We value your privacy

We and our partners store and/or access information on a device, such as cookies and process personal data, such as unique identifiers and standard information sent by a device for personalised ads and content, ad and content measurement, and audience insights, as well as to develop and improve products.

With your permission we and our partners may use precise geolocation. You may click to consent to our and our partners’ processing as described above. Please note that some processing of your personal data may not require your consent, but you have a right to object to such processing.

More Options

Tue 10 Jan 2017 | 12:39
Courtney Lawes trademark hit demolishes scrumhalf Will Cliff

22
Comments

Courtney Lawes has made another huge tackle on a halfback, this time on Bristol's Will Cliff in their round 13 fixture at the weekend. Unfortunate Cliff got a bloody nose from the hit, and while the officials briefly considered having another look at it, they were satisfied that it was legal.

Lawes is known as one of the hardest tackling second rowers around, and while his noticeable victims are often those of more diminutive stature, his effort on defence is always commendable.

His targets so far include Charlie Hodgson, Owen Farrell, Nicky Robinson and Morgan Parra.

While it's another mismatch, Cliff can count himself unlucky to have Lawes standing in front of him at the time that he tried a sneaky inside switch.

Lawes on the other hand, eats up those opportunities.

View the Related Posts for more massive impacts from halfback killer Lawes

Posted By: Grant Constable

22 Comments

  • canafrikaaner
    1:17 AM 16/01/2017

    Hell be gone till november

  • drg
    2:00 PM 15/01/2017

    I raised it in a sort of jest above, but re-watching the video, Lawes shoulder does hit the guy in the head at the end of the tackle...When they both hit the ground, if a legal team.were to analyse this alongside the new directives, is this not technically not reckless contact with the head? Especially given that it now no longer matters if the tackle starts low?

  • raisedbytigers
    8:26 AM 15/01/2017

    Cracking hit! Devil's advocate here, but can't help but notice all of Lawes' 'trademark hits' are on players that have already offloaded the ball. I wonder how many he could have pulled out of without causing unnecessary injury to opposition.

  • drg
    7:17 PM 13/01/2017

    -_- tit....

    Well I did start with sunshine and then figured too much can potentially lead to skin cancer... Then I moved on to pizza and figured heart attacks and obesity....And I couldn't think of a third and at that time of night I just went with what I could..

  • danknapp
    9:52 AM 13/01/2017

    Stroudos is right, DrG. Sounds like you're about to break down sobbing and asking "why did she leave?"

  • danknapp
    9:51 AM 13/01/2017

    Shit, they're moving the goal posts now? Fuck. First they change the tackle laws, and now they're making the kicks harder?

    This game is no longer the one I love.

  • stroudos
    7:56 AM 13/01/2017

    Do you know what that pizza analogy tells me? That at the time you wrote it you needed to put the whisky bottle down and go to bed... :)

  • drg
    11:29 PM 12/01/2017

    The issue is tackles are becoming so policed and changing over and over... Remember when dump tackles existed? That was the way of dominating an opponent... Now because you can't lift, you simply aim at the chest and destroy them.... Not allowed to do that anymore? Ok aim at the midriff...Internal injuries/bruising... Ok, ban tackling...

    Goal posts are being moved and so is our sense of danger and not for the better...

    If you're told pizza is fine one day, you go out eating.
    Then eventually people say "only 8 slices is good", that means 8.5 hours is dangerous or bad yes?
    Then people see that maybe we're not allowing any flexing room, so 5 slices now.... Well, by that judgement 8 slices or a whole is deadly.
    Lowered to 3 slices and now 5 is deadly where once before it was perfectly acceptable, yet people start ranting and raving like it's the end of the world, when in reality all's been fine for a long time when people are sensible...

    Idk, pizza is a stupid example but it's all I can think of right now...

  • 8:03 PM 12/01/2017

    I see your point, but (a long time ago) we were always taught to bend at the hips and tackle low. That still works but coaches don't use it as it allows offloads.

  • drg
    11:18 AM 12/01/2017

    Hope you had a nice break!

    I suppose the motions of the pre hit are probably replicated on a lot of players he tackles however when he hits a big bloke the cartoonesque outcome isn't repeated...

  • danknapp
    11:00 AM 12/01/2017

    That's true. I absolutely destroyed my son when I tackled him in the garden. I'm 6'1", he's 7 years old and weighs next to nothing. I should be applauded for my technique.

  • the_osprey
    9:13 PM 11/01/2017

    Agreed, although a key point is that the tackled player was totally upright at the time of the hit. If the scrum half had ducked into that tackle, it would have been almost impossible for Lawes to tackle him legally.

  • drg
    1:34 PM 11/01/2017

    Agreed, but Brad was trying to tackle a much bigger bloke.... Courtney Lawes smashings and drive backs are normally on smaller players... Or smaller than him anyway... (Which is acceptable IMO)

  • drg
    1:32 PM 11/01/2017

    Oh Jimmy I totally agree with you, the reasons for my views are that it would appear by many standards that one should go gracefully into the future rather than kicking and screaming whilst they're being dragged their anyway.... So I'm still making my mind up on which attitude to take....

  • jimmy23
    10:04 AM 11/01/2017

    Well he is a back, he needs to keep his looks intact you know!

  • im1
    9:41 AM 11/01/2017

    probably also worth noting that this shows 6 foot 6 man managing to get low and hit a 5 foot 10 man with a massive tackle, which is no where near high. So when commentators say, 'its tough for a big man to get down low' then this proves they are talking BS. This tackle should be used an example by World Rugby to show you how to put in a massive legal hit and should be what all guys who currently see themselves as big tacklers (brad barritt etc) should be aiming to replicated. The power it all though the body and legs with no swinging arm or shoulder drop. A perfect example of how to keep the game hard but also reduce the number of serious head injuries/concussions and tbh the size of the concussion lawsuits that World Rugby are scared of from ex players such as happened in the NFL. This is why they are putting the new directives in. To cover themselves, so they can say they were not negligent.

  • stroudos
    9:14 AM 11/01/2017

    Now then, I don't suppose Cliffy will be trying that flashy behind-the-back move again in the immediate future! A shame really, because I thought it was a very neat play. It looked like Butterfingers playing #7 ballsed it up anyway. To some extent, Lawes saved 7's blushes.

  • jimmy23
    8:16 AM 11/01/2017

    I think the whole "focus on the outcome" thing is where World Rugby are getting it completely wrong. I've said this in multiple comments but the very nature of rugby means that things will happen that are unintentional/accidental/part of the game. Random events that can't be policed. It's a horrible thing to say but I think we all go onto a rugby field knowing that there is a small chance of receiving a bad injury. There's an even smaller chance of it happening through negligence or something intentional.

    I seem to recall during one of the Premiership games at the start of the year there was an incident involving someones head or something and the referee said that nothing should be done about it because it was a "rugby incident". For some reason, I've barely seen that concept applied since.

  • colombes
    8:08 AM 11/01/2017

    Perfect tackle
    If a blooding nose is judged as a serious injury, i quit this sport

  • drg
    7:34 PM 10/01/2017

    Jimmy, I'm honestly not sure if I'm trying to be humourous anymore or if I'm being serious...

    I had no issues with the hit on Plisson 2 years ago....Oliver; who may be along shortly certainly did, as did many of our French brethren, but I did not ... But 2 years later, how do I feel about this hit today? :/ Sure, I don't really care myself, but then in my mind I still think rucking is fine... But when I restart my mind in 2017 rugby mode, I'm honestly not sure if I'd consider a penalty and/or yellow for this.... Especially for the outcome based bloody nose caused by a shoulder to the nose.....

  • jimmy23
    7:06 PM 10/01/2017

    I sense an element of humour injected into your comment but in all seriousness, I'd have put my foot through the TV if he got yellowed for that.

    This reminds me of that beauty of a hit on Plisson 2 years ago. He didn't land like that through Lawes lifting, it was the sheer force of the tackle that resulted in the way he landed. If he got yellowed it would have been because of the laws of physics, and that would be the moment I'd seriously consider to stop watching rugby.

  • drg
    4:43 PM 10/01/2017

    Number 9 landed left shoulder first, Courtney's shoulder made contact with the 9's face upon landing...

    Surely in this pansy day and age it's at least a yellow?

Related Articles