The Rugby Pod React to new game-changing RFU Tackle Laws
The RFU announced this week that from next year, all tackles must be made at the waist line or below in the community game. The lads give their take on what has been a very controversial ruling.
Watch more new videos about Law | Synthesized by Mindovermetal English
This rule is nuts, 2hat happens at the try line where the two sets of forwards are crouched down and heads banging together, that is far more damaging than a 'high' tackle in general play.
Woke tackling. Players are already acting soccer-style with the slightest head contact, a red card could assure victory after all.
All the ball- carriers have to do is to crouch very low, and then are untackle-able. Stupid.
No this will change the face of England rugby …The rest of us won't plug in to your stupidity .
Lol all these poor people being forced to play rugby. Absolute shambles of a law. I'm 40 and only play football nowadays but the day they try and ban heading, I'm done. They can shove it with these wimpy laws in sports.
This law change is going to kill the game imo. It won't work because you can't tackle somebody around the waste whilst defending your try line from 5 yards out. You need to smother the attacking player and you need to go higher than the waste. I used to play in the centre and all of my big hits were around the chest area and I used to stop the ball from travelling out to the wings as a result. Also, if you are chasing a player, you have to go around the chest area to smother the ball, otherwise the attacking player is free to stretch out unopposed. Attacking players are going to dip into tackles now, so more knees, elbows, shoulders in defending players heads imo. This defeats the object of making the tackle safer. I can imagine the ref is now going to be blowing his or her whistle every 10 seconds or we are going to get disputes between players and officials every 2 mins. There is going to be yellow card after yellow card and we will see teams reduced to 10 players against 15. Rugby is being killed off and I only hope the players stand up for the sake of the game. I know the supporters are behind them. Common sense must prevail. Having a different set of rules for grass roots vs professional rugby is ludicrous imo. Unteaching the tackle if you want to progress in rugby is crazy. Thank God my playing days are over.
Owen Farrel should be forced to play in these games
Most tackles were below the rib cage until the 1990s…
If someone is sent off for a head-collision tackle, he should be fined five grand. That would soon stop it.
The cold truth is that if they don't do something radical, litigation is going to eventually kill the game anyway.
Game is becoming worse and worse. Not worth turning out to watch.
windsor and beaconsfield…. the grass route of English rugby…. on there knees ?!?! honestly…. my heart bleeds… 🤣🤣🤣🤣
all the top tier clubs and regions have all got their new and academy players from grassroots clubs , when they move up they wont be able to compete because they havent played that style before
plenty offloading then lol.
60 years ago we were taught to tackle below the waist even around the ankles. It was much more a running game because the ball was difficult to smother. As for the 6’ 8” player tackling the 5’ player he will have to get down a bit.
I think the best solution is to set the tackle hight at chest level and enforce it more stringently. After one season of yellow carding every tackle above the chest and red carding every one above the shoulder (taking into account mitigating circumstances such as the recipient dropping lower at the moment of contact) and I think all players will manage to change their ways. The biggest problem with he current situation is not the rule but the inconsistent way it is enforced.
You should rename it the premiership pod. Since you don't mention anyone else. All 3 SA teams made the last 16. They got like 15 sec airtime, but we have to constantly listen to you drone on about how good the premiership is. Take all the non England players out of the prem and you're left with nothing.
Really gotten irritating having a "rugby" pod give 80% airtime to a tiny % Of actual participants in rugby. And its not even the best % of rugby
Whether it's the right thing or not, surely any change that's this fundamental to the game needs to be introduced at World Rugby level, not England Rugby.
Perhaps the game should just end. In any ruck or maul that falls over the chances exist of serious injury to players wrapped up in the melee, it not just one on one tackling or multiple people tackling that causes issues. Rugby is game that has inherent in its conduct and play significant elements of danger. You cannot escape this aspect, if safety is the focus then end the sport, because you cannot avoid these risks.
Probably in my last year coaching senior Colts.
In all the time I've been coaching we have had very few concussions. This season we've had two and both caused by knees to the head when tackling low.
Technique wasn't the issue, it was just bad luck. Concussion is a serious issue and whilst I understand the rationale of being seen to do something, the way it's been rolled out was shambolic and was always going to bring about negative reaction from those it affects.
The main thing I'm struggling with is where all the 'data' was gathered? If it was in the professional game then surely the new law change should be applied sport wide and not just to those in grassroots/community rugby.
Some CBs in England already find it difficult getting referees for games and I'm pretty sure this isn't going to help.
Also, lots of amateur teams only train once a week. Such a fundamental change requires coaches and players to change habits of a lifetime within one period of summer training.
From a coaching perspective I'm wondering why, in conjunction with this law change they didn't look at the maul as I don't see how it can be formed or defended?
Same goes defending on your try line.
As for all the 'back in my day' comments about tackling low…..there were always high tackles and concussions, so take off the rose tinted specs 😉
Hopefully there may be some.movement or mediation on what looks like a knee jerk decision (im sure it's been bubbling for a while though) but it's how it looks eh?
Evolution of the game.is unavoidable but this is being forced rather than managed.
Just my opinion, don't wet the bed if you disagree 😂
Rolling Mauls will be impossible to defend as you can't join the maul below the waist and will be deemed as collapsing the maul.
People complain now, as if the rugby rules are good as it is. IT IS NOT. It's like we kidding ourselves just because we benefit from it. The game is not made one bit safer. There are just more red and yellow cards.
I saw comments like "Oh, he has a bad technique resulting in him being concussed". What a load of 🦀.
A tackler don't want to give away penalties, so they tackle lower…as low as the legs. Two of SA players, Faf and our outside centre were knocked out by Caleb Clarke lifting his knees, embracing the tackle. On these forums, it was said they had bad technique. What is bad technique??? You commit to a tackle while the ball carrier is some distance from you. When the ball carrier realise that you will tackle him, he embrace the tackle and immediately change his body position or stature. The outcome is because of what both players have done in the tackle. Another argument is, where do the tackler put his head? Well, it all depends on the line of the ball carrier. You expect a tackler to always know the final line of the carrier, even though his line is changing as he runs. What line does Kolbe run? Damn, do you know what percentage of lovers don't know what side to turn their heads when kissing? Luckily they only bump noses softly. But you expect a rugby player to get his head on the right side of the tackle all the time… otherwise you shout "bad technique"!
Rugby laws currently, is a circus. The referees control the game like lion trainers, in the process, making up their own interpretations (laws). No consistency, weekly controversial, and on many occasions, pure bias.
Simplifying the rules is what is needed. At least we as the viewers can understand what the referee is blowing. So, I welcome the below waist law. Nothing to interpret because referees are not equipped to interpret games equally and consistently as is required.
I get player safety, but seriously, what's next ? flag rugby ??
You bring up the point of clubs transitioning between the "two" games, what about the lack of experience with full tackles which will lead to more injuries ? Also, if the tackler is coming from a low position (to contact a low target), won't they be easier to push/fend off ? And the ball carrier needs to be careful with his fends and should not be allowed (IMHO) to fend off the head.
Head contact should be avoided, we know what bad contact looks like. We've all played with guys who shook off what they probably shouldn't've, and we all let them (just as we used to "pour drivers into their cars").
And how do you call an attempt to set up a maul (which would be high contact) but then players get off balance (as others arrive) and fall to the ground ?
I understand the position of zero tolerance for any sort of head contact, but we've all seen examples this year where it has resulted in (IMHO) bad calls. I think we know what a bad head contact looks like, and certainly there is no room in our sport for this. I also think that is a major foul has been assessed, then the "victim" should go off for an HIA (and a red card should also require a mandatory 10 minutes off the field).
Good tackling technique is safe (well, as safe as rugby can be) and needs to be taught (as I think it is). There are still too many players going immediately off their feet at a breakdown (our game is played on your feet) and this is getting called more these days. One thing I've noticed not being called is at a line out the backs (either or both) advancing before the line is over (and the ball, on a long over throw, has passed the 15m line).
Ours is a hard game; it tests you physically, mentally, and your moral courage. I think we're better off for it.
Looking forward to the 6ft8 locks tackling the 5ft scrummies below the waist. Also the reffing is going to be extremely tough
Fans will boycott games. Clubs will close down. The end is nigh. Well done RFU. Mission accomplished. If pro players want to save their own game they will need to boycott. Refuse to play. Then if needs be form their own league. Who needs the RFU. Self imposed suits and money grabbers.
There is no time to get that low in close quarters!! This is creating more irritating laws to referee … I hope this is not passed
Touched on a very good point towards the end. Its gonna be down to grassroots refs to enforce this. I dont envy them.
Let a go back to the fundamentals. The object of the game is threefold:
1. To dominate the opposition in each phase of the game.
2. To provide rules that are fair to both sides . Those rules allow either side to dominate if they have the ability.
3. To structure the rules so that, as far as is practical, players can play the game safely.
Any change to the rules that alters or inhibits these fundamentals may very well destroy the game.
Let’s be clear, if the object is to protect players from harm at all costs then do this by abandoning the game. No game, no harm.
Personally, I am a captain of of a counties 1 team due for promotion and 75% of my players have said that if these laws come into fruition then they will not commit to next season. Given that the club will die and that is just one club in England, I dread to think the amount of clubs throughout England that this will be the same case 😢