Zero tolerance on high tackles is a failure

[ronk]

Policy has already failed and has worse if anything based on what I've seen.

[Logorrhea]

Disagree. I think any policy that penalises any questionably high hits is a positive.

[Oldschool]

I'm in the middle.
I think it has improved things alright but either not enough or there's been a bit of slippage.
Based on nothing but intuition, it would not surprise me in the slightest if NZ had a word with somebody in authority and suggested some watering down.
Can you imagine if the new 'interpretation' or 'directive' had applied in the recent Irl v NZ game in the Aviva.
NZ could easily have finished the game with 13 or less (is that allowed) players on the pitch.

[Peg Leg]

Disagree. I think any policy that penalises any questionably high hits is a positive.

I think Ronks point is that the policy is correct but the initiative has failed. Refs have more influence on the outcome of a match like no other sport I can think of. With all the rule changes focused on player protection, this dynamic has come further to the fore and I think Refs, rather than creating holy hell by punishing players with the strong penalties for the rule bedding in period, are trying to avoid situations where they determine the outcome.

[ronk]

The initiative has failed. Refs were supposed to be card happy on high tackles and penalise even blatantly accidental high tackles.

This clearly isn't what's happening, it's BAU at best and probably regression.

[Ruckedtobits]

The initiative has failed. Refs were supposed to be card happy on high tackles and penalise even blatantly accidental high tackles.

This clearly isn't what's happening, it's BAU at best and probably regression.

+1.

The initiative is no longer being applied by Refs with the same rigour as at introduction. The reality is that Refs or the Citing Commissioners need only have applied the standard rigorousless for one full season and Coaches, penalised on the pitch and by disciplinary hearings, would have ensured its enforcement among players, in exactly the way rucking of players has disappeared.

Highish tackles and neck rolls occured with increasing frequency over past two weekends and the top officials ignored them. Likewise late hits were ignored whilst Yellows were given for marginal knock-ons whilst making tackles on last man - Fr v Wales and Hurricanes v Highlanders (I think).

World Rugby may be busy but this is a real health of players issue which can be policed, unlike concussion, and WR have got to push harder for eradication of every high tackle and neck-roll.

[kermischocolate]

Disagree. I think any policy that penalises any questionably high hits is a positive.

The policy is fine. The lack of application after the first week is the problem.

[fourthirtythree]

Disagree. I think any policy that penalises any questionably high hits is a positive.

The policy is fine. The lack of application after the first week is the problem.

Meaningless without being used, as pointed out above all they need to do is apply it rigidly for a season and coaching will filter down. As it is nobody has to change their behaviour.

[Logorrhea]

Disagree. I think any policy that penalises any questionably high hits is a positive.

The policy is fine. The lack of application after the first week is the problem.

Cant argue with that. However I think its too early to call it a failure and too early to give up on it.

[kermischocolate]

Disagree. I think any policy that penalises any questionably high hits is a positive.

The policy is fine. The lack of application after the first week is the problem.

Cant argue with that. However I think its too early to call it a failure and too early to give up on it.

This is true.

But like so many things if the laws of the game were consistently applied in the first place there would be no need for all these directives.

E.g. Scrums. Every front row tries to cheat their way to penalties because they know there is very little chance they will actually have to hook for the ball. Straight put in equals competition for the ball equals less shenanigans equals better game to watch.
No need for new scrum laws just start at the beginning and apply the current ones!

[Logorrhea]

Cooper got a straight red over the weekend.
https://youtu.be/PBmlC5qZv6o?t=1m
As the ref says "the directive is clear, direct contact to the head with force, red card"

There are grey areas where the play is ducking into a tackle, diving for the try line or falling into tackles etc but in general I think its been a massive improvement.

[simonokeeffe]

Cooper got a straight red over the weekend.
https://youtu.be/PBmlC5qZv6o?t=1m
As the ref says "the directive is clear, direct contact to the head with force, red card"

There are grey areas where the play is ducking into a tackle, diving for the try line or falling into tackles etc but in general I think its been a massive improvement.

Cooper there makes no effort to lower his tackle and in terms of rugby collisions he cant say he thought the guy was going to walk upright over the line

simultaneous tip tackle in background too!

[ronk]

Good to see.