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

Wed 4 Jul 2018 | 04:02
Midweek Madness - Tackler gets thin air as winger miraculously flies over him

21
Comments

Cobras A team scored this incredible try against Whangamata recently, as they found a way to get past a cover defender, defying the laws of physics (and some may say rugby) in the process. After some lovely build-up play from a turnover, winger Kiefer Gulliver did the unexpected.

The creativity with the Cobras - standing for College Old Boys Rugby and Sports - isn't just in their name, as Gulliver leapt extremely high to get over the would-be tackler, as fans in Te Aroha, New Zealand watched on.

While the try was given, this is often considered illegal by referees, as we have seen on numerous occasions in the past. That said, it is not always blown up, as we saw when Vaea Fifita jumped over Piers Francis two years ago.

The referee also let that one go, but it is usually penalised as dangerous play, falling under the old Law 10.4 covering Dangerous Play, now called Law 9.11, Players must not do anything that is reckless or dangerous to others. 

Some may say that it could also fall under Law 9.26, A player must not do anything that is against the spirit of good sportsmanship.

Either way, nobody was hurt on this occasion so it made for quite amusing viewing.

You can view more unbelievable hurdle attempts in our Related Posts

Posted By: Grant Constable

21 Comments

  • hallsy
    3:45 PM 09/07/2018

    It has always been my understanding that the ball carrier cannot jump into the tackle. This should have been a penalty to the defending team. At the very least the defender if lucky to not have caught some studs to the face.

  • im1
    1:43 PM 06/07/2018

    I would have thought that the disciplinary panel would have halved his punishment due to a good character and good conduct in the hearing. So just half an execution.

  • drg
    12:22 PM 06/07/2018

    Seems a bit lenient..

  • jimmy23
    10:42 AM 06/07/2018

    Red card / execution.

  • drg
    9:26 AM 06/07/2018

    Actually im1 just to add, I didn't address the comment you made about dump tackles. As you said, it most certainly is important to make a distinction! As far as I know, spear tackles were always illegal. The nastiest spear I think I saw was Lote Tiquiri on McCaw, but it's sad that rather than recognising the differences, the laws have bumbled their way into a "it's yucky eww" stance and outlawed a hard 'dominating' tackle, which imo, was only dangerous to the tacklers nuts...(if someone ever tried to dump me I always tried to get a knee or a shin into their balls!)

  • elvis15
    8:38 AM 06/07/2018

    This is exactly my stance. If you want to have defensive players go lower in the tackle and avoid potential head contact then you can't reward offensive players for putting themselves in dangerous positions. It's counterproductive to positive change.

  • drg
    8:59 PM 05/07/2018

    Not really semantics... One is right the other is wrong..

  • drg
    8:58 PM 05/07/2018

    Ah, potential devil's advocate.. I get you there.

  • reality
    5:12 PM 05/07/2018

    I - and 45678 - probably should have read the article before commenting.

    Semantics about the difference between the words 'rules' and 'laws' is decidedly uninteresting though.

  • im1
    1:39 PM 05/07/2018

    don't get me wrong - I am not saying that I agree with it not being a pen. I'm just explaining why I think it (and similar cases) have not been given within the laws of the game.

    100% agree with you on the rest. I've raised the point about how many how many "serious" injuries have been caused by collisions in the air/dump tackles. (I think its important to make a distinction between dump tackles and spears there). Specifically on air collisions, if these were so dangerous then Aussie Rules wouldn't exist as all the players would be permanently injured.

  • drg
    1:31 PM 05/07/2018

    Nah, I disagree. I don't like the way works... Next phase of play it's one on one again, this time the defender stands upright knowing the jump is coming, jump doesn't happen, attacker and defender clash heads, red card to defender for reckless tackling technique. Doesn't wash with me I'm afraid.

    The game has tightened down EVERY other aspect of the game or aspect of the before and after of this incident, so why make an exception? We're now forcing tacklers to go lower and lower, first it was neck, then it was shoulders, now it's nipple... We're forcing ball catching jumpers to CATCH THE BALL OR ELSE!! Due to the fact that if there is any collision in the air and they don't catch the ball then they're liable for penalty-red card-ban decisions.. it's just wrong and to let this go is wrong as well.

    In fact to further the point, how many "serious" injuries have been caused by collisions in the air/dump tackles.. how many serious injuries to the head are we likely to see if jumping becomes a thing? Superficial facial injuries due to studs, bad head injuries due to knees to faces...

  • morgthom
    12:00 PM 05/07/2018

    Penalty / yellow card.

  • im1
    10:51 AM 05/07/2018

    Not really. The defender had no idea what was going on because he was already committed to going low. Assuming that the attacker can't jump is an error by the defender.

    Would be interesting to see what would/should happen if a player hurdled a chop tackle and did/didn't catch the defender on the head.

  • pickay
    9:21 AM 05/07/2018

    It was still the case that the defender had no option to tackle the attacker without doing something dangerous. Also, most defenders don't expect the attacker to jump, because they assume it's illegal. So imo the attacker clearly gains an unfair advantage here.

  • im1
    9:07 AM 05/07/2018

    if its not dangerous, its not against the laws.

    the defender had already committed to his tackle, if there had been contact it would have been dangerous play by the attacker and then it would have been a pen.

    if the attacker had attempted to jump over the defender before the defender was committed to the tackle, then that would have been against the spirit of good sportsmanship as the defender would have not be able to tackle the attacker without doing something dangerous.

  • drg
    8:58 AM 05/07/2018

    "I don't think there's a rule"

    Correct... There is however a couple laws used... As stated in the description above..

    But I'm.one for not reading the description very well..

  • pickay
    8:45 AM 05/07/2018

    As it is illegal to tackle a player in the air, it must be illegal to jump into or over a tackler on purpose as well. Otherwise you just jump and run like Super Mario through the defence and you can't be touched. Loophole to avoid ever being tackled.
    If this kind of hurdling technique is OK, then in this instance it must be OK to tackle the player in the air as well. However, if you imagine the tackler in this video getting up to grab the hurdler by the legs, then you can picture all sorts of neck-breaking outcomes... So penalise the ball carrier, problem solved, tadaaaa!!
    ('Jumping to catch a hospital pass' is a different story though, as you are jumping to get the ball, like you do to catch a kick, so that's a little trickier there...)

  • reality
    8:44 AM 05/07/2018

    I don't think there's a rule that specifically says you can't do it, but it's considered dangerous play. For obvious reasons.

    Sinckler's was a bit different because he jumped to receive the ball rather than having the ball and jumping the tackler. Although the fact that the tackler was penalised was completely ridiculous.

  • drg
    8:16 PM 04/07/2018

    Not really impressed this was let go really... Especially given it resulted in a try...

  • ruckinmaul
    6:01 PM 04/07/2018

    Can someone clarify me, if the tackler did tackled the ball runner and fall awkwardly face first to the ground, does it constitute of a foul? Is it the same as the 'jumping to catch a hospital pass'?

    As an amateur referee myself, I would definitely penalize the ball runner for 'dangerous play'.

  • pickay
    4:51 PM 04/07/2018

    I would have penalised that.

Related Articles