Refereeing The Magic Round sin bin directive

[bileduct]

Players will be looking to get hit in the head this weekend, I am sure of it.

They back themselves into tackles and then grab their neck claiming to be the victim of a crusher tackle, what's the difference?

They've been pulling that one for a while now.

 

[gerg]

I’m absolutely dumbfounded by these, the extreme penalty for McGuire, and that Sims was charged at all.

Nothing good can come from a 'hip drop' tackle. It needs to be harshly penalised to get it out of the game. Seriously? The tackle is designed to f**k up the tackled players knees. Dropping all your weight down on the back of the legs, while at the same time pulling their upper body backwards.

You are a good poster here. You're better than this.

 

[Bring back John Fifita]

Nothing good can come from a 'hip drop' tackle. It needs to be harshly penalised to get it out of the game. Seriously? The tackle is designed to f**k up the tackled players knees. Dropping all your weight down on the back of the legs, while at the same time pulling their upper body backwards.

You are a good poster here. You're better than this.

McGuire got 5 weeks for it. The same as a teammate who knocked Papenhuyzen into Disneyland. I thought 5 weeks was excessive.2 weeks more than a bloke who’s knees punctured a lung of a player the week before and put him in hospital

Sims didn’t drop his weight on Smoothy’s legs.

Neither instance was penalised by the on field ref, and the commentators didn’t bat an eyelid in the run of play. It was bunker intervention, though None were sin binned.

Never condoned hip drops nor said they weren’t serious. I’m saying I was dumbfounded by the penalties. That’s just my opinion.

Thanks for the back-handed compliment

 

[TheDMC]

Yes
But legally speaking the NRL has to show they’ve taken action that meets their duty of care obligations

Your argument won’t fly in court. This isn’t about opinion, it’s about legal obligations.
Mind you, this isn’t just about the NRL, the clubs have a responsibility too. After all they are the employers

Spot on. And if they didn't move to match the duty of care that rugby union has in regard to contact with the head then legally they are toast.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

 

[blaza88z]

McGuire got 5 weeks for it. The same as a teammate who knocked Papenhuyzen into Disneyland. I thought 5 weeks was excessive.2 weeks more than a bloke who’s knees punctured a lung of a player the week before and put him in hospital

Sims didn’t drop his weight on Smoothy’s legs.

Neither instance was penalised by the on field ref, and the commentators didn’t bat an eyelid in the run of play. It was bunker intervention, though None were sin binned.

Never condoned hip drops nor said they weren’t serious. I’m saying I was dumbfounded by the penalties. That’s just my opinion.

Thanks for the back-handed compliment

McGuire would have loading, nothing surer about that

 

[Pete Cash]

So 57% of HIAs are on the defender? That's interesting

It would be interesting to see the break down of how. I imagine accidentally head to head contact are the leading cause of above the waist contact

If you think of the mechanics of tackling the defender does have his head more vulnerable

 

[Babyface O'reilly]

yes they do but even with all the rules and regs, and there a lot in motorsport! There is still a significant and inherent risk of injury and as drivers we accept that.
The NRL already has a rule that there should be no head high tackling. it had a penalty system as well. All it has done is increase the penalty system to the point it has significantly effected the quality of the game. If it will reduce head high's, and at what cost to the nature of the game is yet to be seen. It'd be like making us all drive behind the safety car every lap as it reduces the risk of crashes!

Competitors accept there’s an inherent risk yet governing bodies do what they can to minimise those risks instead of sitting on there hands. F1 is a great example. The cars have what resembles a toilet seat over the cockpit now which was derided by all. It’s was an unpopular decision until we saw Romain Grosjean’s crash. Designers will tell you drivers will pick a fast, dangerous car over a slow, safe one. It’s the James Graham competitive mentality. Sometimes the powers at be need to take the decisions away from competitors for their own good. I don’t like it either btw, it’s not the game I grew up with. The game has to protect itself from future liable and attract kids to join. I get what they’re trying to do. I just wish they applied commonsense. The Burr tackle on Teddy, case in point.

 

[TheDMC]

I just wish they applied commonsense. The Burr tackle on Teddy, case in point.

That's going to be the main issue I reckon. Players will still be binned for tackles like Burr's where head contact but almost unavoidable due to the attacking player slipping, ducking etc. In rugby union for the last few years it is always a sin bin, no matter the circumstances, and it is really frustrating to see.

 

[taste2taste]

I can't see what the hate is about, since 1908 the rules have stated you can't make contact with the head.

As more studies come out about the long term affects of concussion its inevitable the NRL needs to do something.

A few years back the NFL made rule changes to tackling and the fans had a whinge the game has gone soft but I'm willing to bet it didn't loose any fans.

French Top 14 doesn't allow tackling above the nipple line, a tackle around the shoulders is penalized ..... Imagine how much dinosaur Gus Gould would sook if the NRL had that rule

 

[Perth Red]

So according to stats above only 1/3rd of HIA's/concussions are experienced by the attacker being tackled, and not all of them due to a high tackle? So if the game is serious about needing to get rid of concussions then how effective is this clamp down going to be? My concern is Vlandys being so adamant about the danger of concussion and the need to get it out of the game means when we cant, which we clearly cant looking at these stats, then the perception of our game being dangerous to play is going to be even greater! If the chairman is telling you that concussions are long term dangerous and you see that 2/3rds of concussions are going to continue then what do you think the publics response will be? Vlandys needs to dial down the rhetoric, stop being so offended at people who disagree with him and start putting out some positive messages about how safe the game is becoming, especially for kids. Its a PR disaster right now!

 

[Perth Red]

Competitors accept there’s an inherent risk yet governing bodies do what they can to minimise those risks instead of sitting on there hands. F1 is a great example. The cars have what resembles a toilet seat over the cockpit now which was derided by all. It’s was an unpopular decision until we saw Romain Grosjean’s crash. Designers will tell you drivers will pick a fast, dangerous car over a slow, safe one. It’s the James Graham competitive mentality. Sometimes the powers at be need to take the decisions away from competitors for their own good. I don’t like it either btw, it’s not the game I grew up with. The game has to protect itself from future liable and attract kids to join. I get what they’re trying to do. I just wish they applied commonsense. The Burr tackle on Teddy, case in point.

If someone offered you the chance to be a NRL player, be famous, earn millions of $'s all before you were 30, but it came with the risk of double the chance of getting dementia when your 75 would you take it? I think most would if we are being honest. Yes cut the risks but dont kill the goose in doing so when the risks are actually in a different place.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

So according to stats above only 1/3rd of HIA's/concussions are experienced by the attacker being tackled, and not all of them due to a high tackle? So if the game is serious about needing to get rid of concussions then how effective is this clamp down going to be? My concern is Vlandys being so adamant about the danger of concussion and the need to get it out of the game means when we cant, which we clearly cant looking at these stats, then the perception of our game being dangerous to play is going to be even greater! If the chairman is telling you that concussions are long term dangerous and you see that 2/3rds of concussions are going to continue then what do you think the publics response will be? Vlandys needs to dial down the rhetoric, stop being so offended at people who disagree with him and start putting out some positive messages about how safe the game is becoming, especially for kids. Its a PR disaster right now!

Less concussions for those tackling low than high - reward low tackles.

 

[Eelectrica]

Less concussions for those tackling low than high - reward low tackles.

But we need to speed the game up so we get 500 play the balls per half. No time for defenders to think. Rewarding good tackles just stands in the way of progress.

 

[aussie7798]

Ill tell you whats going to happen unless they change it.

Me average player in the grand final second hit up I target Cleary and falldesco into his shoulder.

Bye Bye Cleary. At worst 18th man comes on best case free interchange and back on i come.

 

[Perth Red]

Less concussions for those tackling low than high - reward low tackles.

And go back to slow play the balls? Id suggest those stats are skewed that way as large majority of tackles are up high. if you looked at incidence then the low tackles may actually lead to much higher incidence of concussion and therefore increasing the amount will increase the prevalence.

 

[Bring back John Fifita]

McGuire would have loading, nothing surer about that

He did - his fine for the "high tackle" was bumped up as I'd read. I didn't read how the other charge may have been bumped up, but dare say you're right here.

 

[Saxon]

McGuire got 5 weeks for it. The same as a teammate who knocked Papenhuyzen into Disneyland. I thought 5 weeks was excessive.2 weeks more than a bloke who’s knees punctured a lung of a player the week before and put him in hospital

Moose's history of offending greatly enhanced the punishment.

Sims didn’t drop his weight on Smoothy’s legs.

Yep, Tyson's PCL tore of it's own accord.

 

[Exsilium]

F1 is a great example. The cars have what resembles a toilet seat over the cockpit now.

Aptly named the “Halo” device.

 

[Danish]

Competitors accept there’s an inherent risk yet governing bodies do what they can to minimise those risks instead of sitting on there hands. F1 is a great example. The cars have what resembles a toilet seat over the cockpit now which was derided by all. It’s was an unpopular decision until we saw Romain Grosjean’s crash. Designers will tell you drivers will pick a fast, dangerous car over a slow, safe one. It’s the James Graham competitive mentality. Sometimes the powers at be need to take the decisions away from competitors for their own good. I don’t like it either btw, it’s not the game I grew up with. The game has to protect itself from future liable and attract kids to join. I get what they’re trying to do. I just wish they applied commonsense. The Burr tackle on Teddy, case in point.

F1s rating have also crashed like 20% over the last decade as they keep making changes to make the cars safer and more ecologically friendly. no one wants to watch a bunch of hairdryers going around a track. professional sports are karening themselves out of existence the world over (check out the free fall in NBA revenue and ratings as a top example).

why the NRL is obsessed with what mythical mothers think is beyond me. Mums love letting their kids play soccer in Oz. How’s the A league doing?