Re: Five thousand and change? : Tue Jul 27, 2021 5:46 pm
puroresu_boy wrote:
The issue is the zero tolerance on headshots is more about avoiding a lawsuit than protecting the players.
You are right sometimes there will be accidental headshots where a player had no intention to hit the head and those ones should be seen as accidents and not result in sin bins.
The ones where there is no doubt and a player is clearly trying to hurt someone should be the bin or red card depending on the severity of the shot.
Clearly the effect of of zero tolerance has seen defence become more passive. Players are worried about getting sent off or sent to the bin so the contact has changed which is worse for the game. Some argue tackle low but the game really doesn't allow just below the waist tackles as without trying to stop the ball carrier off loading we would have a game which would be so advantageous to attack that defense would become irrelevant.
As for the 6 again. Its a good rule which stops defences happy to give a way pens to either slow the game down or concede 2 points instead of a potential 6.
What it has done in the NRL is expose the sides who can't get there defensive line in shape quick enough and those who's players can't handle the speed of the game.
You are right sometimes there will be accidental headshots where a player had no intention to hit the head and those ones should be seen as accidents and not result in sin bins.
The ones where there is no doubt and a player is clearly trying to hurt someone should be the bin or red card depending on the severity of the shot.
Clearly the effect of of zero tolerance has seen defence become more passive. Players are worried about getting sent off or sent to the bin so the contact has changed which is worse for the game. Some argue tackle low but the game really doesn't allow just below the waist tackles as without trying to stop the ball carrier off loading we would have a game which would be so advantageous to attack that defense would become irrelevant.
As for the 6 again. Its a good rule which stops defences happy to give a way pens to either slow the game down or concede 2 points instead of a potential 6.
What it has done in the NRL is expose the sides who can't get there defensive line in shape quick enough and those who's players can't handle the speed of the game.
I couldn't disagree with you more, bending your back and making a waist tackle is massively more effective at stopping the opposition. You cite the offloading of the ball as to why this would lead to more advantage to attack, however I shall explain to you why you, and indeed many others are incorrect in that thinking.
Firstly, have a look at how many yards after contact most players effect, particularly forwards, if there is a waist/legs tackle in like for like scenario, would you agree or disagree that that this prevents yardage been made upfield?
Would you agree or disagree that having 3 or 4 players in a stood up tackle is a better use of resources than one or two players making a waist/legs tackle and one to help out?
How many defenders are having to make back the 10m from a 3 or 4 player stood up tackle compared to a one or two player legs tackle?
Would you accept that having 3 or 4 players in the tackle is more fatigue inducing with the reitrement of the additional tacklers back 10m than none and this in fact has a detrmental affect on the defensive line that because that 3rd and 4th tackler might not be onside can get a penalty drawn against them or they are not in a position to make a defensive move?
Would you agree or disagree that a falling player (from a leg tackle) has less control over an offload than one whom is stood up?
Which player takes longer to make a PTB a player leg tackled/dominated and on the ground, or one that is stood up in a tackle being smothered?
Would you agree or disagree that offloading out the stood up tackle is prevelent in the sport despite best attempts to smother tackle?
if you've watched the game for any period of time you'll notice how many easy yards players make when the up top tackle is performed (hence the 3rd or 4th man in and indeed this increases chances of the cannonball tackle), players get handed off/fended far more easily as well.
Falling players from a legs tackle have far less control over an offload so are less likely to do it than if they are stood up. A legs tackle gives you more defenders in the line than an up top tackle with 3 or 4 players, this means if there is a quick PTB you've more chance of being an effective defensive line compared to a line missing up to 4 players (incl two at the PTB). Fewer committed tacklers means less fatigue overall as it's a better and quicker way to halt an attacker and less time spent retreating 10m.
Dominant leg tackles not only gee up your team mates but they can knock the stuffing out of the opposition, it hurts more to be knocked onto your back or fall onto your shoulder/body as an attacker than it does just being held up, it fatigues you more as well.
If players started bending their backs again, not only does this reduce chances of head/neck injuries, it's a more effective way of defending. problem is coaches are too indoctrinated itno thinking one way and can't accept that they might be wrong because they're either scared of failure or simply acknowledge that most their players can't tackle for @@@t
The likes of Houghton, Tommy Leuluai and some others are great exponents of the one on one tackle and often dominate much bigger players, this not only means their defensive line is fully set but the attacker made no more yards after contact and more often than not did not offload the ball.
Go back and watch games over the last 20 years and more, look at what happens after a good legs/waist tackle, where defenders are, how much yards after contact was made, how often offloads occured, how long it took for the attcker to PTB.
Compare that to the up top grab tackle and see how ineffiecient it is and how it leads to more head shots occuring and indeed neck tackles.
