Low Tackles almost outlawed

[maxta]

Firstly lets call it clearly, these wrestle tactics are outright dangerous...
Tbh I doubt...& hope.... theres no players carrying out these tactics to injure players.
Basically its a tactic to slow down the play the ball, with the modern game so fast & 10m rule, if you dont do it, the opposition will & win by 60.....
With this the case, theres many tackles EVERY game that could easily be reviewed & in the end it just comes down to a farcical judiciary to decide if its a suspension or of course, it cant be due to the player missing a final or SOO game, we cant have that!!
Brings me back to the copybook tackle, yes that forgotten one below the waist & often cutting a player down around the bootlaces!!
Where is the reward?? Soon as the attacker hits the ground the ref starts screaming to let go & basically you have under 2 seconds or the ref blows a penalty or you cop a boot in the mouth from the attacker.
This then enables the attacking player to win the ruck, play the ball, with the dummy half scooting towards a broken backpeddling defence with support either side!!

All this as a result of maybe the best tackle of the game.
Now that players are punished for going low in defence these high shots & wrestles will no doubt continue resulting in debates about these grade 1,2,3 & in the process more injuries.
Love my footy but maybe more latitude for those copybook low tackles could help a few areas of the modern game.
Maybe a 3 -4 count to get off??
Obviously theres occasions the high tackle is needed to prevent offloads, but when coaching youngsters the old "cant run without legs" call has lost part of its reward for the defender.

 

[voicefromthehill]

Completely agree,

A joke that one of the best, dare I say most eloquent tackles goes without reward.

The new call is "You can't play without a shoulder in its socket"

 

[Fluffy]

Refs were going to do this last year but failed again.

Its the only consistency they have - being crap

 

[Merdy33]

Totally agree. In my opinion the answer is treat it similar to a dominant or surrender tackle. Change the rule that for a one on one tackle below the waist, the attacker has to wait until the tackler has got up and positioned himself at marker before he can play the ball.

 

[Mark from Brisbane]

I don't really like the modern game, and the rules they have brought in to " speed up the game ", it's getting close to touch footy with a bit of wide world of wrestling thrown in.

I've been a fan a bloody long time , and if it wasn't for the passion I hold for my club I could very easily walk away from the game.

I only watch Manly games now ( regular season ) sick of the crap they dish up to bother with any others .

 

[The Who]

I feel the same Mark.
The low tackle was a feature of the game, and equally as breathtaking to watch as someone skillfully diffusing an up-and-under.
Remember Les Johns and Ron Coote's covering tackles; Ian Martin and Alan Thompson's copybook defence, and Bunny Riley and 'The Axe' Gillmeister's brutal low tackles. . .
Call me a dinosaur but they were the days!

 

[Killer03]

Can you imagine a Steve Menzies in todays game? Possibly the greatest 1 on 1 low tackler in the game.....he'd be a liability! What a joke!

Good work NRL!

 

[Mark from Brisbane]

I feel the same Mark.
The low tackle was a feature of the game, and equally as breathtaking to watch as someone skillfully diffusing an up-and-under.
Remember Les Johns and Ron Coote's covering tackles; Ian Martin and Alan Thompson's copybook defence, and Bunny Riley and 'The Axe' Gillmeister's brutal low tackles. . .
Call me a dinosaur but they were the days!

Yep I'm prehistoric as well, but it was a brutal but beautiful game in those days.

And not all about rough stuff either.

 

[Jatz Crackers]

This will be a short thread.

There is no reasonable argument that could be mounted by any reasonable person to contradict the thread topic.

Apart from coaches and ning nongs.

 

[MadMarcus]

This will be a short thread.

There is no reasonable argument that could be mounted by any reasonable person to contradict the thread topic.

Apart from coaches and ning nongs.

And Todd Greenberg.

Oh, sorry, I see now that you covered him under "ning nongs".

 

[Shoe1]

There's no worse sight in the game than the one on one clean tackle being negated by a quick play the ball without the tackler being able to get to marker. It's an easy rule change to say that the bloke can't play the ball until the tackler gets to marker.

---

Of course Reynolds (if he is indeed capable of a one on one tackle) would take an eternity to get to marker.

Maybe it would be better to simply ban Reynolds.

 

[Brissie Kid]

When Snake brought down Inglis at the SCG you could see the referee seriously wanting to give a penalty for a hold down which Toddy's guidelines require. I don't know what stopped him other than it was a great tackle.

In Origin it happened this year I think Inglis got done for it when he brought down Hayne. Hayne just put the ball down in front of himself & thrashed his legs about. Penalty. But as it was a Blues penalty the media didn't jump on it.

But the NRL aren't real clear thinkers and what they try to prevent usually brings about the opposite.

 

[Mark from Brisbane]

So now instead of great tackles , and gang tackles we have " the wrestle ".

The Scum started this crap, typical !!

 

[mike walker]

G'day all,If you enforce the rule of the player having to rise to his feet and then place the ball on the ground and then roll it back with his foot it would enable the tackler time to get to marker.It use to happen,it wasn't uncommon for a bloke to make 3 or 4 tackles in a row getting out of marker and knocking over the big fellas,no wrestle just technique and timing.Surely its something that is worth trying to encourage in the game rewarding the one on one tackle,woops silly me Turd Greentodd says were stuck with wrestling so there.Oh well that's that then.
cheers mike

 

[Aussie Battler]

I think a fair bit of it would be solved if you just asked the attacking player to get to his feet and play the ball on the mark, with his bloody foot ! It's not just the fact that the attacking player gets a "quick" play the ball, its the fact that he gets an "illegal" play the ball. Apply the rule that already exists and SBW, JWH, Moa, Roosters have no game.

 

[HoldenV8]

@Killer03 - Agreed, Beaver was one of the games best ever one on one defenders. Taking that sort of play out of the game isn't improving rugby league. Also agree with your comment on Origin. If that was a Qld penalty the NSW media would have been all over it like a cheap suit.

@Brissie KId - Yeah I thought the same thing when Snake brought down GI at the SCG. I was expecting the Vermin to get a penalty for holding down, if not against Snake then against Horo who was the second tackler. Somehow though the ref didn't call it. But it was a brilliant tackle and in no way should it have brought a penalty.

Greenturd is one of the 'new generation' of people who want everything to be faster, they want things done yesterday. But that peon thinks he is improving the 'product'. Reality is that he and the NRL are driving fans away.....and not just the casual fans. Even a lot of the die-hards are only watching their teams games these days because the game has become frustrating to watch under the current administration.

 

[shawn.b]

I don't really like the modern game, and the rules they have brought in to " speed up the game ", it's getting close to touch footy with a bit of wide world of wrestling thrown in.

I've been a fan a bloody long time , and if it wasn't for the passion I hold for my club I could very easily walk away from the game.

I only watch Manly games now ( regular season ) sick of the crap they dish up to bother with any others .

I am with you Mark.

No Manly equals no support of NRL from me.