Chris Bridge

Quote: Omar Little "Rule one of precendents - the facts and issues have to be substantially the same...rlBailey/Fasavalu was not foul play because Fasavalu ducked into the tacklerl
Quote: Omar Little "]

In any case where has this idea that Shoulder charges can't also be high tackles come from. It has no basis in the laws of the game which state that it is foul play if "when effecting or attempting to effect a tackle makes contact with the head or neck of an opponent intentionally, recklessly or carelessly".

In Bailey/Fasavalu there was no intentional, reckless or careless contact with the head. I don't accept that as being the same for Moa.

I disagree this is exactly why it was a reckless tackle. Moa could see how tall Rinaldi was and therefore should have adjusted his technique accordingly. He made no attempt whatsoever to bring his shoulder below Rinaldi's head height which to me is at best careless and more probably reckless. [EDIT ]

Also on this basis wouldn't any high tackle on Rob Burrow be fair game as anyone else would have been fine?!

Why then are high tackles constantly still given when a player ducks into a tackle, granted it is hard to judge. Both cases are a shoulder barge which connected to the head, one was a red one was not.

You've got me there, I'm going off personal experience and the fact that I hadnt really seen a shoulder barge, even to the head penalised

He could have done, but having the choice of hitting him, or adjusting on the fly and probably missing most players would hit him ten times out of ten. A guilty plea no doubt makes his sentence less severe

Of course burrow is not fair game. The point I was trying to say was had it hit a forward or someone who would not have been ko'd it would not have been a red.