Well if what is being described by the witness is true, the play was completely outside the context of the game and criminal charges should be justified in my mind.
You can only tackle the ball carrier. There is physical play amongst the rest of the players, but not tackling. It sounds like this kid picked up the other and suplexed him into the ground. Not part of rugby. The kid didn't have the ball.
Well if what is being described by the witness is true, the play was completely outside the context of the game and criminal charges should be justified in my mind.
You can only tackle the ball carrier. There is physical play amongst the rest of the players, but not tackling. It sounds like this kid picked up the other and suplexed him into the ground. Not part of rugby. The kid didn't have the ball.
hey I agree, I have played a couple of game of rugby in my life......but I am more interested in how the court see this act....and he did not suplex him, spear tackled him.....
As JD said, if this happened 20-30m from the play I think the manslaughter charge is completely justified. It sounds to me like the players had a confrontation behind the play and one of them went for the bodyslam. It's definitely outside of the rules of the game, but without more it's hard to say for sure that it turns into a conviction.
Location: In my office, at the Ministry of Awesome!
Exp:
I'm not 100% certain why they are making a fuss about it being a "dump tackle".
Yes they are illegal, but only in the last 2 years or so, and they do still happen pretty often, and usually aren't a big concern. Hell in the game I played on Saturday one of our players got penaized for one. It's sort of the rugby equivalent to boarding. Sometimes it's malicious, lots of times it's a guy doing something to put himself in danger and getting lit up.
In this case however, what is relevant is that it was 20 meters behind the play. If that is the case, then there sure is reson to belive this may have been an attack on the kid, and not just a big hit. And in that case, I'd say charges probably are waranted.
__________________
THE SHANTZ WILL RISE AGAIN. <-----Check the Badge bitches. You want some Awesome, you come to me!
I'm not 100% certain why they are making a fuss about it being a "dump tackle".
Yes they are illegal, but only in the last 2 years or so, and they do still happen pretty often, and usually aren't a big concern. Hell in the game I played on Saturday one of our players got penaized for one. It's sort of the rugby equivalent to boarding. Sometimes it's malicious, lots of times it's a guy doing something to put himself in danger and getting lit up.
In this case however, what is relevant is that it was 20 meters behind the play. If that is the case, then there sure is reson to belive this may have been an attack on the kid, and not just a big hit. And in that case, I'd say charges probably are waranted.
This seems like a total freak accident. IMO I think teams should do mandatory physicals to test for any type of abnormal things - but they dont. Rugby is a violent game, yes, but I think football is 100 times more violent.
I have played with some very dirty players and against some very dirty players, its part of the game. If in fact he did not have the ball and was far away from the play then absolutly it is assault. You cant just randomly tackle a guy who is not expecting it. The thing with rugby is you know 100% when you are going to get hit because of:
A) A guy cant come from behind and tackle you unless of course he is chasing you - but you cant line up behind someone.
B) If you do not have the ball you cannot be tackled - if you do have it, expect to get hit.
Thats why football is 100 times more violent, you can get blindsided at anytime.
I'm not 100% certain why they are making a fuss about it being a "dump tackle".
Yes they are illegal, but only in the last 2 years or so, and they do still happen pretty often, and usually aren't a big concern. Hell in the game I played on Saturday one of our players got penaized for one. It's sort of the rugby equivalent to boarding. Sometimes it's malicious, lots of times it's a guy doing something to put himself in danger and getting lit up.
In this case however, what is relevant is that it was 20 meters behind the play. If that is the case, then there sure is reson to belive this may have been an attack on the kid, and not just a big hit. And in that case, I'd say charges probably are waranted.
I know, its not that insanely uncommon or malicious. And you're right, its only been about 2 years that they were illegal in the game, and this incident occurred 2 years ago.
__________________ The Beatings Shall Continue Until Morale Improves!
This Post Has Been Distilled for the Eradication of Seemingly Incurable Sadness.
The World Ends when you're dead. Until then, you've got more punishment in store. - Flames Fans
If you thought this season would have a happy ending, you haven't been paying attention.
I also wonder if this opens up a can of worms for the Ontario Union, perhaps his defence is that he was never coached that this was not acceptable, I think there was a fella in calgary that was parralyzed going into a ruck and part of his claim was he was not coached on the correct way to ruck.
Does the Board of Education, & ORU open themselves up to a wrongful death claim as well?
The Following User Says Thank You to ok, ok,....I get it For This Useful Post:
Well I've never heard the term dump tackle so I was relying on this description:
"He described how the player put his arm around Castillo's waist, lifted him over his shoulder, then drove him to the ground with his back hitting first followed by the back of his head. "
Which I guess is a poor description but kinda seemed like a suplex to me.
So a google search revealed this page, which is pretty funny considering one of the images brought up is a streaker getting speared.
Well I've never heard the term dump tackle so I was relying on this description:
"He described how the player put his arm around Castillo's waist, lifted him over his shoulder, then drove him to the ground with his back hitting first followed by the back of his head. "
Which I guess is a poor description but kinda seemed like a suplex to me.
So a google search revealed this page, which is pretty funny considering one of the images brought up is a streaker getting speared.
I also wonder if this opens up a can of worms for the Ontario Union, perhaps his defence is that he was never coached that this was not acceptable, I think there was a fella in calgary that was parralyzed going into a ruck and part of his claim was he was not coached on the correct way to ruck.
Does the Board of Education, & ORU open themselves up to a wrongful death claim as well?
Hmm... very good point. There is definatly an argument there. In Canada, Rugby is not a very well known sport, most people dont have a clue how the game works or the rules until grade 10. I started playing in grade 9 with very limited knowledge on how the game is even played, my understanding at that point was to tackle the guy with the ball and make sure the pass is always backwards.
Hmm... very good point. There is definatly an argument there. In Canada, Rugby is not a very well known sport, most people dont have a clue how the game works or the rules until grade 10. I started playing in grade 9 with very limited knowledge on how the game is even played, my understanding at that point was to tackle the guy with the ball and make sure the pass is always backwards.
right and I am sure we have all been subject to some idiot that thinks he is coaching a world cup final instead of students (kids).....
I also wonder if this opens up a can of worms for the Ontario Union, perhaps his defence is that he was never coached that this was not acceptable, I think there was a fella in calgary that was parralyzed going into a ruck and part of his claim was he was not coached on the correct way to ruck.
Does the Board of Education, & ORU open themselves up to a wrongful death claim as well?
If this happened 20-30m behind the play that defense is pretty weak. In that case he's not attempting a tackle and just getting it wrong, he's picking a guy up and driving him into the ground for no apparent reason. You don't have to coach someone to not randomly do that in order to avoid liability.
I definitely think charges are warranted. People have to think of the consequences of their actions, inside and outside of the game. You don't get a 'get out of jail free card' just because you're participating in a sport.
If this happened 20-30m behind the play that defense is pretty weak. In that case he's not attempting a tackle and just getting it wrong, he's picking a guy up and driving him into the ground for no apparent reason. You don't have to coach someone to not randomly do that in order to avoid liability.
you dealt with courts or judges much.....sometimes they stretch common sense.....and it appears you have played before.....the judge may look at this from the point of view of someone that has never watched/played a game before......court is a crazy gamble.....ask any of the lawyers on CP....and the burden of proof in civil court is much lower than criminal court....ask OJ
Manslaughter during rugby game
<-----Check the Badge bitches. You want some Awesome, you come to me!
