How come it's the tacklers responsibility in a spear tackle situation (as it should be) to ensure a safe landing, but it doesn't appear to be in a head high tackle situation on a falling player *cough* except your name is Jonathan Thurston and the rulebook doesn't apply to you *cough*?
I remember a Tongan winger from Manly getting practically life for a elbow to a blokes head, sure, it was late, and the guy was in a fair position, but a bit better timing and a little bit more of a bend in the knees and he'd have been hailed as a great tackler. What I'm getting at is these sorts of tackles, particularly the types of tackles Sonny Bill lays on, they look wicked, but they're an inch away often from some serious repurcussions. Where do we draw the line? At what the result is, or do we start targetting the intention or moreso technique that could to the result as we do with spear tackles *cough* except Jonathan Thurston *cough*? I understand it's a contact sport, but I wonder where a smart lawyer sooner or later is going to cotton onto a situation of tort where the association hasn't taken all necessary steps to prevent a potentially serious injury.
PS: For the sake of this debate, have it known I'm a Crocker/Sonny Bill and those types supporter and didn't have a drama with Crocker tackle by the way it's currently ruled upon. Just thinking from a business law perspective.
