FIXTURESNo upcoming fixtures — check back soon.
FORUM / RUGBY /  An intelligent analysis of the spear tackle by Austin Healey

An intelligent analysis of the spear tackle by Austin Healey

Started by Mozart41 REPLIES484 VIEWS· 01 Apr 2015, 16:25
SHAREXFACEBOOKWHATSAPPTELEGRAMREDDITLINKEDIN
MO
MozartCaptain49,914 posts
01 Apr 2015, 16:25
#1
01 Apr 2015, 16:25#1

"It is just getting silly. Although it has been going on for years, it came to the fore with Sam Warburton’s tackle on Vincent Clerc in the World Cup semi-final in New Zealand.

To begin with, I want kids to play the game and I want them to be safe when they are playing it.

Nobody wants to see a spear tackle like the one Brian O’Driscoll suffered on the Lions tour, in Christchurch, in 2005.

Having said that, I do not think there is any consistency in the judgment of what is going on.

If we are not careful, the whole tackle technique is going to change completely.

Let us go back in time. When Phil Larder, England’s defence cpach under Sir Clive Woodward, came over to union, players were encouraged to tackle in a particular way.

If someone ran into you with a tackle bag, you were encouraged to wrap one arm around the bag and the other arm around the leg.

The aim, would be to pick up the leg and drive forward. That has been going on since.

Players took that on to the pitch with the mentality of winning every collision.

To win the tackle more positively, you would aim to put the person you are tackling on their back.

So, if someone is running at you at full tilt and you are doing likewise, you have to destabilise them.

You have to take their point of contact off the floor. That, automatically, means lifting the leg, not necessarily lifting it high, but lifting it all the same.

Alternatively, you can squeeze the legs together and drive forward.

Natural physics will indicate that if you do that, the player will come off his feet. T

hen, if you have hit him hard enough, in a straight, linear motion, you will knock him off his feet on to his back.

With the force you are hitting him, more often than not you will land directly on top of him. Your centre of gravity will be way forward, beyond your feet.

As far as the attacker is concerned, when he has been hit in a tackle that he did not want to be hit in, he wants to fall in a position that presents the ball, so his side can continue to win it quickly and easily.

He does not want to fall on his back. He either wants to land on his side or on his front. So what he does is to twist in the air.

You can then put one arm down and place the ball with other.

Unlike the defender, who wants his feet on the floor when he tackles, the attacker wants his feet off the floor.

If you know you have been hit and you are a small guy, you want your feet off the floor because you want to make the area of inertia as small as possible.

The impact is not as great and it does not hurt.

So, we are almost getting to a situation where every big tackle could be perceived as a tip tackle.

It is frustrating and is threatening to become a dominant issue.

Let us go back to the Warburton tackle. It was just very good, powerful technique.

It was the perfect example of a big guy hitting a small guy and the small guy, as you would expect, going into the air.

If I am moving quickly against a 16-stone forward and pick up that leg and drive forward, there is no way I can safely put them on the ground.

What you tend to do is to take yourself off your feet, as they have done, and that gives the impression of a spear.

It is almost like a no-win situation and the problem is that it might end up with players taking their arms out of the tackle and becoming a little but more like American football where the sheer size and bulk of someone takes another player off their feet."

SA
Saffolk Captain30,741 posts
01 Apr 2015, 17:36
#2
01 Apr 2015, 17:36#2

What I don't get is the fact that the players know it is a card offence so why do it?

 

Its no accident that it happens......its a deliberate action.......I find it so stupid on the part of the offender.......do these players have brains?  

MO
MozartCaptain49,914 posts
01 Apr 2015, 17:53
#3
01 Apr 2015, 17:53#3
That's the point Dave its not something the tacklers set out to do. They are trying to make a driving tackle, but because of the angles that appear in an instant, it converts into a tip. Before they even get it, the tackled player is heading down at an angle. This seems to happen more often when the runner jumps into the tackle as explained by Healey and demonstrated Cruden in the Frans'  tackle
CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
01 Apr 2015, 18:00
#4
01 Apr 2015, 18:00#4
 What is very clear is that a player making a tackle should not be in  a standing position or stand up while the tackle is in progress,   If that happens a tackle will inevitably become  a spear tackle as long as his motion forced the tackled player upwards.
Mozart published  a photo on this site showing the tackle by Steyn.  He was on his feet with a slightly forward motion while the tackle on Cruden was in progress and the result was inevitable - a dangerous spear tackle.
If the player make sure that the tackled player came down safely - the situation would not be necessarily a dangerous one - but then the tackler must let go of the player asap and not hang onto the player.
Be it as it may - lifting a player off the ground in a tackle is really looking for trouble,  as Kaplan described the situation in his comment on the issue.  
  
MO
MozartCaptain49,914 posts
01 Apr 2015, 18:19
#5
01 Apr 2015, 18:19#5

"A player making a tackle should not be in  a standing position or stand up while the tackle is in progress"

 

He should sit while making the tackle? Hahahahahaha.....Moronic at his best. 

CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
01 Apr 2015, 18:23
#6
01 Apr 2015, 18:23#6
 Dimwit until you understand what happens in tackles and until you understand something  about the game of rugby - it would be wise for you to shut up, dofdoos.
MO
MozartCaptain49,914 posts
01 Apr 2015, 19:10
#7
01 Apr 2015, 19:10#7

The safe tackle according to OOM Moronic.....bwaaaaaaaaahahahahahahahahaha

 

 

SA
Saffolk Captain30,741 posts
01 Apr 2015, 20:58
#8
01 Apr 2015, 20:58#8

There seem to be two versions of the offence, one where the tackler deliberately tries to tip a player, others where the tip is accidental......unfortunately the majority look intentional and that's what I don't get.


Steyn's looked more accidental.  

MO
MozartCaptain49,914 posts
01 Apr 2015, 22:43
#9
01 Apr 2015, 22:43#9
Agreed  
CL
ClaydogClub Pro691 posts
02 Apr 2015, 00:04
#10
02 Apr 2015, 00:04#10
 Moz that tackle above is not safe. If the dacked player falls back the tackler will be in both an embarrassing and dangerous situation. Back on point I think there is a very fine line between a good driving tackle and a tip tackle. There are so many variables that occur when you are making a tackle it is quite easy for an ordinary tackle to become a tip tackle. Some may be deliberate but when you hit someone sweetly and their weight comes off the ground and you are driving through you thoughts are not "I wonder whether I am tipping this guy past horizontal", it just about getting him to the ground and have him hit the deck as hard as you can. I agree with the initial analysis on this thread. As long as hard dominating tackles occur some will go past horizontal. I don't believe most are deliberate.
MO
MozartCaptain49,914 posts
02 Apr 2015, 00:20
#11
02 Apr 2015, 00:20#11
That's my take as well Cd. This is mostly an involuntary thing, where the mechanics spin out of control. If the refs take this on as an issue this WC year, we could see the extinction of the dominant tackle.
As for the safety of the illustrated tackle...you have to avoid the tip!
CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
02 Apr 2015, 03:48
#12
02 Apr 2015, 03:48#12
 This was an intelligent discussion until Mozart came with his unintelligent nonsense.  Now this:-
" If the refs take this on as an issue this WC year, we could see the extinction of the dominant tackle."  
As long as a tackler goes low at the midriff or lower on a player - it could still be a dominant tackle with a player being tackled back.   
It is when a player are basically not diving at a player - standing up in the tackle  and lifting a ball carrier from the ground - that a tip tackle comes into the process.  Steyn was never going low for the player - and the mythical "jump"  of Cruden makes it even worse in that case, it virtually assured a tip tackle.
This whole debate centers around a determined effort by Mozart to convince people that Steyn did not cause the tip tackle to occur - so he is innocent of any offence or contravention of the rules and is being wronged  by the latest judicial process.  Therefore the whole process comes under attack and attention is diverted from what actually happened in this case.
The problem is also in the particular case of Steyn that he went high in this case against a physically much smaller player, which inevitably has other complications as well.    However, what is becoming clearer with time is that Steyn's defence went pearshaped over the last two years - has tackle stats were poor - and when that happened to a player - the tendency to use illegal tackle techniques increases.  Steyn last year had a very high penalty count for a backline player in Super 15 compared to other backline players and most of the penalties stemmed from higher than acceptable tackles.   He started off badly this year by his going for Kolbe - another smaller and faster player - and getting yellow-carded in the Stormers game for a tackling offense.  He should clean up his act and this type of thing is unlikely to happen.         


            
MO
MozartCaptain49,914 posts
02 Apr 2015, 04:13
#13
02 Apr 2015, 04:13#13

Moronic demonstrating his "kneeling tackling technique".....seems a bit off, but  technically it's flawless. Picture on request but only for those over 18.

 

 

 

 

CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
02 Apr 2015, 04:32
#14
02 Apr 2015, 04:32#14
 See what I mean with a debate with Mozart on RUGBY issues - he becomes so far below reasonable debating standards that he turns any discussions into a farce.  His latest childish tendency to put photos on the site has further shown up his deficient  debating abilities and showed again how really deficient his knowledge of rugby is. 
However, the photo above is funny - this man has a mania about Lambie, Reinach, Serfontein  and De Kock.  Is what is shown on the photo what he dreams about when he constantly deals with items on this site about those sportsmen?    
MO
MozartCaptain49,914 posts
02 Apr 2015, 04:35
#15
02 Apr 2015, 04:35#15
What in blue blazes are you talking about Moronic?
CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
02 Apr 2015, 04:44
#16
02 Apr 2015, 04:44#16
 So the idiot removed the photo he had about the nude person being "tackled" and now suddenly he does not know what I am talking about.  What a bloody liar and low-life this idiot is.  
You know what was on the photo you posted - and suddenly realized what a fool you have made of yourself and removed the offensive photo you posted.  Keep it up - the longer you keep posting photos the more you make a fool of yourself.
MO
MozartCaptain49,914 posts
02 Apr 2015, 04:52
#17
02 Apr 2015, 04:52#17
A nude person being tackled....hahaha. That's a little over top dontcha think...to me it looks like he is  simply wearing his shorts in the modern low slung style. 
CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
02 Apr 2015, 05:07
#18
02 Apr 2015, 05:07#18
That was the offensive and low-life photo you posted and then ran away from it by removing it - what a low-life creature we have here. 
MO
MozartCaptain49,914 posts
02 Apr 2015, 05:14
#19
02 Apr 2015, 05:14#19
A few posts up you said it was funny, which it was, but now it's offensive. Which is it Moronic?
CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
02 Apr 2015, 05:30
#20
02 Apr 2015, 05:30#20
 Liar the offensive photo which you removed was was replaced by "Moronic demonstrating his "kneeling tackling technique".....seems a bit off, but  technically it's flawless. Picture on request but only for those over 18."
You are a bloody idiot and an offensive one at that  Moffie - now back to the photo you removed and the resultant question:- 
" However, the photo above is funny - this man has a mania about Lambie, Reinach, Serfontein  and De Kock.  Is what is shown on the photo what he dreams about when he constantly deals with items on this site about those sportsmen?"
MO
MozartCaptain49,914 posts
02 Apr 2015, 05:48
#21
02 Apr 2015, 05:48#21
 Nothing funnier than a fool pretending to offended, but giving it away by saying it is funny. 
CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
02 Apr 2015, 06:11
#22
02 Apr 2015, 06:11#22
 Sure - your obvious craving for Lambie, Reinach, Serfontein  and De Kock is funny, the photo itself is offensive. 
MO
MozartCaptain49,914 posts
02 Apr 2015, 06:30
#23
02 Apr 2015, 06:30#23
I'm not the one who has young men as my avatar ...old fruit.  
CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
02 Apr 2015, 06:34
#24
02 Apr 2015, 06:34#24
 This happen to be a rugby discussion site - but for you it is apparently something entirely different.  Hence I can use any photo of a rugby player I wish - other membe rs do the same
By the way - where did you get that photo you posted and then withdrew?  From a homosexual website - not so?  
SA
Saffolk Captain30,741 posts
02 Apr 2015, 10:47
#25
02 Apr 2015, 10:47#25
Where is the original pic......I want to see it!!  
CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
02 Apr 2015, 10:55
#26
02 Apr 2015, 10:55#26
 Dave
Mozart will not post it again - he got scared and withdrew the pic.  I can assure you it was offensive and in extremely bad taste.
RO
RooinekCaptain18,117 posts
02 Apr 2015, 11:02
#27
02 Apr 2015, 11:02#27
Ou Maaik, remember when I told Moffie to grow up or shove off and the sad and lifeless loser got all tearful and turned it into a poll about himself, asking posters to vote on whether he should stay or get lost? Remember your response? You said you'd miss him and you voted for the pompous old liar to stay.

If Moffie put up another whiny and attention-seeking little poll asking the same question, would you vote the same?
CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
02 Apr 2015, 11:09
#28
02 Apr 2015, 11:09#28
 Rooinek
After what I have seen of him recently - my vote would change.   I tried for a period to keep a reasonable discussion level with him going based on an agreement we reached and he kept it up for two weeks and then started making personal attacks again and the latest twist is just another example what a low-life he really is.    
SA
Saffolk Captain30,741 posts
02 Apr 2015, 11:24
#29
02 Apr 2015, 11:24#29
Nothing offends me.....I'd like to see it for a laugh  
BE
Beeno1Captain40,032 posts
02 Apr 2015, 11:56
#30
02 Apr 2015, 11:56#30
 What is hilarious is ou maaaikie starting threads attacking Moz and then pretending its all Moz's fault.In your two cases you both keep having digs.However my vote would always be for Moz to stay as he is an outsatnding poster. I would also vote for you and rooinek to stay as you both contribute to the fun that goes on here.
Nothing is funnier than the self righteous indignation of ou rooitwit - hahahahahahahahaha hilarious!!

MO
MozartCaptain49,914 posts
02 Apr 2015, 14:40
#31
02 Apr 2015, 14:40#31

Well I was just waiting for someone to ask. Moronic executing his famous kneeling tackle:

 

 

CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
02 Apr 2015, 15:01
#32
02 Apr 2015, 15:01#32
 Mozart
More your style than mine.  S ies
MO
MozartCaptain49,914 posts
02 Apr 2015, 15:38
#33
02 Apr 2015, 15:38#33
I tell you what I find truly creepy....a 73 year old man that speaks through a 20 year old avatar.  But still Mo ronic I have to ask you, does that pass your prohibition on the standing tackle.....waaaaahahahahaha.
DA
Devil's AdvocatePro7,008 posts
02 Apr 2015, 15:41
#34
02 Apr 2015, 15:41#34

That ref in the pic must be seriously confused at that point

 

I mean........ which of the two balls is still in play 

CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
02 Apr 2015, 15:46
#35
02 Apr 2015, 15:46#35
 DA 
   Surely you mean three balls 
DA
Devil's AdvocatePro7,008 posts
02 Apr 2015, 15:55
#36
02 Apr 2015, 15:55#36

Never assume Mike.... never assume

 

 

Unless I am missing a third ball in that pic, which I seriously doubt...... or the naked guy has some inexplicable mutation, I am banking on the fact that in that ref' s direct line of sight... there are only two balls  

CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
02 Apr 2015, 15:55
#37
02 Apr 2015, 15:55#37
 Mozart
You are a stupid  doos.   This is a rugby site and I use the pics of players I admire on the site.    Other members do it as well so there is nothing to read into that one.  You apparently are so c ock struck that you get weird ideas simply as a result thereof.
I ask you the question before.   Where did you get that pic - on a homsexual website?   
MO
MozartCaptain49,914 posts
02 Apr 2015, 16:00
#38
02 Apr 2015, 16:00#38
No I just typed funny rugby tackles into google. You have heard of google? 
But I have to demur on the avatar excuse . Other posters from time time take avatars of players they admire. You apparently admire Coetzee, Malherbe, Reinach....but they don't ever make the list. It's little boy types like de Kock and Steff who you inevitably select.

Creepy stuff.
DA
Devil's AdvocatePro7,008 posts
02 Apr 2015, 16:19
#39
02 Apr 2015, 16:19#39

I just did that

 

Surprisingly there are even worse pictures using that selection of words in Google.

 

Ag.... it's all harmless

SA
Saffolk Captain30,741 posts
02 Apr 2015, 16:33
#40
02 Apr 2015, 16:33#40
Great pic......love it  
↓ LOAD MORE (page 2 of 2)

More from Rugby

More news