Napa sin bin

[Frank_Grimes]

Ban accidental head clashes?

Maybe we could put a rule in place that penalises reckless/careless contact with the hea...ohhhhh wait.

 

[Zadar]

Maybe we could put a rule in place that penalises reckless/careless contact with the hea...ohhhhh wait.

What if the ball runner clashes heads with the defender?? How many weeks should he get?

 

[typicalfan]

Maybe we could put a rule in place that penalises reckless/careless contact with the hea...ohhhhh wait.

A rule that has never been applied to headclashes?

 

[Clifferd]

Maybe we could put a rule in place that penalises reckless/careless contact with the hea...ohhhhh wait.

Maybe we could appoint a referee that helps Brisbane win games...ohhhh wait.

 

[Frank_Grimes]

Maybe we could appoint a referee that helps Brisbane win games...ohhhh wait.

What's your obsession with Brisbane got to do with the topic at hand? Or are you just deflecting?

 

[Frank_Grimes]

What if the ball runner clashes heads with the defender?? How many weeks should he get?

The rule is there to protect the ball runner from dangerous tackling techniques. Maybe you should petition for tackler safety?

 

[Frank_Grimes]

A rule that has never been applied to headclashes?

Why do you think this was an accidental head clash?

 

[TheDMC]

What if the ball runner clashes heads with the defender?? How many weeks should he get?

Well that depends if it was a flying head missile or just a run of the mill head clash...

 

[Frailty]

How long has the rule been in place and how many times has someone been penalised for a headclash that has not been intentional.

This is my point. The sin bin ruling is new, but the way the rule is written has been in place for a while.

I am fine with the onus on the tackling player to ensure not contact with the head is made - even 'accidental' head clash. I think it's beneficial as it will encourage a change in tackling technique, reducing the amount of instances of head injuries (no, it won't completely eradicate them - it's still a contact sport), and potentially mean that the ball less likely to be wrapped up increasing the chance of an offload and some broken play.

The negative - well you will see a lot more penalties until the players change. This year has shown us, they aren't exactly quick learners.

 

[typicalfan]

Why do you think this was an accidental head clash?

What are you asking do you think it was deliberate?

 

[typicalfan]

This is my point. The sin bin ruling is new, but the way the rule is written has been in place for a while.

I am fine with the onus on the tackling player to ensure not contact with the head is made - even 'accidental' head clash. I think it's beneficial as it will encourage a change in tackling technique, reducing the amount of instances of head injuries (no, it won't completely eradicate them - it's still a contact sport), and potentially mean that the ball less likely to be wrapped up increasing the chance of an offload and some broken play.

The negative - well you will see a lot more penalties until the players change. This year has shown us, they aren't exactly quick learners.

Ok so lets say tomorrow night Shannon Boyd runs into Trent Hodkinson and the players inadvertently make contact with each others head. Boyd powers through and Hodkinson is ironed out and gone from the game. Now in this instance the penalty should go against Hodkinson because the onus was on him?

 

[Frank_Grimes]

What are you asking do you think it was deliberate?

It certainly falls under the category of reckless - not purely an accident. Napa leads with his head and even turns his head right before the moment of impact to protect himself. You think that was just an accident?

 

[Frank_Grimes]

Ok so lets say tomorrow night Shannon Boyd runs into Trent Hodkinson and the players inadvertently make contact with each others head. Boyd powers through and Hodkinson is ironed out and gone from the game. Now in this instance the penalty should go against Hodkinson because the onus was on him?

Why would the penalty go against Hodkinson if Boyd was not hurt by his actions?

You also use the term "inadvertently". There was nothing inadvertent about Napa's technique last Friday. It was reckless.

In your scenario, if Boyd leads with his head and smashes it into Hodkinson he definitely deserves penalty, much the same as any ball runner leads with their knees into the tackler.

 

[Frank_Grimes]

Some people here seem to have a funny view of what a head clash is. A head clash doesn't happen when one player rams their head into another.

 

[Frailty]

Ok so lets say tomorrow night Shannon Boyd runs into Trent Hodkinson and the players inadvertently make contact with each others head. Boyd powers through and Hodkinson is ironed out and gone from the game. Now in this instance the penalty should go against Hodkinson because the onus was on him?

In that situation, given that it would be assumed that Hodkinson had to jump to effect a high tackle, then yes he should be penalised.

Think about it this way. If Josh Reynolds goes for another trip, and in the process of making contact snaps his leg, should he be penalised? Of course he should. Same situation.

 

[Clifferd]

Some people here seem to have a funny view of what a head clash is. A head clash doesn't happen when one player rams their head into another.

Well what do you define a head clash then. Because it sure as hell looked like one to me

I’m not even a roosters fan but the outrage over this is pretty amusing

 

[Cockosh]

Some people here seem to have a funny view of what a head clash is. A head clash doesn't happen when one player rams their head into another.

You mean the same view as the Match review committee? It wasn’t reckless, it wasn’t intentional, it shouldn’t have been a sin bin. Great hit that should of resulted in a roosters scrum feed. I hope he tackles exactly the same way again this week. I don’t like seeing players hurt but in a body contact sport like league it happens. I can’t wait to read your comments each and every time this now happens and players aren’t sin binned. Let’s see if you will be so vocal when your bias doesn’t dictate your opinion.

 

[Frank_Grimes]

Well what do you define a head clash then. Because it sure as hell looked like one to me

I’m not even a roosters fan but the outrage over this is pretty amusing

You don't have to be a Roosters fan to be misguided... and who is outraged? It all seems pretty civil to me.

A head clash happens when the two players involved are not acting carelessly or recklessly - ie a normal tackle or collision. It's pretty easy to see that what Napa pulled off on Friday night was not normal that was a player using his head as part of the tackle. Keep avoiding my questions if you want, but we'll just keep going round in circles.

 

[Clifferd]

You don't have to be a Roosters fan to be misguided... and who is outraged? It all seems pretty civil to me.

A head clash happens when the two players involved are not acting carelessly or recklessly - ie a normal tackle or collision. It's pretty easy to see that what Napa pulled off on Friday night was not normal that was a player using his head as part of the tackle. Keep avoiding my questions if you want, but we'll just keep going round in circles.

So the mrc are misguided? And erm, 17 pages seems to indicate a few people panties are in a knot + Uncle Wango

And unless there’s physically a way you can play without a head I’m not sure you quite understand it’s impossible to make a shoulder tackle without tilting your head forward. Therefore it’s an accidental headclash. And on the merry-go-round we go again

 

[Frank_Grimes]

You mean the same view as the Match review committee? It wasn’t reckless, it wasn’t intentional, it shouldn’t have been a sin bin. Great hit that should of resulted in a roosters scrum feed. I hope he tackles exactly the same way again this week. I don’t like seeing players hurt but in a body contact sport like league it happens. I can’t wait to read your comments each and every time this now happens and players aren’t sin binned. Let’s see if you will be so vocal when your bias doesn’t dictate your opinion.

You mean the same Match Review committee that Greenburg admitted got it wrong?

https://www.foxsports.com.au/nrl/nr...s/news-story/e44d175c60f1ba4df119cae1835a1f26

I guess you had no problem with Nate Myles' tackling style in Origin?

The reality is that not many players tackle by leading with their heads. Bias is not dictating my opinion but I believe it is yours.

I agree that it shouldn't have been a sin bin. It should have been a send off.