I was watching the NRL game this morning I recalled the commentator saying you can tackle the attaking player in mid air but not the defending player, this is news to me, anyone wish to confirm....

Is this just an Aussie interpretation of the rule or what?

Im guessing the commentator supports the team that had a guy tackling the attacker in mid-air.

I'm assuming it depends on the situation, an attacking player diving for a try whilst in mid air compared to a player catching a ball from a kick who is in mid air.

In the first instance the defending player should not be penalised for trying to stop a try.

Unfortunatley missed that game, but surely it is a bit dangerous when a player is off the ground being tackled in mid air attempting to catch the ball.
I take the point in the motion of diving for the line

Spoke with an ex RFL official about this & he says he knew nothing about this supposed "new rule"

I heard that too. Sounded bizarre, as it doesn't seem right. I thought tackling a player in the air (ie with both his feet off the ground) whilst in the action of catching the ball, was a penalty. The action of tackling a player who already has possession and is diving to touch down is perfectly legitimate.
We'll have to wait for jonh or Grimmy to get the facts.

The NRL has has had this rule since at least last year

Aussie rule is that a player can be tackled in the air if he is from the side that kicked the ball.

It's an interesting one. personally I don't like the way that once a player has jumped into the air then by the letter of the law he can't be touched, leaving the defense pretty much helpless, other than to challenge for the ball themselves. It will make kicks into the corner a lot easier to defend if you can shove a player into touch before he's landed. Whether that's a good thing or not is up for debate Isuppose

i like the NRL version as it helps smaller wingers get a chance to stop a try