• Welcome to the forums of Green & Gold Rugby.
    We have recently made some changes to the amount of discussions boards on the forum.
    Over the coming months we will continue to make more changes to make the forum more user friendly for all to use.
    Thanks, Admin.

SANZAR - what is the rule regarding the shoulder charge

Status
Not open for further replies.
W

Worldcupnut

Guest
Could anybody explain to me what the rule is for the shoulder charge in Super XV? I felt SBW should've been yellowed Saturday night. I could very well be wrong. Does anyone know how to look up SANZAR rules online?
 
T

TOCC

Guest
I'm not sure of the exact definition, but..

SANZAR follows the IRB rule book... Go to the IRB website, it has all the rules on there
 

Bruwheresmycar

Nicholas Shehadie (39)
Could anybody explain to me what the rule is for the shoulder charge in Super XV? I felt SBW should've been yellowed Saturday night. I could very well be wrong. Does anyone know how to look up SANZAR rules online?

It was definitely a penalty for foul play (which was what was given?). I'm not sure if they have a publicly viewable red/yellow card offence sheet though. (unfortunately)

A deliberate no arms tackle is subject to a yellow card in any form of rugby. If the tackle is off the ball, then it's a yellow card without question. But when it comes to tight calls, it's up to the ref and how he saw it really. (ie: if it wasn't a clear deliberate shoulder charge, a penalty and warning will probably be the result)
 

biggsy

Chilla Wilson (44)
The shoulder charge and high tackles only applies if you are a Australian rugby player.
 

Braveheart81

Will Genia (78)
Staff member
I didn't think the SBW one was that bad at all. It probably warranted a penalty but nothing more.

It was front on and his arms were there. The contact was strong and the player (I think it was Lambie) went to ground quickly before the arms could be engaged.

Players are obviously taught to tackle with their shoulder. I think that if it is a front on hit and the arms are close enough, there isn't really anything wrong with it.

Tameifuna's tackle was quite different in that he was far more side on when he made contact with the shoulder and there was really never any chance his arms were going to become involved in the tackle.

The Sonny Bill one reminded me of a hit by Palu on Rob Kearney a few years ago. Palu was given a yellow card but in my view shouldn't have been. The only reason the arms weren't involved is because the tackled player drops straight to ground on contact.

 

Proud Pig

Tom Lawton (22)
SBW's tackle warrented and received a penalty. Anything more in that situation would have been excessive.
The Tameifuna high tackle however is a whole different kettle of fish. That should have been a minimum yellow and should be looked at by the judiciary.
 

Scoey

Tony Shaw (54)
I didn't think the SBW one was that bad at all. It probably warranted a penalty but nothing more.

It was front on and his arms were there.

I am reluctant to speculate on what sort of sanction the "tackle" deserved (penalty may have been enough but you probably couldn't argue to much if a yellow was given), but to say, "his arms were there", only states the obvious that they are attached to his body. The only way that tackle could've had less arms is if her had left them in the change rooms when he warmed up. ;)

No attempt to use the arms - he actually tucks his left arm under him just before impact. Standard mungo "tackle". Hate the bloody things.
 

crangs81

Larry Dwyer (12)
Tameifuna has been given a week

SANZAR have given Chiefs prop Ben Tameifuna a one week suspension for a dangerous tackle after he pleaded guilty to the offence.
SANZAR Duty Judicial Officer Nicholas Davidson QC (Quade Cooper) accepted a guilty plea from Tameifuna for contravening Law 10.4 (e) Dangerous Tackling, after he was Cited during a Super Rugby Match at the Weekend.
Tameifuna tackled Ryan Kankowski of the Sharks, making contact with him above the line of the shoulders and has been suspended from all forms of the game up to and including the 18th of August, 2012
The incident occurred in the 47th minute of the match between the Chiefs and Sharks at Waikato Stadium in Hamilton on Saturday 4th August 2012.
SANZAR Duty Judicial Officer Nicholas Davidson QC (Quade Cooper) assessed the case and in his finding, Mr Davidson ruled the following:
Ben Tameifuna was cited for a breach of Law 10.4(e) for a dangerous high tackle in the match Chiefs v Sharks played on Saturday 4 August 2012 in Hamilton.
The citing arose from a tackle of the Sharks No. 8 and alleged initial contact above the line of the shoulder with his left arm making contact with the head region.
The incident was not seen by the Referee or assistants. The ball carrier tackled was not injured and continued to play. The citing was based on the nature of the tackle, making contact with the head region, coupled with momentum in the tackle and potential to cause serious injury.
The DJO reviewed the incident and indicated a sanction of one week 's suspension would be imposed subject to breach being admitted. The DJO concluded that contact was anticipated from an orthodox crouched position, the first point of contact was to the right arm of the Sharks No. 8 but Tameifuna rose in the tackle and his arm then made contact with the chin / neck region of the ball carrier. It was not thus direct contact to the head, but the way the tackle was executed carried risk of such contact.
There was no injury, and no effect on the game.
In the circumstances, the Lower End entry point of two weeks sanction was considered and allowance for a plea of guilty to one week 's suspension, accepted by the player. Because the competition concluded with this game between the Chiefs and the Sharks, the Rules require consideration of the playing schedule.
The DJO was advised that Tameifuna would not play in the final of the Hawkes Bay Club Competition the following weekend, and thus the one week 's suspension imposed is to encompass all rugby up to and including Saturday 18 August 2012, including a scheduled pre ITM Cup match.

http://www.superxv.com/news/super15_rugby_news.asp?id=36101
 
W

Worldcupnut

Guest
Thanks for everyone's contribution I feel the laws should err on the tougher side. That video with Palu, his shoulder hit the Irish guy fair on the head before the arms came into play. IMO that deserved a yellow and so did SBW's. I know I'm a bit soft but it's an aspect I would like to see rubbed out of game.
 

fatprop

George Gregan (70)
Staff member
Thanks for everyone's contribution I feel the laws should err on the tougher side. That video with Palu, his shoulder hit the Irish guy fair on the head before the arms came into play. IMO that deserved a yellow and so did SBW's. I know I'm a bit soft but it's an aspect I would like to see rubbed out of game.

If you hit someone so well they bounce back before you can wrap the arms it is an illegal tackle?

To me a "no arms" shoulder smash/tackle is quite different
 

Braveheart81

Will Genia (78)
Staff member
Palu definitely strikes the chest of Kearney. Watch the slow motion replays later in the video.

I think if the tackle is front on and doesn't hit the player above the shoulders then it is alright. It will always be really hard to get the arms involved if the hit is too good and the player drops straight to ground. As long as it is front on and uses proper tackling technique it should be legal.

I am firmly against the side on rugby league style shoulder charge which has absolutely no control and is designed to injure.
 

qwerty51

Stirling Mortlock (74)
Not to mention Kearney did a blatant shoulder charge on Elsom later on in the same game that went unnoticed. I'm still furious about that game/Kaplan.


Kaplan still hates the Tahs even when they're in national colours.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top