What does the ref mean when he calls a 'surrender' tackle?

Basically, as I understand it, it's when the ball carrier has no intention of running the ball back and as soon as he comes into contact with the defender they hit the deck. They do this to either avoid getting pushed into touch or back in goal or to get the advantage by getting a fast PTB. If the ref calls it the defense are allowed to lay on longer than would normally be allowed, similar to if he calls 'dominant'.

Wakey were doing this all last night and thaler rarely called Surrender.
People say it's daft but it's a great little ruling, Graham does it every single time he runs the ball in his own 20 and sometimes gets away with it.

Anybody inparticular doing this last night? I was at the game and didn't notice anything untoward going on. I know Stosic made sure he landed 'elbows and knees' more often than not but it was not at the expense of trying to make yards after collision in my opinion.

Saints were doing it constantly on Friday night, every other tackle Smith called "Surrender" and so Huddersfield were allowed more time in the tackle

but apparently we were slowing the ptb down...maybe if saints had tried to break a tackle...

Chris Joynt talks about running at legs in his autobiography (remember that tackle?) to get a quick play the ball. So it seems a good ruling to call surrender/dominant tackles but I don't detect a slower play the ball after them.

The point of the rule is that if the ball carrier is entering the tackle in a downward motion, effectively aiming for the floor whether tackled or not, the ref will shout surrender, which tells the defending team they are allowed to lay on the tackle slightly longer to stop the attacker getting an advantage.

Causes confusion because fans can't hear the call so think defense is slowing play down but it's a good rule for me in that it makes the attacker attempt to bust the tackle...which is the entertaining part!

There is no such thing as a voluntary tackle....and there is no penalty for a surrender tackle.

This all comes from the late 90's in Australia when we had unlimited interchange.


Basically some forwards dived to the ground, landing on their hands and knee's, the tackling player basically hand to get off them immediately and it allowed a super fast play the ball.

The surrender call was brought in so that players knew they could take their time holding the player down, letting them earn the physical advantage.

Its works well but players need to be switched on for it and the refs need to know when to call it.

Thats a problem in SL.


As always the surrender tackle has ALWAYS been in the game. In the "good old days" if a player dived to the ground they would get smashed and worked over by the defense. Now we just have a call for it.

Though there is:
Section 11 notes 2(c) Succumbing to the tackle
"A player who is held and wishes to play the ball can make it evident that he has succumbed to the tackle by grounding the ball. It is to his advantage to do this to avoid the possibility of another opponent attempting to complete the tackle."

the whole surrender / dominant tackle came about because of the melbourne storm winning the 99 grand final

they were basically coached to dive at the tacklers feet, get up quickly and PTB to gain a roll on.

its the opposite of what RL is about in that the ball carrier should be trying to break the tackle, not give in to it.

the dominant tackle is when the defender forces back the ball carrier. because you have dominated the attack, you are rewarded.

a surrender tackle occurs when the ball carrier just gives up running and dives to the ground. again the defence is rewarded by being allowed to lay on the ball carrier longer so you can set your defensive line

by allowing tacklers longer to hold down, it stops teams from doing it.

basically it was a form of cheating really.