Ban the Choke Tackle - Yes or No

First topic message reminder :

Shaun Edwards says the choke tackle should be banned.. Do you agree ?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-union/31593740

Feel free to add your thoughts.

Personally I agree, it adds nothing to the game and its only a matter of time before someone gets hurt through this method of tackling.

My logic:

the-goon wrote:Has anyone read this article from the BBC yet. They have absolutely no idea what they are talking about! Here are some quotes:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-union/31638558

"A choke tackle is when a defending player holds an attacker off the ground by wrapping an arm around his neck and shoulders"

The goal is to create a maul by keeping the ballcarrier on his feet and stopping him from releasing it to a teamate, then to either rip the ball or make it unplayable. No need for grabbing players by the neck!

"In a choke tackle the attacker is wrapped so tightly that they seem to be being choked by the defender"

Hyperbole!

The BBC do not have a clue, but what else is new.

Exactly, the article demonstrates a lack of understanding of the choke tackle but it's the usual lazy journalism from the BBC whom we fund with an illegal taxation

Anyway, for me , if executed correctly the choke tackle is much less dangerous than the judo techniques employed in removing players from rucks as previously mentioned by Munchkin. It seems to take someone to be badly injured before the suits take any preventative action.
The O'Connor incident was an unfortunate accident and resulted from a very tall O'Connor trying to hold Bennett upright while Bennett himself and his teammates are trying to get him to ground. Of all the choke tackles that have been effected it's the first and only time (I think or had there been others?) anyone has been adversely affected as the direct result of the choke tackle.
It seems that big hits etc are glorified by the media. Adverts for rugby competitions are usually made up of slow motion replays of the biggest hits and the like. We all cheer when our defender makes a thumping tackle on an attacking player. Rugby is a very physical game, it's part of it's very own nature but these big hits we all love are much more dangerous than any choke tackle so shall we hear Edwards appealing for a ban on hard tackling too?

Maybe we should ban the chop tackle then too Mr Edwards? After all it has the potential for someone to get kicked in the head.
I don't like the name choke tackle really we should try and call it something else, it should simply be reffed properly and then there is no problem, if the arms go to the neck then it's a high tackle and it's a pen or whatever else you want to add, simple as that.
Edwards just wants it banned because A. the Welsh running upright style makes them big targets for it and B. he can't teach his side to do it properly and that would just be terrible for the best defence coach in the world

I'm not opposed to tackling high and holding the ball up, that's just good play. However, the part of the 'choke tackle' that I have a problem with is when the ball goes to ground, the players on the defending side seem to be allowed to lie all over it. Why? If you are on the ground you should have to get out of the way. If you can hold the man up, fair enough. If you're just flopping on top of a collapsed mall you should be penalised. If a maul goes to ground it shouldn't mean it's automatically a scrum.

sittingringside wrote:I'm not opposed to tackling high and holding the ball up, that's just good play. However, the part of the 'choke tackle' that I have a problem with is when the ball goes to ground, the players on the defending side seem to be allowed to lie all over it. Why? If you are on the ground you should have to get out of the way. If you can hold the man up, fair enough. If you're just flopping on top of a collapsed mall you should be penalised. If a maul goes to ground it shouldn't mean it's automatically a scrum.

That's the law right now,if it's a maul the defending team does not have to release,if the defender gets his arm to the ground it becomes a ruck and the defenders have to release but until then it's a maul so if a player is flat on his back clutching the ball it's still a maul and the defenders don't have to release.

While a lot of these measures seem like a good idea to make the choke tackle less effective you have to think of how they'll affect standard mauls as well,the same laws apply to a maul instigated by the attacking team off a lineout as to the a maul instigated by a defending team attempting a choke tackle.Will the changes you propose make the maul too powerful a weapon for the attacking team,imo if you make the defenders release as soon as the maul collapses then it makes defending mauls from lineouts much tougher and that is already incredibly difficult.

Both myself and the other Irish fella I coach with actively encourage our ladies rugby team to use the choke tackle, and to be honest it works wonderfully, and no-one has been hurt or injured from it so far this season. The refs do tell us after the game that they bloody hate them and we are the only team in the league to initiate them "intentionally". It's a great tactic and punishes players who run too up-right into contact. It also drives us to really work hard at our set piece too, as there is no point in winning the put in to then loose the ball against the head in the scrum.

I can see why many would love to see this tactic go as it really does make attacking players work harder to get clean ball back to their 9, I also think a lot of people, particularly backs, are frustrated by the increased number of scrims that occur as a consequence of them. As I said this is only my opinion.

Id be tempted to get them to grab each other around the chest area too.

BelfastDickVet wrote: I also think a lot of people, particularly backs, are frustrated by the increased number of scrims that occur as a consequence of them. As I said this is only my opinion.

F**k the backs, all they do is hit rucks. Backs should be phased out gradually - starting in the Pro12 and Leinster first up.

SecretFly wrote:

BelfastDickVet wrote: I also think a lot of people, particularly backs, are frustrated by the increased number of scrims that occur as a consequence of them. As I said this is only my opinion.

F**k the backs, all they do is hit rucks.  Backs should be phased out gradually - starting in the Pro12 and Leinster first up.

Wiser words have never been spoken! But wait what would that do the return of Isa, the prodigal son?

BelfastDickVet wrote:

SecretFly wrote:

BelfastDickVet wrote: I also think a lot of people, particularly backs, are frustrated by the increased number of scrims that occur as a consequence of them. As I said this is only my opinion.

F**k the backs, all they do is hit rucks.  Backs should be phased out gradually - starting in the Pro12 and Leinster first up.

Wiser words have never been spoken! But wait what would that do the return of Isa, the prodigal son?

Oh yeah...................... forgot about that Visitation that's been rumoured.

Okay, a stay of execution on Backs for a year or so.

a few points to add

1. This choke tackling is boring, dull, negative rugby. It stops offloads which keep the game flowing. It results in scrums which results in ref penalty lottery.

2. This being said, it is not the choke tackler that is causing this. Players are not told to go out there and entertain the masses. They are told to go out there an win. The choke tackle is an effctive way of helping this cause! The person to blame for all these choke tackles is the player with ball in hand! Stop running up right, get your bod position low, protect the ball (as you were taught as a schoolboy) and this blight will leave the game again!

For reference - Watch Dan cole vs Healy. Healy stands upright to go for the choke tackle. Dan Cole runs with his body low. Dan cole smashes Healy out of the way. Play continues!

Ireland tried a few. England actually tried probably more by my reckoning.  But both sides were alive to it and used proper techniques to evade it.  So, the moral of the story is if you get captured in one it's because you haven't worked out how to defeat it. Lazy homework by your coach.

It doesn't matter if the Choke works or not though - it still remains effective because it slows the ball and stops fast offloads sometimes.  Long may it continue when you're in a position to try it.

tigertattie wrote:a few points to add

1. This choke tackling is boring, dull, negative rugby. It stops offloads which keep the game flowing. It results in scrums which results in ref penalty lottery.

2. This being said, it is not the choke tackler that is causing this. Players are not told to go out there and entertain the masses. They are told to go out there an win. The choke tackle is an effctive way of helping this cause! The person to blame for all these choke tackles is the player with ball in hand! Stop running up right, get your bod position low, protect the ball (as you were taught as a schoolboy) and this blight will leave the game again!

For reference - Watch Dan cole vs Healy. Healy stands upright to go for the choke tackle. Dan Cole runs with his body low. Dan cole smashes Healy out of the way. Play continues!

I dont think headbutting someone in the face should be encouraged at all. Its fairly dirty from Cole. He dipped his head into Healy's as they collided. He should have been cited for it.

GunsGerms wrote:

tigertattie wrote:a few points to add

1. This choke tackling is boring, dull, negative rugby. It stops offloads which keep the game flowing. It results in scrums which results in ref penalty lottery.

2. This being said, it is not the choke tackler that is causing this. Players are not told to go out there and entertain the masses. They are told to go out there an win. The choke tackle is an effctive way of helping this cause! The person to blame for all these choke tackles is the player with ball in hand! Stop running up right, get your bod position low, protect the ball (as you were taught as a schoolboy) and this blight will leave the game again!

For reference - Watch Dan cole vs Healy. Healy stands upright to go for the choke tackle. Dan Cole runs with his body low. Dan cole smashes Healy out of the way. Play continues!

I dont think headbutting someone in the face should be encouraged at all. Its fairly dirty from Cole. He dipped his head into Healy's as they collided. He should have been cited for it.

Most of our choke tackles are not actually on players who intend to offload, rather it's those who are trying to bludgeon their way through our defensive line.

Thats an arguement Mr Germs. It's a difficult one to cast judgement on as who is to blame for it?

Old school players like Cole were taught to get your body low when going into contact. Had healy gone for a traditional tackle and put his shoulder into Coles belly, then no one would have been hurt. Healy stayed high though and got caught on the mush by Cole.

I don't think there is a ref in the land that would have penalised Cole for what he did but I can see that if you showed the clip to someone who has never watched rugby before, they'd see it as a headbutt!

Its a bit of a chicken and the egg thing!

How many time have we seen a tackler get banjo'd by not having thier head in the right place! Face planting themselves into an opponents hip bone or on coming knee!  You can;t blame the boy with ball in hand for those ones so can you really blame cole for putting Healy on his backside on sunday? Personally, I don't think so!

No 7&1/2 wrote:

GunsGerms wrote:

tigertattie wrote:a few points to add

1. This choke tackling is boring, dull, negative rugby. It stops offloads which keep the game flowing. It results in scrums which results in ref penalty lottery.

2. This being said, it is not the choke tackler that is causing this. Players are not told to go out there and entertain the masses. They are told to go out there an win. The choke tackle is an effctive way of helping this cause! The person to blame for all these choke tackles is the player with ball in hand! Stop running up right, get your bod position low, protect the ball (as you were taught as a schoolboy) and this blight will leave the game again!

For reference - Watch Dan cole vs Healy. Healy stands upright to go for the choke tackle. Dan Cole runs with his body low. Dan cole smashes Healy out of the way. Play continues!

I dont think headbutting someone in the face should be encouraged at all. Its fairly dirty from Cole. He dipped his head into Healy's as they collided. He should have been cited for it.

England will have been well aware that Bastereau wasn't cited for the head clash on Sexton that cut him up. If you watch the clip Cole dips his head and aims it right into the side of Healy's head and lays him out flat. It was fairly dodgy to say the least and probably born out of frustration because England were completely out of the game at that point.

Maybe Cole is a bit of a hot head?

Players often get carded for leading with an elbow in the tackle. I think Cole should have been cited at the very least because you can really badly injure someone by doing what he did.

BelfastDickVet wrote:Most of our choke tackles are not actually on players who intend to offload, rather it's those who are trying to bludgeon their way through our defensive line.

BelfastDickVet wrote:Most of our choke tackles are not actually on players who intend to offload, rather it's those who are trying to bludgeon their way through our defensive line.

It does also stop balls going anywhere in a hurry though....and read that any way you like

tigertattie wrote:

BelfastDickVet wrote:Most of our choke tackles are not actually on players who intend to offload, rather it's those who are trying to bludgeon their way through our defensive line.

? why Picard?

I vote in favour of banning the choke tackle.

Scotland are dreadful at exploiting it, and invariably get caught out and turned over.

Enough said.

I'm also in favour of banning tries.

I vote to ban Scotland then.... for they try, try and try again.

That's only a joke by the way - don't take it personal and use the anger to hijack us on the last day............. IF we make it through Wales alive.

SecretFly wrote:I vote to ban Scotland then.... for they try, try and try again.

That's only a joke by the way - don't take it personal and use the anger to hijack us on the last day............. IF we make it through Wales alive.

I think it'll take more than anger for us to beat you! 15 better rugby players would help......

SecretFly wrote:

tigertattie wrote:

BelfastDickVet wrote:Most of our choke tackles are not actually on players who intend to offload, rather it's those who are trying to bludgeon their way through our defensive line.

? why Picard?

As a university women's team made up of entirely vet students we are the smallest team in our league, we are up against "larger" ladies who aren't as skillful and rely a lot on their bulk, when they see our relatively small players in a defensive line 9 times out of 10 the try to run over the top of them, more often than not in an upright position. We punish these players for this. Surely our implementation of this tactic will force other teams to improve their offloading prior to contact.

GunsGerms wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:

GunsGerms wrote:

tigertattie wrote:a few points to add

1. This choke tackling is boring, dull, negative rugby. It stops offloads which keep the game flowing. It results in scrums which results in ref penalty lottery.

2. This being said, it is not the choke tackler that is causing this. Players are not told to go out there and entertain the masses. They are told to go out there an win. The choke tackle is an effctive way of helping this cause! The person to blame for all these choke tackles is the player with ball in hand! Stop running up right, get your bod position low, protect the ball (as you were taught as a schoolboy) and this blight will leave the game again!

For reference - Watch Dan cole vs Healy. Healy stands upright to go for the choke tackle. Dan Cole runs with his body low. Dan cole smashes Healy out of the way. Play continues!

I dont think headbutting someone in the face should be encouraged at all. Its fairly dirty from Cole. He dipped his head into Healy's as they collided. He should have been cited for it.

England will have been well aware that Bastereau wasn't cited for the head clash on Sexton that cut him up. If you watch the clip Cole dips his head and aims it right into the side of Healy's head and lays him out flat. It was fairly dodgy to say the least and probably born out of frustration because England were completely out of the game at that point.

Maybe Cole is a bit of a hot head?

Players often get carded for leading with an elbow in the tackle. I think Cole should have been cited at the very least because you can really badly injure someone by doing what he did.

Definitely

SecretFly wrote:

tigertattie wrote:

BelfastDickVet wrote:Most of our choke tackles are not actually on players who intend to offload, rather it's those who are trying to bludgeon their way through our defensive line.

? why Picard?

because if you are choke tackling someone who isn't going to offload then you are choke tackling for no reason. If a boy is trying to bosh through and isn;t going to offload then hit him low to make sure he goes down!

I choke tackle is aimed at stopping the ball not the man

It's also aimed at turning over the ball and setting up a structured attacking line off a set piece.

tigertattie wrote:

SecretFly wrote:

tigertattie wrote:

BelfastDickVet wrote:Most of our choke tackles are not actually on players who intend to offload, rather it's those who are trying to bludgeon their way through our defensive line.

? why Picard?

because if you are choke tackling someone who isn't going to offload then you are choke tackling for no reason. If a boy is trying to bosh through and isn;t going to offload then hit him low to make sure he goes down!

I choke tackle is aimed at stopping the ball not the man

It wins ball back without having your hand on it

It's clear reading this thread that rugby is a very dangerous and brutal pastime, in fact I can't understand why it has managed to exist under the radar for so long. We can't smack our pesky kids any more and yet we can choke, headbutt, bludgeon, and chop with impunity for 80 minutes every week. What's more, it's the other blokes fault for running in "too upright a manner". Serves him right if he's left asphyxiated face down in the mud.

At the risk of driving rugby further underground I say ban rugby completely ! Close this forum and let's agree not to speak of it again.

Go back to taking the man low lifting him and driving his spine/head into the ground, proper rugby.

The recently published injuries study showed the majority come from collisions at either tackles or rucks, not wrestling. From a safety perspective rugby should be looking at cracking down on charging and tackles with little or no attempt to wrap, and leading with the head/shoulder in attack or defence.
Penalise high tackles when they are high, choke or otherwise, and the safety issue is largely covered.

If we are talking about an issue with the choke tackle and resultant wrestling/messy ruck/slow ball as a game mechanics issue thats different, but its hard to see how you adjust the laws without unintended consequences to discourage or ban it.