A frustrated Trent Robinson claims he no longer understands how the NRL interprets crusher tackles as the Sydney Roosters prepare for a run to the finals without Angus Crichton.
NSW Origin star Crichton was banned for three games for a crusher tackle on Penrith’s Liam Martin last weekend, with loading from prior offences adding to the punishment.
Robinson is adamant that pressure was only applied to the neck because Martin fell and bounced backwards into the tackle, leaving Crichton with little room to move.
The Roosters did not challenge the ban at the judiciary, with Robinson admitting once there is evidence pressure is applied to the neck it is very hard to overturn.
Of the 35 crusher tackle charges handed out since the introduction of a separate crusher tackle category midway through last year, only one has been challenged by a player.
“I thought I did (understand what a crusher tackle is),” Robinson said.
“But from one end they (the match review committee) will put out an excuse that there was mitigating factors therefore someone didn’t get charged.
“And when there is mitigating factors on the other end they’ll say that that was a traditional crusher.
“This one, there was pressure on Liam in that tackle, but we thought that he worked his way into that position and we thought that they could see that.
“But they obviously couldn’t.”
Robinson believed the league too had become confused on the issue since the crackdown began last August.
“It’s so varied on where they’re going to get to, they’re more varied than they’ve ever been before.” Robinson said.
“They’re more unsure of what a crackdown looks like and how they’re going to (adjudicate it).
“Our game is multiple people tackling people who are spinning and ducking their head to get to ground.
“These things are going to happen at different times and we don’t want them.
“But we also understand what’s going to happen in a game and for someone to miss three games is just incredible.”
Robinson’s comments came on the same day Daily Telegraph data revealed that the Roosters have won just 29 per cent of penalty counts since he took over as coach in 2013.
He maintains he has no idea why his team can’t get on the right side of referees, with the worst penalty differential in the competition in that period.
“I’ve asked what we need to do differently and that hasn’t come back the other way,” Robinson said.
“We’ve been living with this for a long time so we’ve got to find a way to obviously improve our discipline.
“And it would be helpful if there was some areas that should be looked at. But It doesn’t matter.”
Meanwhile, Robinson revealed he had been helping Newcastle’s Connor Watson with his future, whether it be with a return to the Roosters or moving elsewhere.
Adam
Roar Guru
The solution is to call held the moment someone is going backwards. Save the players from themselves
Rob
Guest
Seriously Robbo whinging. Where was the complainant about the officiating in the Cowboys victory? Cowboys got 2 penalties and the Roosters where given a rails run back into the game by 4 penalties and 6 agains on tackles 3-4. Rooster dropped the ball it was a strip, Walker broke a tackle and fell into Wrights lap and milks a crusher tackle. Crieghton running 2 metres off the marker and getting the marker called offside so the dummy half can scoot down field and gain an advantage. Holding attackers down constantly but only conceded a 6 again on tackle 1-2? Teddy, Walker are professional milkers and very good at ducking behind decoys without being called. JWH, Radley, Butcher, Crieghton, Tupounia all professional hold down and late merchants.
Forty Twenty
Roar Rookie
I'm a black sheep on the crusher tackle thing. Players are allowed to reverse in to the defence but the defender isn't allowed to jump on the attackers head and potentially cause serious damage to his neck. I fully agree with the NRL's stance. The war cry I hear so often from commentators and others is '' what was he meant to do? '' It's asked as a rhetorical question but I'll answer it anyway. Instead of jumping on an opponents head , do something else. It might not be as effective but to pretend it's the only option is drawing on the old days and the ''reflex tackle'', style of defence of illegal and dangerous play.
Clint
Roar Rookie
I guess if Robbo's team won 75% of its penalty counts and was in a +41 penalty differential after 20 rounds he probably wouldn't whinge as much.
Forty Twenty
Roar Rookie
I'd like the punters in the bunker to explain why they examined the cheese incident where he dived and was rewarded with a penalty but why they didn't do anything about Garrick getting kneed in the head. Garrick was clearly hurt and held his head which I had no trouble seeing and the obvious step is to have a look and see what happened. The next step is a penalty to Manly and 10 in the bin. The Storm are very hard to beat and they don't deserve any sort of assistance from some plodder in a box. It's a fair question and I'd like to hear an explanation.
Tony
Roar Guru
It's amazing that after 100+ years of league, players have only started rubbing their necks in the last few years. I guess there were no "crusher" tackles before that
Clint
Roar Rookie
He did say that they (the Roosters) often choose to fight MRC charges at the judiciary, but in crusher tackle cases it is a waste of time as you always end up losing. If he loses, it would be a 4 week suspension. So there is a strong disincentive there to cop it sweet.
Albo
Roar Rookie
Yep ! This crusher tackle charge is fast becoming one of the most contentious issues in our game. I am sure that 99% of crusher tackles called are accidents where the tackler has little option to avoid the situation. Many tackles see some incidental pressure on the neck of the ball carrier, but only a few are ever singled out for penalising & reporting, The decision is so subjective and often influenced mostly by the neck rub of the tackled player. I think Crichton was very unlucky to be cited on that tackle. It seemed to have some impact on Martin who is normally not a actor, but Crichton was caught with little option to escape this event. His loading added to his woes and subsequent 3 weeks off. Unfortunately, with the finals approaching , I can see some very unfortunate players being rubbed out of finals action through little fault of their own.
Paul
Roar Guru
He's better at it than Sticky. I don't think Robbo's had to fork out for any $10k fines yet, has he?
eagleJack
Roar Guru
I wish Garrick had scored a try! Nah he was bundled into touch, and then got a knee to the head for good measure. I can't stand players staying down but it's obvious that if they don't, the refs simply won't do anything about it. And in a tight game that can be the difference between a win and a loss.
Big Mig
Roar Rookie
Robbos got the NRL Coaches title of "Biggest Whinger" (previous holder was Sticky).
Paul
Roar Guru
exactly. Maybe forward progress has to be stopped and the ref calls tackled, if a player turns around and tries to head up field. That would stop this type of tackle pretty quickly I'd reckon.
andrew
Roar Rookie
Most of those crusher tackles are from players backing into the tackles. The defenders are already committed to the tackle but what bugs me is the tackled player rubbing the back of his head, resulting in a milked penalty.
Paul
Roar Guru
and none are ever out next round thanks to that injury. I don't doubt it hurts but I'm equally sure plenty are milking it too.
Tony
Roar Guru
But at least worth a penalty
Nat
Roar Guru
Confused via the media yet he chose not to fight it? Accidental as it was, they mostly all are but if you believe you have a case - fight it. He didn't get 3 weeks for the crusher, 2 weeks of that was carry overs so I think they made the right call. Play on.
Pete
Guest
Just don't understand how Crichton gets 3 games for his crusher and in the same game Kikau got away with one that was even worse on Manu.
Nat
Roar Guru
He got up because he was excited to score the try. He felt for it though and shot Hughes a look...
Tony
Roar Guru
It amazes me that nearly every crusher tackle is followed by a miracle recovery. Can't remember a "crushed" player going off for treatment, other than to rort the 2 minute interchange rule.
Tony
Roar Guru
Agree John. Case in point, was I the only person to see Hughes make late contact to Garrick's head with his knee when he scored a try the other day? To Garrick's credit, he got straight up, but if he'd stayed down perhaps some action would have been taken.