I think we should ban tackling all together, that's the only way we'll completely eliminate the chance of players getting injured.

Well, they changed the rule slightly, after ratchford was took out in the grandfinal '13, but they've never really enforced it unless someone has been ridiculously blatant(like rangi was). It really does seem like they're waiting and leaving it until their hand is forced.

This crap about its ok as long as its from behind because the knees bend that way, its excusing foul play, seeing someone collapse backwards with two or three players on top of them, unable to break their own fall and with someone underneath them is just as unpleasant and painful to watch as someone coming in third man putting the shoulder to the knee join from the side, or snapping the pole as i believe it's known around Orrell way.

It's a house tactic no matter what. And it wants eradicating from the game.

Spot on

I don't see anyone calling for the complete elimination of any chance of injury; injuries are part and parcel of a fast contact sport and RL players accept and deal with that, as do many other sportsmen and women.

What I'm advocating is that the governing body deal with the grubby, thugby league mentality that has spread outwards from Wigan and been allowed to infect the sport. The ruck is a total free for all and attacking players are not being safeguarded by the officials; it's a matter of time before there's a catastrophic injury as a result of gang-tackling, and that will have been entirely preventable.

If the RFL need a reminder as to why they should deal with it, they need only look at Alex McKinnon. It's clear that so long as they are allowed, certain coaches will continue to instil a house, win at all costs mentality in their players - so stop allowing them, and balls to the ensuing whining and moaning when people are penalised; even Shaun Wane can work out that if those tactics are not creating an advantage, it's time to change them.

OTT hysteria for me. The game is infinitley cleaner than it was. I doubt even Wane tells his players to literally 'go out & break his f-cking jaw', which I heard many times as a player. There are occasional bad tackles, as you say spread from Wigan. But these are picked up by the review panel.

But it's not though. Wigan, under Maguire and since HAVE been coaching players to attack the legs of players held in the tackle. There have been mass brawls in Wigan academy games over it, where the opposition has taken exception to it and kicked off. 'Snapping the pole', 'car crash', the speech Wane did on Sky that ultimately showed why Wigan lost the plot last season.

This isn't a purely Wigan issue, it's a tactic other clubs have been desperate enough to join in with. However you word the ruling, it's a very simple rule change that would have little to no impact on the game, but would enhance the safety of players.

I'm surprised you've managed to infer hysteria from anything I've said - I'm not generally a hysterical person.

Injury to players is one part of this - I also take exception to the ugly spectacle the game has become since the introduction of the 'hunt in packs' gang tackle, and the strategy of holding the tackled player up, so your fellow defenders can join in late and chop him recklessly to the ground, then clamber all over each other in the ensuing melee, to ensure a slow ptb and a set defensive line. It's against the spirit of the game in my view, and would be relatively easy to sort out.

You said;





In my view this is way, way OTT. The game is quicker than it has ever been. Trying to slow the PTB is part of the game, which is a completely different thing to the very occasional attempt to deliberately injure someone. I am sure you are not an hysterical person, but your comments are bordering on the dictionary definition.

What's not? I have already agreed it started & spread from Wigan. There is no need to change the law; it just needs applying to breaches of it. The instances of it occurring are, thankfully, a rarity.

I don't think they are completely different; the desperate need to 'control the ruck,' and the tactics developed to do so, have created the conditions in which an attacking player is rag-dolled by a gang of defenders, starting with holding him up so that others can attack his lower body, and ending in an ugly wrestle with the aim of leaving him on his back, with his head facing his own sticks. I've watched wrestle coaches teach players from U8 right through to SL level how to do that; and because it wasn't dealt with by officials from the outset, coaches have continued to employ those tactics and players are getting better and better at it.



No they're not. I'm happy to discuss the point, but not if you're going to be silly.

One for all the "Wigan Haters" www.therfl.co.uk/the-rfl/disciplinary/item?6413

One for all the "Wigan Haters" www.therfl.co.uk/the-rfl/disciplinary/item?6413

Quote ="Wigan Peer"One for all the "Wigan Haters" www.therfl.co.uk/the-rfl/disciplinary/item?6413'" I wouldn't say it's for all the Wigan haters. I have never said the Powell tackle is against the rules currently, it isn't. But it should be. There is no need to slam into the legs when the upper body is held, no need at all. It is dangerous and unnecessary, so I'm proposing the rules should be changed to remove it. Despite the legality of the callenge, Powell still has a duty of care towards his fellow professionals and is clearly just having a cheap shot at a player in a vulnerable position. So he's still a grub

Quote ="Wigan Peer"One for all the "Wigan Haters" www.therfl.co.uk/the-rfl/disciplinary/item?6413'" I wouldn't say it's for all the Wigan haters. I have never said the Powell tackle is against the rules currently, it isn't. But it should be. There is no need to slam into the legs when the upper body is held, no need at all. It is dangerous and unnecessary, so I'm proposing the rules should be changed to remove it. Despite the legality of the callenge, Powell still has a duty of care towards his fellow professionals and is clearly just having a cheap shot at a player in a vulnerable position. So he's still a grub

I noticed in the Wakey v Leigh game a few dodgy/scumbag hits to the back of a player already on his way down to the ground.

Another potentially very dangerous tactic designed to injure that should be eliminated from the game.

Can you state exactly what you are proposing, given that there already is a law against [imakes dangerous contact (either direct or indirect) with the supporting leg or legs [/i? If the initial upright tackle is to prevent offload of the ball how do you propose tacklers bring the player to the ground without going round the legs? Hypnosis, asking politely?

It revolves around force applied.

Third man into tackles has occurred as long as the game has been played however, the difference that Maguire brought over was the level of force. In the past, you'd regularly see a third tackler simply wrap his arms around a held player's ankles and he'd come down. Today, it's third tacklers literally running and throwing themselves at the legs of upright, held players. Since a player can be brought down in this scenario with minimal force, as RL history shows us perfectly, why do we need to pursue putting such force in ? Because it's a means of enforcing your dominance, hurting people and maybe even injuring people. 'Snapping the pole', 'make ing mayhem' etc etc are comments attributed to one club, who initially sought to put such force into these tackles for no other reason of being animals. Since, many others are doing it. The writing was on the wall years ago when Sam Tomkins put in one of the most awful collisions I've ever seen on a held and standing Keiron Cunningham under the posts at KR. That shot directly to the side of the knee could have easily seen one of the game's legends have his career finished in an instant. The Wigan club and players didn't give a damn. Do it anyway. That's because they're a scumbag organisation from top to bottom.

The law should be amended to emphasise force. Any level of force from a third man hitting the legs is unacceptably dangerous and wholly unnecessary. Anybody suggesting otherwise are talking nonsense.

It is impossible to leg tackle without applying some force with the shoulder/chest to the leg. I effected that tackle hundreds of times. I would like to to think every time, if possible, it would be to the thigh, with the arms going lower to lift the player, as it easier not to have to bend your back as much. Some need to think of the practicalities of what they are saying before getting off on one. I am not against any sensible rule change to stamp the Wigan curse out, but the rule is already in place. Someone suggest better wording.

And I bet most of the times you affected that kind of tackle the player was still moving. As SLS said its about the force applied. If a player is stationary or only moving slowly, which is likely if he's held upright by one or two defenders, then there's no need for anything other than minimal force. Enough to wrap the arms around the legs and allow the player to be tipped over by the other defenders that have him held upright.

The danger comes from players running and then diving at the stationary (or very slow moving) legs of a held upright player. Even those that hit on the thigh are running very close to causing serious injury as it only needs a slight mistake to not hit the thigh and to hit the knee. And plenty of players are aiming far too low ie only just (by centimetres) above the knee.

For me it's a part of the game that is unnecessary and can be stamped out without any negative impact on the sport whatsoever.

I've not really thought about that, but you are probably right. I played at a time & standard pre-wrestling & where getting someone to the ground was what tackling was about.


The only way to stamp it out is to prohibit leg tackling when someone is stationary (difficult to know when that exactly is - the player can still have his legs pumping, if not it should be called held anyway) or the tackler must be stationary when efecting a leg tackle on a held player.

Surely the existing rules should cover all this? If a player is held stationary the ref must call held. The player then plays the ball.

It’s up to refs to call held as soon as the player is stationary. They can penalise anyone who comes in around the legs after their call.

Word on the street is that you tag on the knee. Animal.

The pie-eaters' form on this issue goes a LONG way back. I draw the jury's attention to Sam Tomkins' attack to Keiron Cunningham's not just standing - but INJURED - leg several years ago.

One of the most despicable pieces of underhanded play I've seen on a rugby pitch.

Sam Powell looks as though he,s been given the responsibility of doing this type of work, he's just not very good at it at the moment and gets let off a disciplinary charge.

ban the 3rd man from 'charging' in. if a 3rd joins an almost stationary tackle in progress then they must not engage with the tackle at anything over walking speed. i.e sprint up few steps before stop grab hold.

Remember when James Graham did that to Ryan Bailey and the Saints fans were creaming themselves over it? Yeah, me too.

Big girl's blouse.