The IRB is considering punishment for tackles that are upright and result in concussion, because they will be deemed at fault. The aim is to bring the tackle lower. Is the IRB going to far? How safe can a contact sport be? If one wants to eliminate all possibility of injury, play checkers.
I'm seeing a lot of these tackles. This will drastically diminish defence by removing tools that it needs. How are you to defend head-on? This is utterly ridiculous. Knowing the IRB, I'd say this is the real agenda. The watering down of rugby continues.
Are you in favour of neck high tackles?
They are going to punish tackles which may result in head-to-head contact. If you are tackling a crashballer head-on, you'll meet him standing up. The impact could mean hitting heads, and this would mean the defender gets punished, were the tackle to result in a concussion. So avoid punishment, teams will have to tackle lower. This will be an advantage to the attacking team as they will have the advantage going into contact.
Are you in favour of teams not being able to defend? You'll see alot more channel 1 ball.
One of the new trial laws is under the nipple tackle to prevent the head on head clash. I would expect a lot more offloads now.
How does not wrapping some ones arms up in the tackle result in less offloads?
A mid-riff tackle will entail lesser free arms to off-loading and passing of balls,
Fuck it the IRB is trying to make Rugby as sooky as wendyball.
Every player knows the risks so just ke ep it below the neck and get on with it.
Wendyball!
Agreed, everyone knows that running into another human being is not a safe activity. What next? "Unnecessary roughness" calls like the NFL? Some may disagree with me, but I see this as another step in emasculating men. Let the damn sport be what it is. Stop trying to hold everyone's hand.
26 September, 11:31pm
According to the Sydney Telegraph, World Rugby are reportedly considering new rules to make the game safer. Proposed changes included banning upright tackles and suspending concussed players.
After research has shown that tacklers pose the highest concussion risk, the proposals reinforce the level of concern World Rugby has when it comes to head injuries.
New changes would be implemented post-World Cup, and could change the game entirely. New techniques to avoid penalisation could also create a tough adaptation period for current players.
During the under-20s World Cup a new law was trialled, requiring tacklers to make contact below the nipple line. This trial was ultimately a failure as referees had difficulty locating the imaginary line in real time.
Upright tackles may soon be banned in an effort to reduce head-to-head contact, and a concussed tackler who was at fault could face suspension.
The flow-on effects of the law changes may make players like offload-heavy Sonny Bill Williams even more dangerous if opponents are unable to tackle him from an upright position and lock up the ball.
World Rugby’s chief medical officer Martin Raftery said traditional rugby attitudes must change to drastically reduce concussion, the Telegraph reported.
“The tackle is the phase of the game with the most concussive injuries, and then within the tackles it is the tackler, not the ball carrier, who is most at risk,” Raftery said.
“So what we’re trying to do through a number of different processes is to bring the tackle height down, to protect more the tackler than the ball carrier.
“Yes we’ve got to protect the ball carrier as well, but the focus is on the tackler.”
Raftery also commented on the new high tackle warning system that would penalise upright tacklers who made contact with ball carriers.
“It doesn’t matter whether the ball carrier is injured or the tackler is injured. If the tackler is upright, when there’s clear and obvious contact, can receive an extra penalty.”
Raftery said World Rugby has a heavy focus on evidence before making decisions to change laws.
A World Rugby study found that in 464 cases of in-tackle concussions, the tackler was the once concussed 335 times.
“It seems quite logical; lower the tackle, you’re going to reduce the number of head injuries,” he said.
“It’s not rocket science. If it sounds sensible and is backed by research I think we should be doing it.”
Only the IRB can more idiotic than the ANC. The ramifications for this garbage are unacceptable. They've done enough damage as it is.
Maybe they could paint huge nipples on the jumpers,or make them wear that inflatable sumo gear .The ladies might take umbrage though.
The uniform of the future. Safe and gender ambiguous!
Needs head gear .And welding goggles .
