Just reading the beeb and there's a story about Alex Walmsley's knee operation

but this the image that accompanies the story

When was the last time a ball carrier was penalised for high contact? I fully understand the argument that a player who slips and is caught high is still a penalty etc, so why does it not work both ways. surely all players have a duty of care to each other?

Its the same way a ball carrier can lead with a shoulder but not the tackler.

This isn't a whinge about the final by the way, just the image made me think that if this was a tackler on ball carrier we'd be putting up the gallows now

you can hand off to the face in rugby

You can, but that's not a hand, its a forearm

maybe but is that the initial contact or has the hand has slipped off the face?

Initial contact from Hastings on Fages was with the shoulder but was still a penalty

true but shouldnt have been

Hand off to the face, slipped up the arm by the point of the picture. Happens all the time, play on.

That's not what I'm asking, the photo is irrelevant really, its the disparity between the roles attacker and defender. If a tackle starts on the shoulder and ends up with contact to the head its a penalty, but a ball carrier can legally make contact with the defenders head, and we play on.

Well yeah but what's the alternative? The attacker needs to be able to get his bumpers up and fend in order to protect himself. Getting penalised in possession is also a big game changer.

Leading with the forearm or elbow in possession is still a penalty. McShane got three matches for it last year after he did it to Myler.

Not with a forearm you can't,ask Kelvin Skerrett

Yeah McShane the GRUB

Can’t tell what’s gone on from that photo but a couple of Catalans players (Casty and Kasiano) should’ve been warned about leading with their forearms/elbows after that Warrington play off game.

Don't understand how contact with the head is fine when you have the ball but unacceptable when you don't.

Not complaining about the Grand Final or the picture in question (hastings tackle on fages was fine though

) just think that's a reasonable inconsistency to point out

If you lead with the forearm or elbow, dependant on where the contact is it’s a straight red. That to me looks like a fend off where Bullock has moved to avoid and ended up hitting the forearm. Walmsley doesn’t do anything wrong there, play on.

I get what you’re saying but we’re never going to eradicate contact with the head. Removing the fend off removes the offensive players opportunity to do exactly that, fend off defenders to offload or find a gap to squeeze through. Not all props do that, the likes of Flower/Clubb are essentially bartering rams with minimal offloads who don’t need to fend off.

show me the clip of the above picture instead of a still taken and I may change my mind

and make minimal yards also, maybe they should fend

Non issue, hand off to the face is totally normal and happens in every game. Forearm/elbow is different; Liam Watts got sent off for doing that against Mickey Mac a few years back.

Why would i have that evidence,maybe if you watched the game back again you might see it

I think the OP makes a valid point, but the photo is not the best illustration of it. I've long complained that the ball-carrier is given the benefit of the doubt far too much; elbows and forearms to the face are not uncommon (often with the ball-carrying arm, not the 'free' arm), moving off the mark, playing the ball any old how at any old angle, etc etc.

A fair deal for defenders!

Consider:

- the ball carrier is the one with 3 or so lumps of muscle all trying to hit him as hard as they can
- the ball carrier has the extra disadvantage of having a ball to catch, keep hold of, and possibly try to offload
- the ball carrier sometimes doesn't get chance to brace until the last second, as he can't necessarily track where all 13 defenders are whilst trying to catch a ball. The defenders always know where the ball carrier is so have more time to get their contact right.
- defenders make contact with the head in many tackles, not all of them are penalised (and rightly so) if the contact is incidental and not too big of an impact
- a penalty against the defence is a lot bigger than a penalty against the attack

I think it's absolutely right that we afford the ball carrier more protection. If we started making them run with their arms by their sides they would get mullered.

I think Woolf contributed to the penalty decision. This is exactly why he made the public statement regarding high tackles after the last game between us. It’s all mind games with referees

Nobody is saying that. All the things I described above happen, and often. They are contraventions of the laws of the game, and should be penalised.

I think there has to be a differentiation between a ball carrier 'getting his bumpers up' to protect himself and what we deem to be a penalty (or more!) for leading with the forearm or elbow. The former happens every game and is bound to lead to some element of contact with the head of the defender on occasion. Just like plenty of legitimate tackles involve a degree of contact with the head but are left alone. The game is played in shades of grey, not black and white. As long as we're getting the stand-outs (ie that McShane one last year) then it's alright. If you go the other way you either get a ton of penalties or the ball carriers start surrendering to avoid getting smashed into next week.

Some of the penalties now being given for a high tackle are anything but a high tackle!

turning into rugby union