Australia v Argentina 7 Oct 2017 in Mendoza

[Derpus]

In a bid to reduce injuries in the sport, World Rugby has redefined illegal high tackle categories and increased sanctions to deter high tackles via a revised set of law application guidelines. In effect, the changes aim to ensure that the head is a no-go area.
The changes introducing minimum on-field sanctions for reckless and accidental contact with the head, effectively lowering the acceptable height of the tackle.
From 3 January 2017, two new categories of dangerous tackles within Law 10 will carry penalty offences to deter and eradicate high tackles:
Reckless tackle
A player is deemed to have made reckless contact during a tackle or attempted tackle or during other phases of the game if in making contact, the player knew or should have known that there was a risk of making contact with the head of an opponent, but did so anyway. This sanction applies even if the tackle starts below the line of the shoulders. This type of contact also applies to grabbing and rolling or twisting around the head/neck area even if the contact starts below the line of the shoulders.
Minimum sanction: Yellow card

Maximum sanction: Red card
Accidental tackle
When making contact with another player during a tackle or attempted tackle or during other phases of the game, if a player makes accidental contact with an opponent’s head, either directly or where the contact starts below the line of the shoulders, the player may still be sanctioned. This includes situations where the ball-carrier slips into the tackle.
Minimum sanction: Penalty
(my bold)
http://rugbyreferee.net/2016/12/30/new-high-tackle-laws-from-3-january-2017/

The worst worded rule ever. There is always a risk of contact with the head in every tackle and all the players know that at all times. So dumb.

 

[Quick Hands]

The much (unfairly) maligned backrow went well.

Foley good with ball in hand.

The fitness level of the team and their ability to execute basic skills at speed has improved out of sight since June.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

In a bid to reduce injuries in the sport, World Rugby has redefined illegal high tackle categories and increased sanctions to deter high tackles via a revised set of law application guidelines. In effect, the changes aim to ensure that the head is a no-go area.
The changes introducing minimum on-field sanctions for reckless and accidental contact with the head, effectively lowering the acceptable height of the tackle.
From 3 January 2017, two new categories of dangerous tackles within Law 10 will carry penalty offences to deter and eradicate high tackles:
Reckless tackle
A player is deemed to have made reckless contact during a tackle or attempted tackle or during other phases of the game if in making contact, the player knew or should have known that there was a risk of making contact with the head of an opponent, but did so anyway. This sanction applies even if the tackle starts below the line of the shoulders. This type of contact also applies to grabbing and rolling or twisting around the head/neck area even if the contact starts below the line of the shoulders.
Minimum sanction: Yellow card

Maximum sanction: Red card
Accidental tackle
When making contact with another player during a tackle or attempted tackle or during other phases of the game, if a player makes accidental contact with an opponent’s head, either directly or where the contact starts below the line of the shoulders, the player may still be sanctioned. This includes situations where the ball-carrier slips into the tackle.
Minimum sanction: Penalty
(my bold)
http://rugbyreferee.net/2016/12/30/new-high-tackle-laws-from-3-january-2017/

At the same time a degree of common sense needs to be applied. Koribete didn't slip out and make contact via his own momentum. He effected a really good spot tackle. Hopefully we'll see a replay of it emerge but from what I saw it was the head movement of the Argentine player that initiated the contact bouncing off Koribete's head.

 

[Quick Hands]

The worst worded rule ever. There is always a risk of contact with the head in every tackle and all the players know that at all times. So dumb.

Whether it's dumb or not, it's the law. If you go to the link, you'll see that it was introduced to prevent the very incident which happened in this game. i.e to stop players going in to make a tackle with so little margin for error that the slightest slip from either player would lead to someone being stretchered off unconscious.

 

[cyclopath]

In a bid to reduce injuries in the sport, World Rugby has redefined illegal high tackle categories and increased sanctions to deter high tackles via a revised set of law application guidelines. In effect, the changes aim to ensure that the head is a no-go area.
The changes introducing minimum on-field sanctions for reckless and accidental contact with the head, effectively lowering the acceptable height of the tackle.
From 3 January 2017, two new categories of dangerous tackles within Law 10 will carry penalty offences to deter and eradicate high tackles:
Reckless tackle
A player is deemed to have made reckless contact during a tackle or attempted tackle or during other phases of the game if in making contact, the player knew or should have known that there was a risk of making contact with the head of an opponent, but did so anyway. This sanction applies even if the tackle starts below the line of the shoulders. This type of contact also applies to grabbing and rolling or twisting around the head/neck area even if the contact starts below the line of the shoulders.
Minimum sanction: Yellow card
Maximum sanction: Red card
Accidental tackle
When making contact with another player during a tackle or attempted tackle or during other phases of the game, if a player makes accidental contact with an opponent’s head, either directly or where the contact starts below the line of the shoulders, the player may still be sanctioned. This includes situations where the ball-carrier slips into the tackle.
Minimum sanction: Penalty
(my bold)
http://rugbyreferee.net/2016/12/30/new-high-tackle-laws-from-3-january-2017/

"May".

 

[KOB1987]

2 draws don’t count as wins mate..

Sorry I don’t see the light shining out of Cheikas ass like some others on here do. I do enjoy how when we get a win, people jump on here and start with the whole “I told you so” dialogue. if we beat the All Blacks next week, I might actually agree

That aside, I did see some positives out of that game, mostly from an attack perspective. Hodge runs nice lines, Koroibete has strength in contact and speed, they are at opposite ends of the spectrum but seem to work well in attack.

Defensively, I wasn’t impressed.. it was porous at times and they made far too many easy meters on set piece and broken play against the backs. I said it earlier, but have KB (Kurtley Beale) defend in his selected position, he has proven himself capable of doing so and it went well. Hodge is capable of supporting Izzy at the back so I see no benefit to shifting players around during play.

It was meant completely in jest. However there are different ways of calculating the W/L ratio after a draw: some take the draws out of the equation completely, others give half a point to each team. Personally I favour the latter, meaning we are 3/4, not 2/2.

 

[Quick Hands]

At the same time a degree of common sense needs to be applied. Koribete didn't slip out and make contact via his own momentum. He effected a really good spot tackle. Hopefully we'll see a replay of it emerge but from what I saw it was the head movement of the Argentine player that initiated the contact bouncing off Koribete's head.

Shoulder contact with the head while making a tackle is a penalty. Black and white.

See post 304 so I don't have to repeat myself.

 

[Derpus]

Whether it's dumb or not, it's the law. If you go to the link, you'll see that it was introduced to prevent the very incident which happened in this game. i.e to stop players going in to make a tackle with so little margin for error that the slightest slip from either player would lead to someone being stretchered off unconscious.

How does it stop it though? all it does is punish accidents...
Edit: probably better discussed in another thread.

 

[Derpus]

Shoulder contact with the head while making a tackle is a penalty. Black and white.

See post 304 so I don't have to repeat myself.

Not when it's accidental. Not necessarily.

 

[Quick Hands]

"May".

7. ​

modal verb
You use may to indicate that someone is allowed to do something, usually because of a rule or law.

 

[cyclopath]

How does it stop it though? all it does is punish accidents.
Edit: probably better discussed in another thread.

I agree, probably best in the Refereeing Thread

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

Shoulder contact with the head while making a tackle is a penalty. Black and white.

See post 304 so I don't have to repeat myself.

Cyclopath makes a good point by highlighting a key word. "May". A player may be sanctioned but it also suggests that a degree of discretion is appropriate. Taking into account all the factors and the situation and applying a commonsense approach to it.

 

[cyclopath]

7. ​

modal verb
You use may to indicate that someone is allowed to do something, usually because of a rule or law.

"Allowed", not "compelled".

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

7. ​

modal verb
You use may to indicate that someone is allowed to do something, usually because of a rule or law.

Yes, the official would have been within the rule of law to have sanctioned Koribete. But at the same time they were just as equally permitted to determine the mitigating factors of the situation and apply their best judgement to it. Just because they were allowed to sanction him doesn't mean they had to. If it said "must" then fair enough.

 

[Quick Hands]

Cyclopath makes a good point by highlighting a key word. "May". A player may be sanctioned but it also suggests that a degree of discretion is appropriate. Taking into account all the factors and the situation and applying a commonsense approach to it.

Your approach is contrary to everything that WR (World Rugby) has said and done re protecting the head of players over the past 10 years.

Players need to adjust their tackling techniques to avoid knocking another player out.

I'm imagining the different response had Brodie Retallick tackled Israel Folau with the same result.

 

[Quick Hands]

Also agree with other posters that Hooper is growing into the role of captaincy. Interactions with the referee were excellent.

And I thought that the referee did an excellent job.

 

[Derpus]

Anyways, how good was Dempsey. I'll reserve final judgment till i see ruck stats as he seemed to be hanging out in the centres a little bit, but otherwise seemed the best performance from a 6 this year.

 

[KOB1987]

Yes, the official would have been within the rule of law to have sanctioned Koribete. But at the same time they were just as equally permitted to determine the mitigating factors of the situation and apply their best judgement to it. Just because they were allowed to sanction him doesn't mean they had to. If it said "must" then fair enough.

Going by the laws, if there was deemed an infringement then a penalty would have been appropriate. Very little grounds for a card but let's see if WR (World Rugby) have anything to say.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

Your approach is contrary to everything that WR (World Rugby) has said and done re protecting the head of players over the past 10 years.

Players need to adjust their tackling techniques to avoid knocking another player out.

I'm imagining the different response had Brodie Retallick tackled Israel Folau with the same result.

Mate, you see so many instances of direct contravention of WR (World Rugby) orders around contact with the head in a game. Under their new mandates any contact with the head should be penalised. Not trying to excuse it away but just watch how many tackles start high with the legal range and end up around the tackled players neck and head. Clearly there's a level of discretion applied. As for if it were Retallick on Folau. I'm not so one eyed that I'd look for the smallest thing to get one up on the ABs. I'd like to think that I'd maintain my position.

 

[Warpath]

uhm the Argentina Player was the one who put his head down, everyone knows that you do not put your head down if you have the ball in your hand and Marika tackled with BOTH ARMS, around his ribs, It is just a freak accident, that Argentinian should have known better and anyways, its unlikely to be a major injury, it looked more like a Whiplash to me.