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="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="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.