contact? It'll be tweak after tweak after tweak until they finally admit that playing rugby carries a risk of concussion no matter how you play it as long as there is tackling involved.

But you've changed the goalposts in your argument - do you even remember what the point was in your origibal post - it was about whether grabbing the arm of a fend off would be a penalty !!

Yes, then that developed into what happens when the players bodies get closer... The optics will look bad for the tackler because of his original tackle height.

Just follow the thread FFS.

[JM2K6]

Like I said - we'll have to see what happens. I don't think it's a real problem in any way. Firstly because the concern that people won't be allowed to grab the arm or attack the fend seems unfounded, and secondly because I think players tackling waist high or lower are a) more likely to not give a shit about the fend and focus on the tackle, and b) less likely to be fended off successfully than going high in the first place.

Nothing about it screams big problem to me.

[Ovals]

Yes I know, but they won't have the option to go high and attack the arm if they are only allowed to go low. And when they go low they have no defence against the hand-off.

As I said, this is one of those unforeseen consequences. Maybe they'll ban the hand-off like they are supposedly banning the dip before contact? It'll be tweak after tweak after tweak until they finally admit that playing rugby carries a risk of concussion no matter how you play it as long as there is tackling involved.

But you've changed the goalposts in your argument - do you even remember what the point was in your origibal post - it was about whether grabbing the arm of a fend off would be a penalty !!

Yes, then that developed into what happens when the players bodies get closer... The optics will look bad for the tackler because of his original tackle height.

Just follow the thread FFS.

I have - and well enough to see that your original concern was invalid. I assume that you now accept that !!

[Kawazaki]

Like I said - we'll have to see what happens. I don't think it's a real problem in any way. Firstly because the concern that people won't be allowed to grab the arm or attack the fend seems unfounded, and secondly because I think players tackling waist high or lower are a) more likely to not give a shit about the fend and focus on the tackle, and b) less likely to be fended off successfully than going high in the first place.

Nothing about it screams big problem to me.

I bet you that the higher the standard of the players the more this will specifically be an issue. It's an obvious area for a coach to exploit.

[Kawazaki]

But you've changed the goalposts in your argument - do you even remember what the point was in your origibal post - it was about whether grabbing the arm of a fend off would be a penalty !!

Yes, then that developed into what happens when the players bodies get closer... The optics will look bad for the tackler because of his original tackle height.

Just follow the thread FFS.

I have - and well enough to see that your original concern was invalid. I assume that you now accept that !!

You've got zero idea if it's invalid unless you can point out that there is an exception to this new law that allows upright tackling if the attacking player is attempting a hand-off.

[Raggs]

Can't be arsed with this anymore, which is why he's on mute anyway. Amusingly though, Manu got tackled, handoff didn't work on the low tackler. Can't find any footage from the 2010 Delhi commonwealth games 7s match though.

[JM2K6]

Like I said - we'll have to see what happens. I don't think it's a real problem in any way. Firstly because the concern that people won't be allowed to grab the arm or attack the fend seems unfounded, and secondly because I think players tackling waist high or lower are a) more likely to not give a shit about the fend and focus on the tackle, and b) less likely to be fended off successfully than going high in the first place.

Nothing about it screams big problem to me.

I bet you that the higher the standard of the players the more this will specifically be an issue. It's an obvious area for a coach to exploit.

What are they exploiting?

[Brazil]

FFS, I never said they were. Do you cunts ever fucking read threads?

So your argument is that if you go low you'll be less likely to be handed off? Or that grabbing an arm and then wrapping might be a penalty if you get it wrong, like it is already?

Just read the fucking thread, Jesus wept!

To attack a hand-off the tackler has to remain upright which won't look good.

If a tackler tries to go under the hand-off the attacker can just fend him off by pushing him down.

Don't attack the fending arm then. Which will be easy because you'll be low anyway, then you can wrap the legs.

[Kawazaki]

Like I said - we'll have to see what happens. I don't think it's a real problem in any way. Firstly because the concern that people won't be allowed to grab the arm or attack the fend seems unfounded, and secondly because I think players tackling waist high or lower are a) more likely to not give a shit about the fend and focus on the tackle, and b) less likely to be fended off successfully than going high in the first place.

Nothing about it screams big problem to me.

I bet you that the higher the standard of the players the more this will specifically be an issue. It's an obvious area for a coach to exploit.

What are they exploiting?

If you're a ball carrier and you know in advance what the tackle choice is of the defender then you exploit that.

[JM2K6]

I bet you that the higher the standard of the players the more this will specifically be an issue. It's an obvious area for a coach to exploit.

What are they exploiting?

If you're a ball carrier and you know in advance what the tackle choice is of the defender then you exploit that.

Right, yeah, that seems reasonable. Players no longer being able to tackle chest high will have an impact on the game. We agree there.

Though there's still a difference between waist-high driving tackles and chop tackles. However even the FRENCH KLAXON ALERT other trials showed the game was faster and more open as a result.

[Kawazaki]

Don't attack the fending arm then. Which will be easy because you'll be low anyway, then you can wrap the legs.