Gang tackles: illegal or not?

[tezzah]

Seeing how many teams are complaining about the Melbourne Storms tackling techniques are teams seriously complaining about the noted gang tackle (tackling in numbers)?

Surely every club is doing this to slow down the play the ball.

Thoughts?

 

[Tonearm Terrorwrist]

The only thing wrong with them is it makes for boring footy but if you impose some sort of ban on gang tackles then you need to do the same thing for offloads.

 

[muzby]

gang tackles should be allowed, however only if it is to stop momentum..

what i don't like is this habit of the 3rd or 4th man in coming and grabbing the leg of a guy who's momentum has clearly stopped, and then just twisting or bending the leg..

that sort of junk should be penalised as it's not necessary.

 

[DJShaksta]

gang tackles should be allowed, however only if it is to stop momentum..

what i don't like is this habit of the 3rd or 4th man in coming and grabbing the leg of a guy who's momentum has clearly stopped, and then just twisting or bending the leg..

that sort of junk should be penalised as it's not necessary.

Agreed Muzby, this type of tackle should be renamed to the "Cam Smith tackle"

 

[tezzah]

Is this not why the ref would call dominant tackle or surrender? As a player you are usually taught how to tackle, wrap the ball, turtle the player (turn on back), smother (or lie on) player to slow the play the ball down.

I don't think this is boring but more so about the power and ability of the attacking runner who has to show more flare and footwork to beat opposition defenders to get a quick play the ball (usually elbows and knees).

 

[firechild]

Agreed Muzby, this type of tackle should be renamed to the "Cam Smith tackle"

More broadly a Cam Smith tackle would be any tackle where the intent is to injure the player being tackled. Every time they outlaw his favoured tackling style, he finds another dirty tactic to use.

 

[stormbati]

Just watched the 09 GF yesterday and same thing was happening. Quiet a lot actually.
Why is it a problem now?

 

[DJShaksta]

Very true Firechild, I stand corrected.

 

[betcats]

Cam 'the crippler' Smith is the master of this.

 

[Pierced Soul]

More broadly a Cam Smith tackle would be any tackle where the intent is to injure the player being tackled. Every time they outlaw his favoured tackling style, he finds another dirty tactic to use.

smith wrapping up the legs to slow down the play the ball isnt intended to hurt anyone. sandow being a kamikazee and diving at hoffman is an intent to injure.

the storm have always been goood at pushing the boundaries of the rules. what they do isnt illegal - it can be frustrating to watch but it's not illegal.

if they want to stop it then the refs need to call held when the momentum is stopped by the two holding up the player, that way if a third man comes in to grab the legs you penalise them

 

[POPEYE]

Before this thread awakens the dead lets just clarify something. Bellamy, Harrigan and Raper are apparently kept in contact about rulings..

Harrigan is on record as saying last week that the new tackles are perfectly legal as long as the last man up is moving when the others get off.

Aside from all this, the Storm will always be trendsetters in winning games because their coach is paid to it and he is the best at it. The Broncos are also using the tackle.

I don't particularly like the tackle but it's not illegal. It will become so soon because Gallop and his cronies won't like the Storm prospering.

I do know that whatever is thrown against them they will always come up with something new.

 

[firechild]

The grapple, crusher and other tackles are not intended to injure? If the tactics emplyed by the Storm are not intended to injure, then those at the storm (players and coaching staff) are one of the dumbest groups of people in the world if they do not realise that the tactics are likely to cause major injury. Steve Matai has permanent nerve damage in his neck due to a crusher tackle (before those tackles were made illegal). Why is it that every type of tackle that is banned originates at the Storm? They are the masters of dirty tactics.

 

[SDM]

gang tackles should be allowed, however only if it is to stop momentum..

what i don't like is this habit of the 3rd or 4th man in coming and grabbing the leg of a guy who's momentum has clearly stopped, and then just twisting or bending the leg..

that sort of junk should be penalised as it's not necessary.

It is up to the refs, if momentum has stopped; call held. If someone else joins in, then penalise.

 

[POPEYE]

The grapple, crusher and other tackles are not intended to injure? If the tactics emplyed by the Storm are not intended to injure, then those at the storm (players and coaching staff) are one of the dumbest groups of people in the world if they do not realise that the tactics are likely to cause major injury. Steve Matai has permanent nerve damage in his neck due to a crusher tackle (before those tackles were made illegal). Why is it that every type of tackle that is banned originates at the Storm? They are the masters of dirty tactics.

Of course they're not intended to injure. The Storm didn't make up the names . . . people with agendas did that.

Matai is a show pony but I digress. You need to watch replays all the way back to when you were wetting nappies to see what damaging tackles really were.

If a single type of tackle was to be outlawed every time a team led the comp since the '70's we'd be watching touch footy now.

Saying that players deliberately try to hurt another player to the extent you promote is naivety at it's utmost

 

[firechild]

Defending the tactics of the Storm is naivety at its utmost.

The difference between the old damaging tackles and the Storm tactics is that it used to be impact damage the sort of stuff that breaks bones, can't really avoid that in rugby league. What the storm do is twist and bend players where the damage is ligaments, tendons, etc.

As for Matai, he has serious neck and shoulder injuries and has undergone surgery several times. Most recent offseasons he has spent recovering from surgery, he was told at one stage that he would have to wear a Brent Tait neck brace if he wanted to keep playing.
The only time I think he has seriously feigned injury was in the '08 grand final when he wanted to be replaced by Beaver Menzies (as did the majority of the spectators).

 

[Mr Fourex]

Agreed Muzby, this type of tackle should be renamed to the "Cam Smith tackle"

and let's not forget the forearm to the face lean on the tackled player as you stand up .......otherwise fondly known as the "Gallen Gotcha".

I love how all the jealous and bitter geniuss always moan about the Storm's tackling techniques. Craig Bellamy has got to be contributed as being on the fore front when it comes to coaching 1st grade NRL players and for finding ways to give his team the edge. He plays to the rules to the most minute degree.......suck it up everybody. Blame your team or your own coach if you're not winning games.

I've got no probs with the gang tackle. It's really just good defence. Tackling in numbers .....dominating your opposition, slowing down the play the ball. It's the name of the game in the modern "faster" era.

I thought the 3rd-4th or 5th man coming in and tackling at the legs/knees while the player was being held (defenceless) was dangerous ........the refs are on to that now.

 

[SpaceMonkey]

I've actually thought that limiting tackles to two players would potentially be a useful rule change. You'd reduce some potential for injury, and have a more open game due to quicker play the balls and more tackle breaks. The only time I'd allow a third man in would be to hold a player up over the try line.

At the same time you could get rid of the stripping rule, if a player isn't good enough to hold the ball in a two man tackle then it would be deemed poor ball security.

 

[DJShaksta]

Go Cam go!

 

[Danish]

Gang tackling is a perfectly legal and necessary defensive play to bring down an attacking player who is trying to offload or fight for every advantage.

We already give far too much advantage to the attacking player with new rules brought in every year without demanding that tacklers not be allowed to take their legs from under them as well.

If you are worried about a knee injury, don't continue to push and struggle for every last inch of field position or fight for every last opportunity to offload. Until you have submitted in the tackle and a referee has called held, you are fair game.

 

[POPEYE]

Defending the tactics of the Storm is naivety at its utmost.

The difference between the old damaging tackles and the Storm tactics is that it used to be impact damage the sort of stuff that breaks bones, can't really avoid that in rugby league. What the storm do is twist and bend players where the damage is ligaments, tendons, etc.

As for Matai, he has serious neck and shoulder injuries and has undergone surgery several times. Most recent offseasons he has spent recovering from surgery, he was told at one stage that he would have to wear a Brent Tait neck brace if he wanted to keep playing.
The only time I think he has seriously feigned injury was in the '08 grand final when he wanted to be replaced by Beaver Menzies (as did the majority of the spectators).

You apply the sort of logic to your posts that indicates you are not willing to step back a little and look outside a preconceived perception. Don't be overcome by what you want and what is real