‘Attacking players falling into high tackles’. ‘Head clashes’.
‘It was an accident’.
‘Collisions happen’.
We’ve heard plenty of this over the past couple of weeks.
‘What could he do? He can’t disappear. It’s a collision sport’.
There are four tackles in particular over the past two weeks that I want to draw your attention to.
Lindsay Collins on Morgan Boyle, Jake Turpin on Victor Radley, Tariq Sims on Connor Tracey, and Dale Finucane on Stephen Crichton.
Before I break down the tackles themselves, let’s be clear that these were all hardcore head shots. Crichton’s ear was split in half. Radley immediately had blood gushing from a head wound. Collins and Tracey were both heavily concussed and taken from the field, Tracey in a stretcher.
Exhibit A
Against Manly, Collins tried to assert his authority, rush out of the line and “put a hit” in Manly forward Boyle. His technique was to charge in wildly and body check Boyle. With a head at head height tackle, the almost inevitable happened and head-on-head contact occurred.
Collins – who’d only just come back from an early concussion in Origin 3 – was left spasming on the ground and played no further part in the Roosters’ victory. Collins is the defender so there was no suggestion of illegal play.
(Photo by Cameron Spencer/Getty Images)
Exhibit B
Again, Turpin raced out of the line to “put a hit” on Radley. Again, there was no lowering of body height so Turpin’s head was at Radley’s head height. To make matters worse, Turpin’s tackle technique was awful.
Radley was running to Turpin’s left. Turpin, however, led with his right shoulder instead of his left, putting his head directly in front of Radley’s. The Roosters lock was left with blood pouring out of his head.
This is the 101 of defending… don’t get your head in the way. It was a head clash so there was no suggestion of illegal play – although it was this exact technique flaw that saw Dylan Napa suspended.
Exhibit C
Lightweight utility back Tracey took the ball to the line. Sims tried to “put a hit” on Tracey. Tracey was simultaneously hit low by another Dragons defender and “fell into” Sims’ tackle. Sims’ shoulder hit Tracey in the head.
Tracey’s neck was immediately immobilised by the Sharks’ trainer and after a lengthy delay, was stretchered from the field and played no further part in the game. Sims was sin-binned for 10 minutes.
Exhibit D
Relative cleanskin Finucane tried to fire the Sharks up by rushing out of the line to “put a hit” on Panthers centre Crichton. Heads collided and Crichton was left with his ear split in half, requiring plastic surgery.
Accidents happen, right? What were they supposed to do? They can’t disappear.
Except with what we know about head injuries and chronic traumatic encephalopathy (CTE), these are exactly the incidents we’re supposed to be trying to get out of the game.
Clearly, we’re not.
In all of these tackles, the defender rushed up quickly and with a target zone above the ball. The idea in all of them was “put a hit” on their opponent. There was no effort in any of them to lower body height or lower the target zone.
Dale Finucane looks at the ear of Stephen Crichton. (Photo by Matt Blyth/Getty Images)
Can players really claim, “It was an accident, sir” when their opponent falls suddenly in a tackle? I mean, players fall in every tackle. It’s kinda the point of the game.
Can a player plea, “Where was I supposed to go?” or, “I can’t disappear” when they aim their skull at their opponent’s cranium? Is I want to “put a hit” on my opponent a good enough excuse to fly in recklessly upright?
Players have to lower their tackle target zones.
Aiming above the ball and inches below an opponent’s chin is a recipe for disaster. For attacker and defender.
Jake Trbojevic has the best tackle technique in the modern game. When an opponent runs at him, he moves forward. Sets his feet. Lowers his body height. Pushes off from his thighs. Hits under the ball and drives up. Clinical.
When he gets one wrong (anyone remember a time he has?) he can genuinely claim an accident, not bone idle, lazy technique.
How often did Players like Trevor Gillmeister, David Gillespie and Dean Lance hit opponents high?
Rugby league is a brutal collision-based sport. It’s not made better by smashing opponents in the head and it wouldn’t be made worse from stopping it.
It will be made worse by players having their career ended prematurely.
Pomoz
Roar Rookie
Great article TB and I agree with it 100%. The ex-players like Johns and Roach are the worst at excusing tackles that end up with an injury. The "men were men" back in my day is an understandable sentiment, but the long list of ex-players with brain injuries is something people weren't aware of when they played. With the information we have now, the NRL is duty bound to make changes to protect the players. The players have to change their attitude both for the defenders and the attackers sake. As Gus has pointed out, just as many injuries are happening to the defender as the attacker. I pretty much see it like this. The word accident needs to be removed from the vocabulary when describing tackles. If you make a tackle that results in the opposition players head being hit, then you have been reckless or careless. A player is hurt, by definition something went wrong. No argument entered into. All that "deflected of his shoulder/ball" argument is just nonsense. You need to anticipate that and aim lower. If a player has to leave the field as a result of a head high tackle, then you should be sent off. Your carelessness has taken a player out of the game, off you go. Finucane should have been off (Klein should be ashamed of himself for not even penalising Finucane), JFH and Sims should have been off. Intent? Maybe not, but you were careless and now they can't play and could have a long term injury as a result. The extent of your punishment is then decided by the circumstances, did they fall, did you have intent etc. No intent, only reduces the punishment but cannot reduce it to nil. Introduce this approach and Finucane will be ringing Jake for some tackling lessons. He should get a mini- bus and take along JFH and Sims as well.
Tony
Roar Guru
And no HIA back then
Paul
Guest
Did Ricky Stewart use bad technique when tackling , about a thousand times? That would explain a Lot!
steveng
Roar Rookie
Great points there TB and good article on all this mate. Just to put my two bobs worth into this, as watching and seeing the changes in the game in last 5 years, this has all started from the way the game has been allowed a tackled player to be tackled and he’s been allowed to be so vulnerable in the ruck, as anything goes, the laying all over tackled players, the wrestle, the steal and hands on the ball, lifting and all the actions of the tacklers after the ref calls “HELD” and then and on top of all that, the tacklers just force the tackled player onto the ground anyway (which the last really annoys me and has been allowed for years) allot of this rubbish was never ever allowed (and all of a sudden the refs allowed anything and everything?) as we all know that in the past, it was an instant penalty. All these factors have completely changed the game and have made the game evolve into the unwatchable rubbish that we are seeing and getting today. As the HELD and the completion of a tackle is never policed by the refs and all sorts are allowed to continue on the tackled players. Then we have players going in high and with half pie shoulder charges, that are allowed, then far too many high tackles above the shoulder are also allowed (causing these head clashes) etc etc. The bottom line here is that the game is nothing like it was in the old days, as the above the shoulder tackling techniques are allowed far too much which was never ever part of the game, as and for example, the days of on eof the greatest tackles ever “Johnny Raper" will never come around. Unfortunately those days are gone as the game of RL has evolved into the ugliness that we have today. IMO, unless the NRL changes the game back to where it was and limits the tacklers to a max of 3 (as in some instances we have 5 or 6 players tackling one bloke) and the wrestle, the pulling, gouging and all sorts are allowed and the NRL and refs don’t absolutely 'stamp down' and police the "HELD RULE" the game will continue like it is. These high tackles especially are a continuation of the utter rabble that the NRL allows as a tackle, as the rules that they have ‘don’t work’ unless the tackling rules are redefined and especially the ruck cleaned up, and any “above the shoulders “ no matter what or any circumstances is panelised, as that is the only way out of this mess that RL has gotten itself into.
AJ Mithen
Expert
Love this, Baz
Tim Carter
Roar Pro
It is sad just how certain I am that you nailed the NRL's next steps.
Choppy Zezers
Roar Rookie
Spot on, Cadfael.
Muzz
Guest
Controlled aggression and good technique is key.
DP Schaefer
Roar Rookie
Yep, that's a good point - the acting on behalf of the 'injured' player ahs a lot of impact on the result and shouldn't. We shouldn't be encouraging players to act up. Citric should have been marched immediately regardless.
Nathan Absalom
Roar Guru
One common theme in the tackles that you mention, and a lot of the tackles that have gone wrong in the past few seasons, is the speed that the defensive player enters the collision. I liken it to the bowers run up in cricket. If you run in too fast the technique falls apart, you have to approach the crease at a speed you can accelerate into. Now, don't for the moment think I've done the considered analysis to say that the speed a player enters the collision should be taken into account in terms of sin bins/send offs and suspensions, but the NRL is a big enough organisation to do that and act upon it. But I never know if they've done the work and found nothing, or are always reacting to incidents from the last three rounds. I suspect the latter.
Cadfael
Roar Guru
Problem is with the coaches and how they coach. For quite some time the idea of the tackle is to slow everything down so a low tackle won't work. Go in high and tie the ball up which allows time for the defence to get set before the play the ball. Also, going in high to tie up the ball brings more chande of connecting the ball carrier high above the ball.
The Barry
Roar Guru
I don’t know… Lindsay Collins’ recent tackles have been big man on big man and haven’t ended well for him…
The Barry
Roar Guru
Yeah agreed But I think we need to move away from the idea that if you’re aiming a tackle over the ball that it’s an accident when someone’s height drops and gets hit high It’s a defensive choice, not an accident
The Barry
Roar Guru
I think all three of those guys played into the 10 metre era and were still effective. The five metre rule was an informal 10 well before it was changed but I think you’re right about teams having to slow the ruck to get back onside Again I agree about the wrapping the ball up, and I don’t think coaches will take the chance on having players tackle lower. I just think we need to move away from the idea that if you’re aiming a tackle over the ball that it’s all just an accident when someone drops and gets hit high It’sa choice defenders make, not really an accident
Cadfael
Roar Guru
Don't forget that it was really a 10 metre rule. BOTH sides had to be back five metres.
Succhi
Roar Rookie
Somehow we have to encourage one on one low tackles. At the moment defending teams get rewards for 3 in a tackle to slow the play the ball. Tackling low used to be an art and certainly some smaller players were exceptional low tacklers.
Big Daddy
Roar Rookie
When it's big man on big man and it goes wrong the consequences can be bad but when it's big man ( sims) on little man ( tracey) the consequences are a lot worse . The onus wether big man or little the tackler has to make adjustments and these guys as someone said wrap up the ball carrier is the prime objective . They just need to adjust their technique or spend more time on sideline as I'm sure their will be more . Shoulder charge will soon be automatic bin regardless of intention and we'll probably see more send off's ic intentional.
Rellum
Roar Guru
Also, the challenge is trying to get people to understand the player who comes out concussed is the one who should be charged with a head high tackle. Many just will not be able to comprehend this idea.
Rellum
Roar Guru
This to me is the reason the Roosters have such issues with concussions. They are big on this technique but also love to push the big hit as part of the tackle.
Rellum
Roar Guru
The current players are also bigger and stronger so that all evens out.