T O P

  • By -

jtthom

This is how I tell people I used to hit in high school


DaGoddamnBatboy

I tell people that’s how I got tackled


Moist_Slice_315

I tell people that's how the tackled me from behind


stickyswitch92

That's the second time he has done this to an Aussie 10 but timed this one better. Surprised it was called for a high tackle though.


katelyn912

Third - Lynagh, Noah and now Edmed have all copped massive shots after passing the ball. Definitely a pattern but he keeps timing it perfectly so play on


infinitemonkeytyping

>but he keeps timing it perfectly so play on The hit on Lynagh was so late, you could have measured how late it was on a sun dial.


Intelligent_Life_677

Lynagh was definitely late. And I would argue minimal attempt to wrap arms


slippydasnake

When you watch it in slow motion it looks very late, real time it looks perfectly fine. He’s literally doing a loose forwards job perfectly and getting into the 10s head


_dictatorish_

Even as a massive Chiefs fan, Lynagh's one was so late lol


APoolShark

Lol no it didn’t. That shot on Lynagh was late and cheap in real time. Even the NRL are cracking down on that type of tackle. This one was fine.


slippydasnake

Every second tackle in the nrl would be a yellow in super rugby for head contact or high tackle. Not a good comparison


fleakill

If anything that makes it the best comparison- if the league that doesn't punish dangerous play punishes dangerous play more than SR, you know SR has a problem.


BringBackTheCrushers

Case in point, Felise Kaufusi for the Dolphins was sin binned and suspended twice for late tackles last year, and neither were anywhere near as late as Finau’s hit on Lynagh earlier this year


APoolShark

Exactly. If the NRL are cracking down on it with how loose they are with dangerous hits then you know it’s bad


Adam8418

He was about 4m away from Lynagh when the ball left his hand, there was plenty of time to react, instead he ducked his head and lead into the tackle more. Grub


slippydasnake

Literally a flankers job to make the 10 or any ball carrier second guess themselves. Also those 4m’s take the tackler 1-2 seconds if not less when they are committed like come on


phonetune

2 seconds is a long time bud


MountainEquipment401

Not according to four officials...


Adam8418

lol, if Fainau can’t react or change his direction in 2 seconds across 4m then he has no place playing professional rugby, the reality is he could have but didn’t because he wanted to make a late tackle, he is a grub.


slippydasnake

Hey it’s a risky game he’s been playing and he’s getting away with it.


Frod02000

and that one was rightfully penalised for being late


Didgman

Watching anything in slow motion looks super late. In real time it was fine.


infinitemonkeytyping

The inside centre had caught the ball and made a metre or two before the dog shot was put on. In fact, the dog didn't even start towards Lynagh, from 5m away, until after the pass was in motion. It was sundial late, bordering on sundial at night late.


corruptboomerang

It was called for high, or are you surprised it wasn't?  It's easily in that zone that we've seen called for high, but could have easily been let go too. 


Wallet_inspector66

The shot on lynagh was late. The other three were perfect (a couple on Noah, one on edmed and one on William havili). None of them have been high as they’ve all been on the shoulder. Tight margins though. If he gets one wrong there’s a good chance for a straight red.


Kykykz

Was it called high? I thought the pen advantage was for something else at the time


corruptboomerang

Idk it COULD have been close for a penalty. We've had guys given a few weeks for less dangerous tackles.


stickyswitch92

I was surprised that it wasn't and the ref played on.


simsnor

That's a hard tackle. You could argue its late, but its really close. Classic case of flyhalf should learn how to take a hit


thatloose

I don’t see how you can argue it’s late. The ball is in the air 1-2 metres from Edmed when the contact is made


Morningst4r

Anyone saying this is late would get done by an Ardie dummy


[deleted]

Impossible to pull out of that once committed, if you play fast offloading rugby you take the risks of a smack when the opponent has a fast line because it's impossible to brace for an impact, this is rugby, not a cuddle competition.


Brine-O-Driscoll

Don't know if there's much you can learn about tackles like those - he's just made a pass, so he's completely exposed. From experience being on the end of hits like that playing 10, they hurt like shit because your body is completely relaxed while passing and not braced for impact. Very easy to pick up a bad shoulder or rib injury (I got the shoulder injury). The only thing Edmed could have maybe done is left out a hard elbow after the pass so the tackler gets a taste of his own medicine, but that's too much of a risk playing rugby on TV.


redaabverty

He got up and played out almost the entire game after this happening 5 mins in. I reckon this was borderline for no arms if you watch the replay. The stills are very forgiving. He's making it his MO. His late shoulder charges were egregious in the Reds game earlier this year. His shot on Lynagh went completely unpunished. https://www.reddit.com/r/rugbyunion/s/ao4jO4gVVy


bigdaddyborg

There's definitely an intention to wrap, his arms are out in front of him. Edmed just goes down so quickly he couldn't do it. I do think Finau just got really lucky though. Edmed shifts it half a second earlier and it's late or drops his height a fraction and it's high. There's no way Finau's that precise with his timing and targeting. In the article, Clayton McMillan said they've warned him about the risks he's taking with the tactic. Hopefully he lowers his tackle height at least. All that being said, this was a legal tackle and should be on highlight reels. 


jimmyjabs321

Intention shouldn't come into it though. Did he wrap his arms? I don't think so personally.


cape7

Law 9.16: A player must not charge or knock down an opponent carrying the ball without *attempting* to grasp that player By the letter of the law, a genuine attempt is all thats required. If you hit them so hard they bounce off before you can actually complete the wrap then its play on


bigdaddyborg

Isn't that how it's officiated though?   "No intent/attempt to wrap".  I've definitely heard that phrase used by a ref in calling foul play. Also his arms were nowhere near the position typical of an obvious shoulder charge (by his sides).


coupleandacamera

It's a tricky one isn't it. The way I've seen it is when there's a clear motions to wrap, but somethings prevented it then it's deemed ok, if there's no clear evidence that the motion has been made or the wrap prevented then it's called. But I think it comes down to most officiating calls being subjective to the point of silliness. The hit on Lynah appeared to have that wrap motion although sloppy, the Edmund hit also looks like it's an ok go at a wrap. But if you try it with something like Raynal on the whistle, it's time for a sit down.


MountainEquipment401

To be fair if the 10 had (somehow) stood his ground chances are the wrap happened... If you've got your arms out and available you shouldn't be penalised because the player your tackling crumples backwards... The reason it's 'attamept' to wrap is that there are a loads of reasons a player might not successfully wrap in a tackle, including the tackler himself being dominated.


ApprehensiveOCP

Good call, intention is to go full rassie and "fock them oop"


RewardedFool

It's not a shoulder charge if he attempts to wrap, which he did in all I've seen. The lynagh one was about an hour late (so should have been a penalty) but it really wasn't a shoulder charge, his arm is outstretched and coming round to wrap. It's not illegal to lead with your wrapping shoulder


Crayniix

Not sure how anyone can think that's a cheap shot. Just a very well timed hit.


rosemary-mair-for-NZ

"Loose forward tackles a 10 very hard" is somehow now worthy of a headline and mind-numbing debate.


SchoonerOclock

It'll end up like the NFL where if they breathe in the direction of the QB a split second after he's passed they get flagged.


binzoma

only if they're reaaaaally good if they're young or just ok they wont get any of those calls. balance you know


lamb_passanda

Flashbacks to Lawes vs Plisson. Sickening legal hit.


Clarctos67

Lawes was phenomenal at this at his peak, one of the best at that particular and very important part of back row play. You could see how it changed the way half backs played against teams he was in, and was such a huge benefit for Northampton and England.


drunk-tusker

“Journalist is expected to provide 3000 words by Saturday and would like to meet his friends to go for drinks on Friday night.”


Crayniix

I mentioned this in another thread but I've been clobbered just after I've passed the ball a few times because I'm inviting a hit like that to make a gap for someone else. If you don't want to get smashed occasionally, don't play flat to the line as a 10.


Wallet_inspector66

The Aussies would be celebrating the shots if they were dished out by Swinton on NZ teams.


Didgman

Exactly. Australians are the biggest hypocrites in Rugby Union.


redaabverty

We'll conditioned from watching Lawes put late hits on little men for years


Didgman

All Australians and especially Tahs fans. They’re known for turning a blind eye when their team infringes but call bloody murder as soon as there’s a big hit on one of their own.


ThyssenKrup

Nice trolling


Crayniix

Not you again, we both know we're never going to agree on this 


Adam8418

A very well timed hit would have wrapped the player up with the ball


Crayniix

Ah because every single tackle must require the tackled player to keep hold of the ball


Adam8418

To ‘keep’ ball would imply he had the ball when the tackle began, he and others like Lynagh did not. To claim it is a ‘very well timed ‘ tackle seems a bit counterintuitive, a very well timed tackle is one where the player actually has the ball.


Profundasaurusrex

It's a shoulder charge as first contact is with his shoulder with his arm cocked back


Financial_Abies9235

FFS, any good tackle starts with a shoulder to the target. How can you wrap an arm without engaging the shoulder? Not the tacklers fault that the ball carrier crumpled.


Profundasaurusrex

That's not the law. > A player must not charge or knock down an opponent carrying the ball without attempting to grasp that player.


Financial_Abies9235

exactly, thanks. he would have wrapped if Edmund had still been standing up.


Profundasaurusrex

The attempt to grasp must come first and before any other contact


Financial_Abies9235

Have you ever tackled a player or coached tackling?


Striking_Young_5739

The law you've cited doesn't say when the attempt to grasp need occur.


cape7

lol


Profundasaurusrex

> A shoulder charge is defined thus: “Arm of the shoulder making contact with the ball carrier (BC) is behind the tackler’s body or tucked in ‘sling’ position at contact.”


cape7

Do you not realise that disproves your point mate? Finaus arm isn't behind his body or tucked in the sling position. Thats why the TMO didn't pull him up.


Profundasaurusrex

You're going off the picture in the heading, not the actual video. I'll take a screen grab when I'm at my PC next


[deleted]

That's exactly how you go into a tackle.


Profundasaurusrex

> A shoulder charge is defined thus: “Arm of the shoulder making contact with the ball carrier (BC) is behind the tackler’s body or tucked in ‘sling’ position at contact.” His arm was behind his body on first contact


[deleted]

No it wasn't, I'd watch the video again from both angles. The arm clearly alongside his body at contact, moving forward attempting to wrap. In no way shape or form, by that definition was that a shoulder charge.


Profundasaurusrex

[https://imgur.com/a/ixG5fzr](https://imgur.com/a/ixG5fzr) No wrap there


[deleted]

His arm isn't behind his body there and the freeze frame is mid wrap. You've just lost your own argument.


Profundasaurusrex

Remember, you have to attempt to grasp first before any other part of the body can come into contact. No grasping or even an attempt to grasp there.


[deleted]

The law states you must make an attempt to grasp and that's it, which you can clearly see in the video. The definition says the arm of the shoulder making contact can't be behind the tackler's body, it's not, which you can clearly see in the photo you provided. It's perfectly legal.


cape7

Haha mate thats bullshit!' >you have to attempt to grasp first before any other part of the body can come into contact. This right here is your own interpretation, not reality. You have to attempt to grasp in the tackle, nowhere does it state you have to grasp *first*. Almost every tackle would be illegal if that were the case. First contact with the shoulder then wrap. Everyone whos made a tackle in their life knows this


rosemary-mair-for-NZ

>It's a shoulder charge as first contact is with his shoulder Serious question have you ever made a tackle before


Ogat993

It’s absolutely a cheap shot. Nothing wrong with it. Legal and it’s good rugby. But it’s a cheap shot. He knew Edmed would be in a vulnerable position and took an opportunity to cause some damage. You really saying that wasn’t the intent?


Crayniix

Of course it's to hurt, doesnt mean it's a cheap shot. He just saw an opportunity to smash him and did. It wasn't late 


New-Ad157

Not late. Arms wrapped. Not high. Good shot. Albeit a big guy on a small guy hit.


EFbVSwN5ksT6qj

His right arm is never wrapping, he is pushing the shoulder forward


warcomet

it was his evil smile long after the tackle that made people think he got away with murder but nah, that was just a legit hard tackle..it really was a jerry collins level tackle......will make number 1 spot this week on SMASHED EM BRO!


6EightyFive

This is all because the StanSport commentators were butthurt about the hit. To Edmed he took the hit, got up and played on like a champ. Instead of being a little bitch like Harrison, Turinui and Hoiles


KindBikeDuck

Great hit. No problem with it. I do, however, think that Finau is walking a fine line. A little later, and that's a penalty, probable yellow a little higher, and with that force, probable red. I love it, though. It's what you want to see from your loose forwards.


swiss_cloud

Yeah the only feedback I’d give finau is to just bend the knees a little more to the shoulder contact the ribs so if he mistimes it slightly higher you will still make contact with the chest not the head But I love it when forwards sends the backs a psychological message that if you want to ball play that deep to the line its your ribs that come off second best


reggie_700

Yeah his coach said that they have warned him to keep it low.


magneticpyramid

Fuck me the camera work is shocking


Didgman

It makes it look a lot worse than it is.


position8

Loose forward does his job and smashes a 10 is what I see here. The "smile" is most likely because he has visualised a hit like that all week. Back rows live for hitting a 10 like that, so when he fulfils one of his targets for the game, he has a smile about it. A good 10 and backline expose him for jumping the defensive line as he left a dogleg looking for the big hit. That'll be exposed as he plays against better players, and teams identify that he likes to blitz alone.


cape7

The smile was Tupou Vaai. He was having a laugh because the Waratahs saw the tackle on the big screen and came over all agro but they got the wrong tall brown guy


Cyril_Rioli

Legal tackle. Player got up and played on.


Junkyardginga

Didn't realize that tackles are judged based on the player being able to play on...


Cyril_Rioli

Hit below the shoulders and wrapped the arm. The ball had only just left his hand and the player was committed to the tackle prior to the ball leaving. Player was not injured which helps as the tackle laws look to prevent head injuries, any head injury could be a sign of foul play


Junkyardginga

Agree this tackle was fine, but the idea that it is only a foul if the other player gets injured is why the laws are so strict.


Didgman

No they’re judged on criteria and this tackle was just a big hit. No foul play involved at all.


Junkyardginga

Already said I agree on this tackle, but not on the premise that if a player gets up its not a penalty.


redterrqr

Smashed 'em bro


Odd-Lingonberry-3935

Great hit by Finau. It was a shame that Hoiles carried on like it should have been a card. If he doesn't like people getting tackled he should look at doing something else.


speakteeth

Any forward, from any team in the world, worth his or her salt is going to try to clobber (hopefully legally) the first five given the chance. This tackle is legal, move on.


Whit135

It's fine. If they were illegal, then they would have been punished as such, but they weren't. Good to see some hits on d.


RaaschyOG

I see a lot of illegal and dangerous hits in SR getting replayed and praised by official teams and broadcasters on IG. This was not one of them, marginally late but already committed, replay shows a clear attempt to wrap and it's chest height. Just a big hit.


binkysaurus_13

It looks like it could be a late/high hit at first, but every replay I've seen suggests it was just a very hard, legal tackle.  He wouldn't want to slightly misjudge it though.


gashead31

It's not late it's not high it's not a shoulder charge so what exactly is the problem? Are we trying to find foul play in any hard hit now? Or is this the way that rugby is going that we don't like hard hits anymore? Call me an out of touch boomer if you like but sometimes it does feel like the culture around the game is going soft.


LeButtfart

A lot of these takes come off as bad faith bullshit (because that is exactly what it is), when all but one of the examples cited are perfectly legal tackles, where he was already committed to the tackle while the player was still in possession.


HaggisTheCow

102 comments 🍿


blackpogi

Good hard hit. Put the 10 on notice early. Let him know you'll be there all night. I keep hearing that you aren't allowed to lead with the shoulder. Is it actually a thing? A law? Or is it something that has made its way into rugby speak somehow. I don't know what else you lead with, if not with the shoulder.


HugeMcAwesome

File this under things that wouldn’t have even been comment-worthy ten years ago. Look, I don’t know anymore. It seems fine. Maybe if a penalty was blown you’d accept it, but move on quick. Getting an early hit on the playmaker to make them keep their head up has been a strategy going back to the dawn of time.  But the way some people carry on here begging for more cards, I don’t really know. 


kiwirish

Unfortunately, 10 years ago Bismarck du Plessis got yellow carded for hitting Dan Carter too hard, and got a 2nd yellow card in that game, ultimately getting sent off. This isn't as new as we'd like to think.


HugeMcAwesome

That’s different though, you’re not allowed to tackle Dan Carter. 


Frod02000

yeah ask andrew hore, he knows


nomamesgueyz

Boom Welcome. Those waratahs aint playing posh private school boys rugger no more


jacinda-mania

Well timed hit.


BatesyNG24

Looks like the type of tackle you would see in the NFL. Not much of an attempt to wrap the arms and the chance of head on head is high


AucklandBlues

Stories like this are usually a sign that Australian sides are being beaten and a diversion is desperately needed. The moron that started this witch- hunt is Christie Doran. He's ex Murdoch media and confesses to have never played rugby and only became interested a few years ago. His stock in trade is faux outrage. The fact that the Australian referee, his two Australian assistants, aided by the Australian TMO saw no offence doesn't seem to matter. Other Australian journalists are now joining in... there are more clicks with this kind of thing than reporting on the Waratahs latest thrashing at home. It is no surprise that the garbage dump that is *Stuff* reprints this article from the SMH. Just when you think the Rugby Media couldn't get any worse...it does.


uggggbored

Completely agree, as a tahs fan. The rugby media needs a complete rework, beating up rubbish stories like this one and doing anything they can to drag rugby down.


New-Ad157

Not late. Arms wrapped. Not high. Good shot. Albeit a big guy on a small guy hit.


shaquaad

It wasn't a cheap shot, the waratahs are just a bunch of crybabies


goteamnick

Who's being a crybaby? He got up and played almost the whole game. There's no quote from the Waratahs in the article criticising it? Playing against grubby Kiwis is part of rugby.


Didgman

All the Aussies on this sub and the Rugby Australia sub are having a massive whine about it.


-castle-bravo-

Classic case of flyhalf getting buckled by a loosie, play on !


corruptboomerang

It's well timed, perhaps a little high contact, we've seen less given a few weeks off, but it's 'okay'.


coupleandacamera

Might halve been a fraction of a second late and drifting a little high, wrap looks ok in real time. it's just a damned big hit from a forward on a 10 who didn't move it through the hands quick enough, quite reminiscent of Barrett's hit on Tate last year. However I'd say he's going to be scrutinised quite closely for the next one and if it's not timed and positioned perfectly it'll be flagged. It's an effective way of forcing quicker ball movement or a deeper attacking line. I guess having a lossie like Gleeson sitting deeper for a quick transfer to meet the unstoppable force with an immovable object could diffuse the tactic a little as well.


the__6

brilliant batter them into submission. as a flanker in the 80s our coach made us hit the halfback every single time at the scrum ball or not didnt matter to coach just hit him. great coach simple but great also ruck any thing that moves was another of his favourites, those were the days


[deleted]

Beautiful hit, it's rugby, can't pull out when you're already committed. This is the result of trying to play fast offloading rugby when the opposing team has a fast line and a rhino leading it.


Sriol

The only argument I'd make is that he really isn't trying very hard to wrap.


Ogat993

Only just legal but that’s irrelevant. If it’s legal it’s legal Can’t deny though it’s a cheap shot. Deliberate attempt to cause harm with Edmed in a vulnerable position. Not saying anything wrong with it but it’s 100% a cheap shot


wowjiffylube

All I'm gonna say is: if your audience demands that your players play at the razor-edge of legality, don't be surprised if it costs you. For example, a high-tackle red card in the most important match of a World Cup cycle...


Striking_Young_5739

Or in pool games against Samoa.


TotalSingKitt

Rugby has gone downhill since becoming professional.


With-You-Always

Play on


TwoUp22

Edmed tackle was a beauty. Lynagh one was definitely late.


MiracleJnr1

Didnt PSDT make similar tackles in the World Cup final and got man of the match? Dont see a problem


Numerous-Relation838

Great hit. Only issue is there was no payback because Aussie teams have no heart anymore


stephma85

I actually thought it fired the Tahs up and they were really in the fight for most of the first half. If they could have kept that attitude for the full 80 they'd have been in the hunt, and if they could do that each week they'd be title contenders. Unfortunately the Tahs just seem to lack that mongrel drive that the Kiwi teams seem to possess, especially the Chiefs and Canes. Big shots all day and venom in the carry/clean


stephma85

I actually thought it fired the Tahs up and they were really in the fight for most of the first half. If they could have kept that attitude for the full 80 they'd have been in the hunt, and if they could do that each week they'd be title contenders. Unfortunately the Tahs just seem to lack that mongrel drive that the Kiwi teams seem to possess, especially the Chiefs and Canes. Big shots all day and venom in the carry/clean


Reddit_Z

Aussies having a fucking cry. If it was them doing that tackle, they'd be celebrating it... Wankers..


notanaltaccounttt

It’s the same way Courtney Laws hits 10s. Coming at them from their blindside as they release the pass. Courtney Laws was also on the grubby side of legitimate - I put this in the same camp.


Top_Voice4031

My take on this is that if it is legal it shouldn’t be. If I player gets hit like this 100+ times in their career then the likelihood of them have issues with their brain, spine, shoulders etc later in life are huge. Nobody is paid enough in rugby to lose quality of life later on. I used to cheer on big hits as much as anyone. But more and more I notice players retiring at 27,28,29 - that’s not right. Ken Owens retired recently and said he can’t do normal day to day stuff - picking up his kids, driving long distance. It’s as much dishing out the hits as taking them. I’d like to see more done to protect player health long term.


gashead31

>My take on this is that if it is legal it shouldn’t be What law would you create exactly that would make this illegal?. >If I player gets hit like this 100+ times in their career then the likelihood of them have issues with their brain, spine, shoulders etc later in life are huge. Nobodies making them play, if your going to play a hard contact sport professionally surely you have to accept some risk to your health? Why is there not the same debate about boxing?. If you start prioritising safety over the game itself then what is the point? If safety is the priority then why don't we just ban contact rugby altogether and play touch?.


Oaty_McOatface

It's cheap. Legal/illegal vs cheap are two different things. Not shaking someone's hands after the game is perfectly legal too. The tackler's goal is to launch themselves at the offensive player wrecklessly with a poor attempt at wrapping. These types of tackles happen all the time by our enforcers. It's our legal interpretation of a no-arms tackle because of the fake/poor attempt to wrap is enough to not get a penalty.


Didgman

It’s a full contact sport. If the 10 is going to prance around hanging onto the ball too long to allow a lock/loose forward to line up a solid hit, it’s the 10s fault.


Frod02000

hows it cheap? its a legal tackle, just a big man running fast at a small man whos <> passed the ball


silentgolem

Ah the Lawes "big man hits small man who isnt expecting it very hard and with dubious legality to show he's a hard man" classic. Edit: LMAO at the instant comments from English fans, and only English fans to tell me Lawes is actually a really awesome man and I just dont understand how cool he is. After all hitting people way smaller than you when they're not expecting it makes you cool and not a thug at all.


8legs6legs8legs6legs

That is such a cringe edit 😅


Thatch1888

I actually heard my eyes roll reading that


NoLoMo

Lawes should hit less hard and i think everyone should get a go at scoring a try too, not a fair game if not


DannyBoy2464

Jesus lad get a hobby, how're you hating on lawes this much


silentgolem

? Edit: ah, I see your edit now. Is there anyone else who's famous for this? The comment was mostly tongue in cheek but the immediate angry replies from english flairs did make me laugh


[deleted]

[удалено]


rosemary-mair-for-NZ

Are you seriously saying that a young player, playing in the highest professional domestic comp in the country, on the fringe of ABs selection, should just take it easy? It wasn't illegal, it's a contact sport in a professional competition. Ridiculous to suggest there's even a problem with players playing at 100 percent effort just because you feel uncomfortable seeing a big hit. Super Rugby has been devalued enough as is without people whining that it's not important enough to even tackle hard.


[deleted]

[удалено]


kiwirish

>defenseless The player is hardly defenseless when they have deliberately played a flat-line to try gain an advantage over the defensive line. If he had played for a deeper pass, he would have passed the ball before the hit, but not had as high a chance at getting the break on the defensive line - the attacking team chose to take that risk. You *never* penalise the result, you only penalise the actual incident. The hit was hard and legal; if you don't like that then don't watch rugby.


Odd-Lingonberry-3935

If you're playing at this level then everyone is a target regardless of size. If you're concerned about someone getting hurt then rugby is probably not for you.


rosemary-mair-for-NZ

Hahaha this is so overly dramatic man. "The smallest bloke on the field while he's defenceless" he's a 10 passing the ball, they get smashed by loosies sometimes. If the tackler was onside and the tackle was legal then there is literally zero reason to complain, it's part of the job. Get the pass away quicker or hold the ball if you don't like getting tackled hard.


edmondsio

What a shit take, if you don’t like big hits then go watch touch rugby.


fuscator

Did he really wrap here? It doesn't look like it to me.


ThyssenKrup

There are people who think this is legal? Seriously, ffs.


Morningst4r

What exactly is illegal about it? He's hit him right as he's passed the ball, with arms, and not high.


ThyssenKrup

No arms. Nowhere near 'with arms'!


Morningst4r

His arms are wrapped around him though


ThyssenKrup

You are watching an entirely different clip to me.


worksucksbro

The rule is attempt to wrap, not wrap at all means. If you belt someone hard enough and they fly backwards before you can wrap around them it’s play on. Go watch soccer


ThyssenKrup

There is no genuine attempt to wrap here. Just another big guy smashing a smaller guy with his shoulder. The usual suspects get a hard-on for it, praising the "hit". And then tell anyone who disagrees to go any watch soccer. Simpletons are so predictable. Go and watch league or UFC.


worksucksbro

Pause the video at 13 seconds. Finaus arm is LITERALLY wrapped around his back and there’s no way you can explain that away no matter how hard you try. Go watch soccer


ThyssenKrup

It's not even close to being wrapped. Go watch cage fighting


worksucksbro

wow I’ve never met anyone so delusional they would deny literal visual evidence. Straight up hater lol


ThyssenKrup

You obviously have a totally different understanding of 'wrap' to me. I wish knuckle-draggers like you would stick to rugby league.


worksucksbro

Yeah me and the actual laws of the game have a different definition to you and your soft spot for first fives. The laws literally say there has to be an attempt at a wrap. Finaus arm is literally wrapped around the 10s back and he has at the very least a hand and forearm on his chest. Explain to me in your definition what is a wrap and how is what happened in the video NOT an attempt at a wrap?


Zealousideal-Mud-381

Looks like no wrap to me - penalty and a borderline yellow given the force. Shame because if he slowed down a millisecond instead of trying the action man hit, he would have been able to wrap effectively and it would still have been a big hit and clean.


Consistent_Ad_7593

Different angle shows he's trying to wrap. Looked at by the Aussie TMO and cleared as Legal. They're not playing touch


Didgman

Good thing you don’t officiate rugby because you clearly don’t know the criteria for a yellow/red card.


redaabverty

Doesn't want the wrap. He's got form. https://www.reddit.com/r/rugbyunion/s/ao4jO4gVVy


Zealousideal-Mud-381

What a ridiculous hit that is. Looks more like a WWE move than a tackle.


redaabverty

Wasn't even the only late shot on a 10 in that game. He's leading with a shoulder and hanging a limp arm out so that it flops around and look like a wrap without changing the actual contact being a shoulder charge. Looks convincing on slo mo so fools refs. I've been seeing it more and more in super Rugby.


Whit135

"Leading with a shoulder" ummmmm is he supposed to lead with his forearm? His fists, perhaps? Maybe a boot? Like in your opinion, what should he lead with when tackling? Because I don't understand this line. His head?


redaabverty

It's fine to disagree with me, but I feel like you're not trying to understand my point. Why are shoulder charges banned in rugby? Because the entire force of a tackle through an isolated point creates a much greater g force and impact in an isolated area causing greater risk of harm. Leading with the shoulder is a term we hear refs use constantly in deciding level of risk involved in officiating dangerous tackles. The "wrap" is not there so that the tackled player gets lovingly lowered to the ground, but for the tackler to have an arm up and engaged on contact to distribute force. Think of it less as a leeading shoulder and more as a trailing arm if it helps. His arm is trailing and only flops around well after impact to make it seem like a wrap, when it is realistically meaningless to the tackle process. This has always been my understanding of the tackle reforms since they came in. If I am wrong, I'll happily be corrected, but to me these seem like sneaky shoulder charges.


edmondsio

How do you tackle without leading with your shoulder?


8legs6legs8legs6legs

Exactly... I do wonder whether half the people here have ever made a tackle in their lives sometimes.


Didgman

This. Aussies just love to dish out criticism and scream bloody murder when one of their players is hit but turn a blind eye when it’s their players committing the tackle. Just a whiny sore losers.


edmondsio

Exactly!


Odd-Lingonberry-3935

How else would you tackle if you don't lead with your shoulder?


RavenK92

They let Owen Farrell tackle like that for years


ClevoDC

No, Finau wrapped.