anthonyb1965
GO Manly
SeaEagleRock8 said:
Bingo........lol
Cannonball Tackle
- Thread starter anthonyb1965
- Start date
Bingo........lol
Only a few guys have terrified me,Lesnar,Undertaker and that asian bastard from old van damme (such as bloodsport) movies,2 of those i met as a fan and the other was behind me in a line ,friendly enough tho,i called him tit twitch man and he near wet himself giggling then said 'nice identifyer' and then did it
Ian Martin tragic
Bencher
In 97 kosef was suspended for a diving charge-down on andrew johns in the prelim final. bug hullabaloo in the press about the dangers of this coached tactic to dive at the knees. We could have used him in the gf....
Often 1 or 2 tacklers are up high and a third makes a tackle round the legs to stop forward progress and end the tackle. If the guy is still moving I don't see there's any need for any rule change, and the guy is fair game for hard contact. But this is a new phenomenon, not just a part of the contact sport set of expectations (ie. HTFU does not apply imho). With a few exceptions players these days are more powerful and faster, and this scenario of the immobilisation of an attacker with a third coming in to down him is about the evolution of tactics to control the ruck and slow the play the ball down.
So here's a rule change: once the player's forward progress is stopped, and he is stationary (not going backwards or sideways), then careless, reckless or intentional 'dangerous' contact to the legs is illegal. Defn dangerous: causes or likely to cause injury. Stationary + dangerous contact = penalty (and possible suspension).
players coming in for the legs should then be a bit more careful as they risk a penalty or worse. Most look to me to be doing this already (I haven't seen a manly player power in like a steam train in this situation) and it will still be ok to make the leg tackle. But the flying wedge is pretty easy to see and the refs will just blow it up for a penalty...
Thanks. Where do I send my invoice?
Often 1 or 2 tacklers are up high and a third makes a tackle round the legs to stop forward progress and end the tackle. If the guy is still moving I don't see there's any need for any rule change, and the guy is fair game for hard contact. But this is a new phenomenon, not just a part of the contact sport set of expectations (ie. HTFU does not apply imho). With a few exceptions players these days are more powerful and faster, and this scenario of the immobilisation of an attacker with a third coming in to down him is about the evolution of tactics to control the ruck and slow the play the ball down.
So here's a rule change: once the player's forward progress is stopped, and he is stationary (not going backwards or sideways), then careless, reckless or intentional 'dangerous' contact to the legs is illegal. Defn dangerous: causes or likely to cause injury. Stationary + dangerous contact = penalty (and possible suspension).
players coming in for the legs should then be a bit more careful as they risk a penalty or worse. Most look to me to be doing this already (I haven't seen a manly player power in like a steam train in this situation) and it will still be ok to make the leg tackle. But the flying wedge is pretty easy to see and the refs will just blow it up for a penalty...
Thanks. Where do I send my invoice?
Ian Martin tragic
Bencher
that's a pretty radical idea rex. interesting I have to say.
It would take league back to the 70s before jack gibson introduced the gang tackle. I still think league in the mid-late 70s was close to the best balance of defense and attack. after that wazza-ball came along and started the bias toward defense in gameplay, rule-making and reactions in attacking strategy.
It would take league back to the 70s before jack gibson introduced the gang tackle. I still think league in the mid-late 70s was close to the best balance of defense and attack. after that wazza-ball came along and started the bias toward defense in gameplay, rule-making and reactions in attacking strategy.
TokyoEagle
Bencher
I thought it was an "immobiliser" ? Has it been renamed the "Cannonball" ?
You can send your invoice to me, that way you can claim it as a tax return, cause i won't be paying it.
Ian Martin tragic said:
You can send your invoice to me, that way you can claim it as a tax return, cause i won't be paying it.
Ian Martin tragic
Bencher
I'll settle for a bowl of ramen...
This is a little more complex than many think. For starters this is a tactic but it isnt designed to hurt a player. Its all about the tackle. The tackle has changed a lot over years and in recent years its changed signifigantly
The tackle around the legs is a classic but it allows the offload so all coaches now instruct playes to lock the ball up as the first priority. If the player doesnt get knocked to the ground in the wrestle it can be counter productive for the defending team as it the allows a player on there feet to get a quick play the ball , which again all coaches are trying to avoid
So the next step is to get the man on the ground to slow the game. So initially its to contain the ball and then to slow the tackle and mostly the legs is the only area where a defender can get a handle as there is already 2 or 3 in a tackle
Then as a player is stationary the other defenders only have a small window of time to get in there and get the man down or they will be penalised so its about urgency rather than a desire to take out knees
Regardless of the tactics when you put it all together it doesnt look good and it is a concern for players who cant defend themselves. But what can you do, While it sux if a player gets injured its hard to say that a tactic to slow the ball down isnt in the spirit of the game or contrary conduct. In many cases its like a lifting tackle in that its fair, part of the game and is accepted until damage is done.
The judiciary has shown they can not consitenly handle the lifting tackle so I for one dont trust them with this
A player has the right to get the player on the ground. Coaches are coaching them to stay up for the play the ball. Either a player has to conceed or the ref needs to call held but why shouldnt a defender do his job.It has come asbout as a natural progression to other parts of the game that are changing
I agree it doesnt look good and the players are at risk but with the tackle wrestle and players refusing to concede, the obsession with a quick play the ball, and players being taught to go high rather that low at first impact somethings gotta give
The NRL need to think long and hard about how they handle this before the react to media pressure and think about the cosequences it may have to the game. Maybe if the game had considered the impact of the 10m rule, the wrestle, and a desire for absurdly quick play the balls we wouldnt be here in the first place
Add to that the increased fitness of our players , they are more willing to run that extra 5m to be involved a a tackle that seems almost complete
To oulaw a 3rd man in to tackle at the legs is absurd . If the player is vulenrable, and stationary why the **** hasnt the ref called held
Australia is regulated way to much , we protect the idiots of our species way to much with rules about everything and it affects us everywhere. While this tackle is a little different i am sick to death of reactionary rules for everything and i have no doubt that attitude is creeping into our sports
I suppose i should add, if a player shoulder charges at the knees, or missiles in, that is a cat move but if the player runs in and tackles correctly around the legs even if the shoulder is in it, its probably legal and doesnt warrant a player being suspended
If we kept the play the ball rules consistent for 20 years we could get on top of it, but as the change the interpretation every year it gives coaches a new situation to exploit every year and we never get on top of it, and are forever chasing our tails, and we blame the coaches pfft
The tackle around the legs is a classic but it allows the offload so all coaches now instruct playes to lock the ball up as the first priority. If the player doesnt get knocked to the ground in the wrestle it can be counter productive for the defending team as it the allows a player on there feet to get a quick play the ball , which again all coaches are trying to avoid
So the next step is to get the man on the ground to slow the game. So initially its to contain the ball and then to slow the tackle and mostly the legs is the only area where a defender can get a handle as there is already 2 or 3 in a tackle
Then as a player is stationary the other defenders only have a small window of time to get in there and get the man down or they will be penalised so its about urgency rather than a desire to take out knees
Regardless of the tactics when you put it all together it doesnt look good and it is a concern for players who cant defend themselves. But what can you do, While it sux if a player gets injured its hard to say that a tactic to slow the ball down isnt in the spirit of the game or contrary conduct. In many cases its like a lifting tackle in that its fair, part of the game and is accepted until damage is done.
The judiciary has shown they can not consitenly handle the lifting tackle so I for one dont trust them with this
A player has the right to get the player on the ground. Coaches are coaching them to stay up for the play the ball. Either a player has to conceed or the ref needs to call held but why shouldnt a defender do his job.It has come asbout as a natural progression to other parts of the game that are changing
I agree it doesnt look good and the players are at risk but with the tackle wrestle and players refusing to concede, the obsession with a quick play the ball, and players being taught to go high rather that low at first impact somethings gotta give
The NRL need to think long and hard about how they handle this before the react to media pressure and think about the cosequences it may have to the game. Maybe if the game had considered the impact of the 10m rule, the wrestle, and a desire for absurdly quick play the balls we wouldnt be here in the first place
Add to that the increased fitness of our players , they are more willing to run that extra 5m to be involved a a tackle that seems almost complete
To oulaw a 3rd man in to tackle at the legs is absurd . If the player is vulenrable, and stationary why the **** hasnt the ref called held
Australia is regulated way to much , we protect the idiots of our species way to much with rules about everything and it affects us everywhere. While this tackle is a little different i am sick to death of reactionary rules for everything and i have no doubt that attitude is creeping into our sports
I suppose i should add, if a player shoulder charges at the knees, or missiles in, that is a cat move but if the player runs in and tackles correctly around the legs even if the shoulder is in it, its probably legal and doesnt warrant a player being suspended
If we kept the play the ball rules consistent for 20 years we could get on top of it, but as the change the interpretation every year it gives coaches a new situation to exploit every year and we never get on top of it, and are forever chasing our tails, and we blame the coaches pfft
Rex
Bencher
- Referees are asked to be more vigilant on their held call when an attacking player is being held up by a defender/s in an upright position and he is deemed to be in a vulnerable position.
- If a player offloads the ball at the same time as the referee calls held, the football will be returned to him and he will be asked to play the ball on the mark where held was called by the referee. (This is an interpretation change, not a rule change)
- If in the opinion of the referee a player forcefully spears his body at an opponent’s leg/s in a “Dangerous†manner he will be penalised by the referee.
- A player may face further action by the NRL Match Review Committee if he forcefully spears his body in a “Dangerous†manner at an opponent’s leg/s whilst an opponent is deemed to be in a vulnerable position (being held in a tackle by other defending players)
-“Dangerous†in circumstances detailed above is defined as contact that involved an unacceptable risk of injury to the opposing player.
Sensible changes IMO. Particularly like "If a player offloads the ball at the same time as the referee calls held, the football will be returned to him and he will be asked to play the ball on the mark where held was called by the referee."
- If a player offloads the ball at the same time as the referee calls held, the football will be returned to him and he will be asked to play the ball on the mark where held was called by the referee. (This is an interpretation change, not a rule change)
- If in the opinion of the referee a player forcefully spears his body at an opponent’s leg/s in a “Dangerous†manner he will be penalised by the referee.
- A player may face further action by the NRL Match Review Committee if he forcefully spears his body in a “Dangerous†manner at an opponent’s leg/s whilst an opponent is deemed to be in a vulnerable position (being held in a tackle by other defending players)
-“Dangerous†in circumstances detailed above is defined as contact that involved an unacceptable risk of injury to the opposing player.
Sensible changes IMO. Particularly like "If a player offloads the ball at the same time as the referee calls held, the football will be returned to him and he will be asked to play the ball on the mark where held was called by the referee."
ManlyBacker
Winging it
A bit more here:
NRL outlaws controversial "cannonball' or "kneecapper" tackle
http://www.foxsports.com.au/league/nrl-outlaws-controversial-cannonball-or-kneecapper-tackle/story-e6frf3ou-1226088231568
NRL outlaws controversial "cannonball' or "kneecapper" tackle
http://www.foxsports.com.au/league/nrl-outlaws-controversial-cannonball-or-kneecapper-tackle/story-e6frf3ou-1226088231568
DSM5 said:
He's still got his swinging arm that he loves to use on any player on the ground.
You'd think that a bloke who goes out there playing like that would at least have the guts to stand in the line & get stuck in some more but he always seems to go into hiding on the wing when they play us.
Users who are viewing this thread
2020 Ladder
| Team | P | W | D | L | PD | Pts | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Bulldogs | 7 | 6 | 0 | 1 | 74 | 14 |
| 2 | Storm | 7 | 5 | 0 | 2 | 78 | 12 |
| 3 | Raiders | 8 | 6 | 0 | 2 | 58 | 12 |
| 4 | Warriors | 7 | 5 | 0 | 2 | -4 | 12 |
| 5 | Broncos | 8 | 5 | 0 | 3 | 78 | 10 |
| 6 | Cowboys | 7 | 4 | 0 | 3 | -10 | 10 |
| 7 | Sharks | 8 | 4 | 0 | 4 | 39 | 8 |
| 8 | Sea Eagles | 8 | 4 | 0 | 4 | 36 | 8 |
| 9 | Tigers | 8 | 4 | 0 | 4 | 14 | 8 |
| 10 | Dragons | 7 | 3 | 0 | 4 | -8 | 8 |
| 11 | Rabbitohs | 8 | 4 | 0 | 4 | -44 | 8 |
| 12 | Dolphins | 8 | 3 | 0 | 5 | 16 | 6 |
| 13 | Roosters | 8 | 3 | 0 | 5 | -52 | 6 |
| 14 | Titans | 7 | 2 | 0 | 5 | -68 | 6 |
| 15 | Knights | 7 | 2 | 0 | 5 | -74 | 6 |
| 16 | Eels | 7 | 2 | 0 | 5 | -107 | 6 |
| 17 | Panthers | 8 | 2 | 0 | 6 | -26 | 4 |
