Lifting tackle - Now banned

[FreshSoulL]

The NRL has directed the Match Review Committee to take a hard line against players lifting opponents into a "dangerous position" where they could injure their head or neck.

This follows an extensive review of performance data and tackle analytics over the first six rounds of the season.

NRL Head of Football, Mr Todd Greenberg, said that, from this weekend, any player involved in a dangerous lifting tackle on an opponent could expect to be charged - unless they pulled out of it quickly.

A dangerous position is where the head or neck of the tackled player dips below the horizontal level of the hips - and it is not immediately corrected.

Mr Greenberg said charges had not been laid in some cases this year because the tackled player was able to move into a position where he was unlikely to land on his head or neck first.

But he said, from this weekend, players will be charged if they lift an opponent into any position where they could land on their head or neck.

"If you lift a player and put him in a dangerous position you will be charged unless you pull out quickly and return the player to a safe position," Mr Greenberg said.

"The only discretion the Match Review Committee will have is the grading of the charge.

"It is important to stress that the rules have not changed… rather the way in which they are to be applied has been re-emphasised with the Match Review Committee."

Mr Greenberg said the NRL was not satisfied with the action taken in regard to some lifting tackles in the first six rounds of the Premiership.

He said players should not escape penalty just because an opponent was lucky enough to move his body into a position where his head or neck was not going to hit the ground first.

"We have been disappointed that some players have escaped charges for tackles we believe were dangerous," Mr Greenberg said.

"So we are lowering the threshold for a dangerous tackle charge - and it starts this weekend."

Mr Greenberg said the edict followed an extensive review of tackles so far this season.

It found that there had been a significant decrease in three-man tackles - from 36 per cent to 30 per cent - since the new rules were introduced at the start of the season.

"We believe it is not the three-man tackle that is of concern but the dangerous lifting tackle where a player goes beyond the horizontal," Mr Greenberg said.

"So that's where the focus will be for the Match Review Committee.

"We've given the committee a clear definition of what we believe is dangerous and we want them to police it ruthlessly."

 

[Raysie]

Hope I don't hurt anyone's feelings here, but geez Todd Greenberg has been quite re-active in decisions since becoming NRL Head of Football.

 

[Wearnze]

I think the NRL are being a little bit too reactive. I understand that what happened to Alex McKinnon was terrible but accidents happen and the NRL needs to not change the whole game over 1 tackle. It will make the game more boring.

It will also increase the likelihood that a game will be decided on a questionable penalty. It will be very hard to referee.

 

[Stoofy]

No shoulder charges, no lifting in tackles, etc.

I do understand that player safety is paramount by within 10 years NRL will be become touch footy.

 

[S4Sonny]

They'll ban the players from the game soon, the NRL will run all the game results from a simulation using Rugby League Live 2

 

[B-Train]

F**k I hate this sport sometimes. There's never been a sport that changes it's rules and interpretations more frequently and more unnecessarily.

It's not a can of worms they open, it's a bunch of compost worm farms.

 

[Mr Beast]

No shoulder charges, no lifting in tackles, etc.

I do understand that player safety is paramount by within 10 years NRL will be become touch footy.

Or Oztag

Imagine SOO - Oztag

Lol

 

[Ndawai]

This rule is only beneficial for 1 on 1 tackles where the player has control of the situation.
But most lifting tackles are by more that 1 player, How are you suppose to know that the other player who has gone low to tackle will eventually lift the opposition player sometimes unintentionally and cause the lift with your assistance?

Knee jerk reaction at best.

 

[silva]

Head or neck below the hips is fair enough - dangerous and should be taken a hard line on. Nothing tough about sphere tackles and I got no problem with them being outlawed

 

[The 2nd Spitter]

Hope I don't hurt anyone's feelings here, but geez Todd Greenberg has been quite re-active in decisions since becoming NRL Head of Football.

Because, you know, he doesn't want the NRL to on the wrong end of a large lawsuit..

No shoulder charges, no lifting in tackles, etc.

I do understand that player safety is paramount by within 10 years NRL will be become touch footy.

What possible benefit do you see in lifting tackles? Seriously.

 

[Shanked]

might lead to people actually tackling a player instead of just holding the guy up

 

[blueyedsamurai]

So does any other sport change the rules during the season? they banned the shoulder charge halfway through the season as well.

 

[The 2nd Spitter]

The shoulder charge was outlawed January 2013.

 

[Stoofy]

Because, you know, he doesn't want the NRL to on the wrong end of a large lawsuit..



What possible benefit do you see in lifting tackles? Seriously.

Lifting a bloke & slamming him on his back is a great tackle. It lifts the game & the crowd love it.

Stuff like this & shoulder charges when done correctly were once the centerpiece of the game but now are all outlawed.

What percentage of these tackles cause unnecessary injuries?

Do you seriously agree with the changes?

The game is being killed off slowly.

 

[Stoofy]

might lead to people actually tackling a player instead of just holding the guy up

That will only happen if a around the legs tackle gets rewarded. Something like giving the tackler extra time to mark up.

Currently a quick play of the ball will get a penalty for the attacker.

 

[The 2nd Spitter]

Lifting a bloke & slamming him on his back is a great tackle. It lifts the game & the crowd love it.

Stuff like this & shoulder charges were the centerpiece of the game but now are all outlawed.

Do you seriously agree with the changes?

Yes. I don't get off seeing guys in their early twenties becoming quadriplegics.

 

[Psycho Doggie]

Proof that whoever wrote the headline didn't read the article. Halfway down the report says:

"It is important to stress that the rules have not changed… rather the way in which they are to be applied has been re-emphasised with the Match Review Committee."

The article is correct, the headline is bogus. This rule has been in existence for a while. The lifting tackle has been banned for yonks. I remember a similar crack down on its interpretation about 10 years ago. This was always going to happen, it isn't the beginning of the end for tough footy, we aren't going to end up playing tiddlywinks because of this. Some people need to look up definition of the slippery slope fallacy...

 

[Stoofy]

Yes. I don't get off seeing guys in their early twenties becoming quadriplegics.

I agree spear tackles should be outlawed but with the Alex Mckinnon case, it was a terrible accident.

Maybe they should consider:

- Outlaw 3 man tackles
- All players to wear a neck brace to avoid accidents like this.

With what Brett Tate wears is that just something that actually helps or more of a security blanket for him?

 

[Bob dog]

Too late, the comp has started and they shouldn't change the rules, leg lifting is part of the game.

 

[The 2nd Spitter]

I agree spear tackles should be outlawed but with the Alex Mckinnon case, it was a terrible accident.

Bro, if you seriously can't see the connection between this 'terrible accident' and lifting tackles, i will be seriously concerned.