Tackle height law change confirmed

[Griff]

44 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

OK leave it at that.

For what it's worth, Schoey agrees with you.

[graveyard johnny]

we wont know the real impact of the new rules until the new season is well under way - if the game turns in to a bigger stop start penalty fest than it has already become lately then naturally the public will just switch off and people wont pay good money to go to games - tall players like Liam Watts may as well pack in now as getting so low down on the smaller players "every time" will prove impossible -the taller kids in the youth teams wont want to play either - does the new rule include collar grabbing and shoulder grabbing from behind? like "blocker" Roach said in his commentary in an NRL game last season after another marginal farcical decision -"do we need to start putting bibs on the players?"

[Impartial Observer]

10 minutes ago, graveyard johnny said:

we wont know the real impact of the new rules until the new season is well under way - if the game turns in to a bigger stop start penalty fest than it has already become lately then naturally the public will just switch off and people wont pay good money to go to games - tall players like Liam Watts may as well pack in now as getting so low down on the smaller players "every time" will prove impossible -the taller kids in the youth teams wont want to play either - does the new rule include collar grabbing and shoulder grabbing from behind? like "blocker" Roach said in his commentary in an NRL game last season after another marginal farcical decision -"do we need to start putting bibs on the players?"

Maybe take until 2025 as that is when the tackle height rule comes into the pro game

[The Blues Ox]

16 hours ago, Impartial Observer said:

Maybe take until 2025 as that is when the tackle height rule comes into the pro game

Which is ridiculous that we could be forced to have a potentially mess of a season in the community game only for the rules to be interpreted slightly different when they are brought in throughout the rest of the game.

[gingerjon]

27 minutes ago, The Blues Ox said:

Which is ridiculous that we could be forced to have a potentially mess of a season in the community game only for the rules to be interpreted slightly different when they are brought in throughout the rest of the game.

You test new rules in lower tiers of the game.

That's just life.

[Impartial Observer]

1 hour ago, The Blues Ox said:

Which is ridiculous that we could be forced to have a potentially mess of a season in the community game only for the rules to be interpreted slightly different when they are brought in throughout the rest of the game.

If rules are interpreted then they will always be different as one persons interpretation will be different to someone else

[The Blues Ox]

10 hours ago, gingerjon said:

You test new rules in lower tiers of the game.

That's just life.

They already did that though so there must be some doubts. They were confident enough in the data to release it to the public but not confident enough that the pros will be able to adapt to it. Its a strange one really as you would think the best of the best would be able to adapt to it pretty well where as the community game will not go anywhere near as smoothly as they would like. Ive spoke to a couple of local refs and they are dreading it, the amount of abuse they get already is ridiculous but you have people on the sideline who already don't understand the rules and it could be chaos. I presume they will plan to send an official round each club to talk over things with club officials and coaches just to make the transition go better but I am not holding my breath.

[Harry Stottle]

21 hours ago, gingerjon said:

You test new rules in lower tiers of the game.

That's just life.

Please excuse my ignorance, but I would have thought in SL's case that a collection of full time pro's at the club training for maybe 5 days a week and the coach being able to afford more time to the adjustments as opposed to amatuer lads who would be doing in all probability 85% less training than their professional counterparts that the pro's would be more adaptable to the new rulings.

Do you think if it does not go well at amateur level, those at the RFL will abandon the new rules after all the claims they have made why it is nessacary to bring them in, they have made their statements now they will be obliged to follow them through even if the "amatuer trial" proves to be disastrous.

I get the feeling this is not going to end very well.

Edited December 21, 2023 by Harry Stottle

[gingerjon]

26 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

 

I get the feeling this is not going to end very well.

Unlike you Harry.

Testing for unintended consequences and whether punishments in game are proportional or damaging. This is what they will hopefully be testing and why you run it in the lower tiers first.

[iffleyox]

38 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

Please excuse my ignorance, but I would have thought in SL's case that a collection of full time pro's at the club training for maybe 5 days a week and the coach being able to afford more time to the adjustments as opposed to amatuer lads who would be doing in all probability 85% less training than their professional counterparts that the pro's would be more adaptable to the new rulings.

Do you think if it does not go well at amateur level, those at the RFL will abandon the new rules after all the claims they have made why it is nessacary to bring them in, they have made their statements now they will be obliged to follow them through even if the "amatuer trial" proves to be disastrous.

I get the feeling this is not going to end very well.

I don’t think you’re thinking about this conspiratorially enough. A look over the fence at the other code might help (for once) here.

English RU is currently in the first season of the game from tier three down having different tackling rules from tiers 1-2.

why? Because clubs in the top tier play clubs from other countries, and supply the internationals, and clubs in level 2 provide game time for level 1 players.

the theory in RU is that they can’t change the fully pro game until everyone in the world does it, and so they need levels 3 down to provide a weight of evidence which makes the case.

RFL is doing it slightly differently, because they are moving the top tier over unilaterally, but again it’s all about building a case for bouncing people into it who don’t want to do it. 
 

in a year’s time, the hope will be that the RFL is saying something like ‘because of this, xyz has happened. Why stand in the way of safety and who are you to deny the facts?’

so it’s absolutely not a direct comparison between the two codes, but I’d argue the RFL and RFU (for different audiences) are essentially on manoeuvres here and it’s all about message management.

Edited December 21, 2023 by iffleyox

[Harry Stottle]

15 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

Unlike you Harry.

Testing for unintended consequences and whether punishments in game are proportional or damaging. This is what they will hopefully be testing and why you run it in the lower tiers first.

If you are not trained properly and under prepared how can you make comparisons with the full time professional set up?

I understand from your geographical position you will not easily be able to see for yourself with any kind of regularity to make a judgement on how it is going in the amatuer game, I am very curious and will give an honest opinion.

As I asked but you declined to answer if it does not prove to be successful 'in the lower tiers' what then?

[gingerjon]

11 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

if it does not prove to be successful 'in the lower tiers' what then?

Then I would expect changes to be made.

Honestly, this isn't particularly difficult to understand.

[Harry Stottle]

26 minutes ago, iffleyox said:

in a year’s time, the hope will be that the RFL is saying something like ‘because of this, xyz has happened. Why stand in the way of safety and who are you to deny the facts?’

Same question to you as to the Ginger one Foxy, what if it proves to be an unsuccessful exercise in the amatuer game, what then?

You mention the top as being internationals, I strongly doubt that the Southern Hemisphere will follow suit and if they don't does the RFL reverse the rulings for Internationals or abandon them completely?

Quite honestly I am not very concerned what they do in t'other game I have no time for it.

[Harry Stottle]

8 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

Then I would expect changes to be made.

Honestly, this isn't particularly difficult to understand.

But that is the point, will there be a fair comparison to be made on how it will go with amateurs and how full time pro's adapt, surely that is not to difficult for you to answer, as I intimated the RFL has at length stated why they have made these changes I still think they will plough ahead even if it does fail at amateur level without any changes, as you would expect.

[gingerjon]

4 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

But that is the point, will there be a fair comparison to be made on how it will go with amateurs and how full time pro's adapt, surely that is not to difficult for you to answer, as I intimated the RFL has at length stated why they have made these changes I still think they will plough ahead even if it does fail at amateur level without any changes, as you would expect.

The answer is: yes, it is a fair comparison. The fuller answer is: yes, it really is a fair comparison.

[iffleyox]

35 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

Same question to you as to the Ginger one Foxy, what if it proves to be an unsuccessful exercise in the amatuer game, what then?

You mention the top as being internationals, I strongly doubt that the Southern Hemisphere will follow suit and if they don't does the RFL reverse the rulings for Internationals or abandon them completely?

Quite honestly I am not very concerned what they do in t'other game I have no time for it.

And I’ve said nothing about what I think - all I’ve said is what I think the RFL thinks.

FWIW I don’t think your first question will arise (or be allowed to). But if it did then when the facts change the rules change. Incidentally that cuts both ways…

To your final paragraph, here’s why you should be concerned what the RFU do - on this one, they are the canary in the coal mine and if you don’t think the RFL and RFU are talking to each other, and to an extent walking down the same path and tinkering each in response to the other then can I interest you in a bridge?

[iffleyox]

Shorter response is I’m just saying what I think’s happening

[The Blues Ox]

I wonder what the RFL are actually going to use to see if the experiment in the community game has been a success or not bearing in mind that most teams don't notify anyone to say if a player has a concussion.

[Griff]

8 hours ago, Harry Stottle said:

But that is the point, will there be a fair comparison to be made on how it will go with amateurs and how full time pro's adapt, surely that is not to difficult for you to answer, as I intimated the RFL has at length stated why they have made these changes I still think they will plough ahead even if it does fail at amateur level without any changes, as you would expect.

Whilst I admire your indefatigable search for knowledge, Harry, I'm not really seeing why you think any of us on this forum has an answer to your very detailed questions.

Why don't you just wait and see what happens?  Like the rest of us.  Chill.  It'll be reyt.

[JohnM]

 From a press report: The Concussion Legacy Foundation would be interested in meeting with NRL leadership and players when they visit the United States. "In the US we’ve been wrestling with the diagnosis of CTE in athletes for a decade longer than they have in Australia.The lesson that has been learned, specifically at the NFL level, is that you can be aggressive and proactive in minimising repetitive head impacts while the game continues to grow in popularity and profitability.

“It is critical to educate both the players and fans on CTE so that they support these reforms, as well as have a separate and more aggressive approach to safety for younger athletes who are not being paid and cannot consent to the risks.”

[JohnM]

On 21/12/2023 at 15:04, The Blues Ox said:

I wonder what the RFL are actually going to use to see if the experiment in the community game has been a success or not bearing in mind that most teams don't notify anyone to say if a player has a concussion.

Shame on "most teams", if true. It should be in the rules.

[The Blues Ox]

1 hour ago, JohnM said:

Shame on "most teams", if true. It should be in the rules.

I agree it should be in the rules but teams are not under any obligation to report injuries and I am not even sure if there is a portal to do so. Ive had times where a concussion in a community game has been reported to that players pro team and the pro team has totally ignored the diagnosis. Another point is that most first aiders in the community game only have basic training and it is really hard for them to correctly diagnose concussion unless it is blatently obvious. 

A lot of the above is why I keep banging on about just introducing the new rules at community level is pretty much a waste of time when it comes to assessing if there is a rise/reduction in concussions from the community game.

[Impartial Observer]

4 hours ago, The Blues Ox said:

I agree it should be in the rules but teams are not under any obligation to report injuries and I am not even sure if there is a portal to do so. Ive had times where a concussion in a community game has been reported to that players pro team and the pro team has totally ignored the diagnosis. Another point is that most first aiders in the community game only have basic training and it is really hard for them to correctly diagnose concussion unless it is blatently obvious. 

A lot of the above is why I keep banging on about just introducing the new rules at community level is pretty much a waste of time when it comes to assessing if there is a rise/reduction in concussions from the community game.

Concussion training has been madatory for all coaches, physios, 1st aiders since last season and reporting of concussions has been in the rules for a few seaons on the system that the rfl use for registrations. 

[The Blues Ox]

12 minutes ago, Impartial Observer said:

Concussion training has been madatory for all coaches, physios, 1st aiders since last season and reporting of concussions has been in the rules for a few seaons on the system that the rfl use for registrations. 

Ive seen it and done the training. Im still not qualified to diagnose a concussion just because I watched a few videos and answered a few questions.

[Impartial Observer]

3 hours ago, The Blues Ox said:

Ive seen it and done the training. Im still not qualified to diagnose a concussion just because I watched a few videos and answered a few questions.

No you wouldnt be qualfied to diagnose a concussion as a trained medical person would need to do that. The aim of the course was to try and help recognise the symptons of a possible concussion. Im amazed that you say that you have done the course and didnt know that there was a reporting mechanism for suspected concussions.