Good lord, Myler actually kept jumping into the Bradford player to try and get them to complete the tackle but never thought once of getting to his feet. Then Alibert, standing over Myler tells him to play on several times. only a nugget then completing the tackle gives Myler his get out of jail free card.

Clearly it should not have been an issue if the knock on prior to it had been given but it was over several seconds of Myler attempting to force a tackle rather than getting up. In my mind that is a voluntary tackle, regardless if he gets up and plays the ball or not.

A bit late aren't you

Jefferies was worse in the second half. Never seen a voluntary tackle given

Probably should have been under the rules but none get given these days.

Was there some halcyon era when voluntary tackle penalties were commonplace?

I think the last time this happened a ref commented they have to play the ball for it to be a voluntary tackle which makes sense

Jeffries did the same thing. Even if it's not penalised, it looks a bit pathetic - why don't they just get up and run?

In Mylers case it was obviously because he was right next to the touch line...if he would have just stood up he would more than likely have been bundled into touch.

I think this type of thing snuck into the game and became a surrender tackle. Whilst the rules do say the player must play the ball for it to be a voluntary tackle it does look ridiculous that a player should do this. I remember the Chris Joynt/Paul Deacon incident at the end of the Grand Final and the furore it caused at the time. This sort of incident should be looked at and should be penalised as it is clearly not in the best interests of the sport to have such a negative tactic.

He could have just lunged forward without risking going into touch; similarly, Jeffries nutmegging a player with his own body looked like something out of the WWF - as I said, a bit pathetic. If nothing else, it's a tactic that invites the type of challenge that Bridge is being villified for on another thread.

Very true, if a player flops with force on such a player they are immediately the miscreant. This does not excuse Bridge btw. If a defender places hands on the player he cannot control the tackle completion and this is unfair as well. There is no easy ground on this but to get rid of it as a tactic. Penalise the buggers and they won't stay on the ground.

I don't have a problem with players going down to protect the ball and field position, especially near their own goal line. It has to be with imminent contact where it's the best thing to do for getting the ball upfield and keeping it there though. It's a positive move at that point. If they go down too soon it's negative play and ought to be penalised. Twice tonight it happened before the defender got there and the defender stood there over the player on the ground. Neither seemed like it was in the spirit of the game and we should be penalising it when it's that blatant.

Jeffries gets comedy points for scrambling between the Warrington player's legs though.

I've heard/read that somewhere as well I think. If they choose to lie down then it's classed as surrendering the tackle and the defence get a few more seconds to hold down than normal to counteract it.

Hmm. Not sure, Jeffries was a clear example of a voluntary tackle as well, but the Myler one was comical.

I think I've seen one given once, but it was given incorrectly - the ref waited for the player to get up and play the ball before he blew the whistle

Not according to the laws of the game:

The instructions given to refs by Cummings might say that but the official laws of the game as downloadable and readable on the rfl website do not say that.

I'd [ilove[/i the RFL to do a fans forum with at least Cummings (preferably some senior refs, too) in attendance. It would be a hoot.

you see it in the NRL alot i watched the opening game and the dragons fullback dove over the line and lay on the floor waiting to be tackled and their commentaters were looking at it being a great bit of skill to get out of the in goal area. its a fine line but do u really want a penalty everytime someone dives out of the in goal area that would just drain time and slow our game down more.

where would you draw the line? Diving out of the in goal area is that not a version of the voluntary tackle? The Myler should have been a penalty, Terry Albert told him a few times. The Jefferies one was class quick thinking from him imo to nutmeg the Wolves player definately the play of season.

I have seen one given in Wakefields favour - I can't recall who it was against but it was obvious - ref may have been Ganson.

Saw one against Wakey a few years ago when Luke George was running the ball out of defence. His hamstring went, and he went down like he'd been shot - but the ref called voluntary tackle!

Haven't read the thread and I haven't seen this weeks games, but I can't remember the last time I seen a voluntary tackle given, it's like it doesn't exist anymore.

Isn't it technically only a voluntary tackle if the player tackles himself then gets up to play the ball without the ref having called held?

Not according to the rules. At least not the way I'm reading them ... The pre-requisites are that the player goes to ground to stop play unnecessarily allowing himself to be tackled.

To me, I read that as the player simply falling to the floor and waiting for a defender to complete the tackle, I don't read it as being necessary for the tackle to actually be completed. If the powers that be do feel it can only be deemed voluntary if the tackle is completed (or the ball carrier plays the ball before the tackle being completed), then maybe they ought to re-word that section of the law book.

I've put in bold the section that makes me think the tackle doesn't need to be effected for a penalty to be given

I take that point - maybe this bit is that causes the ambiguity:

"if he has time to regain his feet and continue play."

How does the ref judge if the player has time to do the above?

It needs to be clarified either way.

Yeah, it can also be difficult I suppose to understand why the player's lying prone and making no attempt to move - in some cases the player could legitimately be hurt - maybe if we found the refs cracking down on VT's we could suddenly start seeing a lot of play acting with fullbacks across the league suddenly being very injury prone when collecting balls close to their own line.