Well, who would have thought your protest would be not actually attending the game. Brilliant.

64 of you there tonight

Nice to see the hull fans support those who protested by doing the same too

Nope. As soon as a Huddersfield player touches someone sitting on the floor, the tackle is completed. A voluntary tackle is only given if hohaia stands up again and plays the ball, without a Huddersfield player touching him. Hooter goes, Huddersfield player touches hohaia, game over. No voluntary tackle. Please, before calling for decisions, make sure you understand the rules.

Are we going to go through every decision from tonight in every tiny detail?

Nah, i counted 83 actually

He could be right though- if he's a member of chav corner they did actually spend more of the game looking in our direction rather than at the game on the field.

Don't they always ?

Never understood that, in football or rugby, why would you go to a game to not even face the direction of the pitch ?

Same at Magic Weekend, half the FC fans facing Wire fans goading us for 80 minutes, it was hilarious.

OK so far.



Nope. He was/is guilty of a voluntary tackle just by going to ground untouched by an opponent and remaining there, playing the ball doesn't come into it.



Irony alert.

From the latest rules on the RFL site:

Voluntary tackle 4. A player in possession shall not deliberately and unnecessarily allow himself to be tackled by voluntarily falling to the ground when not held by an opponent. If a player drops on a loose ball he shall not remain on the ground waiting to be tackled if he has time to regain his feet and continue play.

This is the "classic" voluntary tackle, trademarked by Chris Joynt. No mention of playing the ball there.

and

Player marking dives on the ball 4. If the player marking the tackled player at the play-the-ball dives behind the tackled player in order to drop on the ball as it is heeled, he is guilty of a voluntary tackle and should be penalised. If there is no acting half back it is permissible for a player to dive behind the tackled player and drop on the ball after it has been heeled provided that, unless tackled, he immediately regains his feet.

Or there (in this context).

From the glossary, Voluntary Tackle is where a player in possession voluntarily stops play when not effectively tackled.

Ditto.

The situation you describe I only recently became aware of and I can't find a reference on the RFL site. Best I can come up with is from the ref's Twitter feed: "Does the voluntary tackle rule still apply? If not, when was it abandoned? Still applies. Enforced when a player deliberately dives to the floor, doesn’t regain feet & plays ball prior to being tackled."
I suppose players may do this to confuse opponents and gain an advantage.

i count as 2

Half of them?

Really

You actually proved my point there, thank you

Your correct there is currently no mention of playing the ball in the rules of the game - because it is merely the open, accepted interpretation of it, throughout the years (and codes) voluntary tackles have taken different significance which is why the rules you quote are vague. As with the rules about kicking a drop goal, they are kept precise and open, so they outlast current trend and fashions in the sport, and don't need to be updated as every new trick comes into fashion.

If the rules you quoted were strictly followed, we'd see a penalty for it every other week, as a player picks the ball up on his own line, stays on the floor to not be pushed back and the defender waits for him to stand. If you think that that should be penalised, fair enough - but that's not the current interpretation no irony here it is also worth pointing out if you do believe this is a voluntary tackle, there are at least 2 penalties saints should of had for voluntary tackles throughout the game

It's also an irrelevance - Lunt touches hohaia and he falls to the floor (whether that contact was enough for him to fall is another debate ) so the tackle was merely in the process of being complete