April 29, 2025 • 13 mins
Former NRL referee Bill Harrigan feels common sense needs to be taken into account when determining the severity of high tackles.
It follows round eight of the competition, where 18 players were sin-binned, 15 of those for head high contact.
One of those was Rabbitohs fullback Latrell Mitchell, who was given his marching orders after a hit on Storm winger Sua Fa'alogo, who appeared to be slipping before the collision.
Harrigan points to that incident as one he disagrees with.
LISTEN ABOVE
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:06):
You're listening to the Sports Talk podcast with Darcy Wildergrave
from news Talk zed Be.
Speaker 2 (00:12):
And it's warm.
Speaker 3 (00:13):
Welcome now to Bill Harrigan, former NRL referee and arguably
one of the greatest to ever hold a whistle to
his lips. He joins us now to talk about the
amound of trouble at mill players are finding themselves in
when it comes to high tackle and the said adjudication.
Hi Berl Good evening, Darcy Drama over the weekend in
(00:35):
the NRL, eighteen players sent to the bin and round eight,
a lot of them high tackles the suggestions there's been
a crackdown from upstairs. They're saying, no, that's not the case.
We're pretty consistent in what we do. What's your read
on what's happened?
Speaker 4 (00:50):
Bill, Now, we're not being privy to any information that
goes on with the referee in that anymore.
Speaker 2 (00:55):
So long time since retired.
Speaker 4 (00:58):
I don't know if there was a crackdown set or whatever,
but to see eighteen players sending right across the eight games,
something was said somewhere that they're going to do it,
But after watching it, I'm confused. I think a lot
of the people I've spoken to are all confused about
what is a high shot? When is it intentional or illegal?
(01:20):
And when was it an accident? And what are we
going to do about it? And I understand they've got
to keep the integrity of the game and the safety
of the players. We've also got to be remember, we've
got an entertainment out there, and you know, just some
of the I'm shaking my head eyes with some of
the decisions compared to some of the others that weren't
acted upon over the weekend.
Speaker 3 (01:39):
Consistency in applying a law like this, this is always
going to be problematic, like back in your day when
you're refereeing umpires referee sorry aren't built the same. They're
going to see different things. So it's actually quite a
fraught thing to lay down, isn't it.
Speaker 2 (01:56):
It is?
Speaker 4 (01:57):
And I go back to way back, And I know
they've done it this year, and I applaud the NRL
for doing it this year and making the players play
the ball with their foot. It's a basic of our
game and I'm happy that they got stuck into that.
We were given an instruction many many years ago, I
think just after the Super League started, well after the
NRL first started back in the late nineties early twos
(02:20):
that we had to get to play the ball with
a foot on it, And poor old Stephen Clarke ended
up being a scapegoat because he was the first game
that weekend and he went out and blew around about
thirty penalties.
Speaker 2 (02:30):
So when he played it.
Speaker 4 (02:30):
Even just missed putting their foot or their studs on
the ball, well they end up copying a penalty. And
I know after that game there were quite a few
of us rang around and said, are we going to
do this? And so we decided that we weren't going
to do it as badantic is what he did, and
anyone that looked like they were touching the ball we
(02:51):
allowed to play on because we knew we still have
to keep an an entertaining game, an empathy for the game,
and not have thirty penalties in a stop start game,
which is most people turn off after that. I understand
what they've done and where they're coming from, but with
eight referees across the board each weekend, I just find
it's probably they've found it very difficult to determine what
(03:13):
was to be penalized, sin binned, or placed on report duty.
Speaker 3 (03:19):
Of care to the athletes is one thing, but I
suppose I shouldn't really make light of this, but duty
of care to the paying fans, the people paying for
the broadcast at some of their laundroom, and people actually
going to the games. It surely has to be taken
into account.
Speaker 4 (03:33):
I think they do, and I think I've heard the
NRL this morning have said that they're going to take
the bunker out of the play by play, and I'm
happy with that. That's a really good thing that they
can do straight off. Different to last weekend is to
stay right. We will not be going back four or
five tackles when the bunker has seen something stopping play,
(03:55):
going back and giving a penalty, putting a play report,
and in some occasions sin binding them back. Then my
opinion is, if the referee doesn't see it, you play
on and you let the match. You've got in place
to do their job post the game, and if some
player has to be charged, well then they charge him.
(04:16):
And I know the negative on that is where a
team will say, well, hang on, we were disadvantage because
nothing happened to that player during the game, But the
team that plays him next week gets the advantage. Out
of it because he's now got a week, two week,
three weeks suspension. Well, that's just bad luck. That's the
way the game is. If the referee doesn't see it,
play on. If he sees it, he'll pull it up,
he'll penalize it, he'll send in it, or he'll put
(04:37):
it on a report. But at least he's doing it
and the continuity of the game stays there. He gets
an opportunity to let the game flow and referee that
game with the empathy that is required.
Speaker 3 (04:48):
If that was to happen and the referees were not
see it and they would adjudicate based on that, does
that open the way for players maybe to be a
little fast and loose if they feel they're not being
seen or is that just over the top.
Speaker 4 (05:05):
No, they won't because if the referee, like most of
the times, the referee is going to get it. It's
only these little innocuous ones which they're trying to you know,
like the bloke's head goes down into the guy's shoulder.
The referee will still get most of them. And if
he doesn't, the player's not going to escape if he
has done something loose, because he's going to get picked
up by the Match Review Committee albit not in that game,
(05:27):
but he's still going to get picked up, and he
still could end up suffering a charge in a penalty
financially or a couple of weeks.
Speaker 2 (05:34):
So they're not going to get away with it.
Speaker 4 (05:35):
So I don't think it'll open up the gates where
players will think new beauty. I can go a little
bit loosier and knock a few blokes around.
Speaker 2 (05:41):
But the thing that.
Speaker 4 (05:43):
It's concerning mur at the moment is in some stages
there are players which are getting hit and falling, and
a player is already committed to a tackle where he
might be hitting him around the legs, and I say,
e g. Latrell Mitchell, he was going in low, the
player fell down and end up falling into him and
coppying it, And yet Latrell gets charged and everything. Just
(06:06):
think for what was he supposed to have done. Isn't
this going to be silk some accidental contact. I think
I could wear that if they had to said, look,
you've whether it's accidental or not, your video in the head.
We've got to blow the penalty. But boy, I don't
see sin binning and placed on an important charged for
something like that which he had no control over with
an accidental player. And there are sometimes that situation.
Speaker 3 (06:30):
I suppose, when a referee is trying to do that.
Looking at a video replay in the heat of the moment,
it's a little hard to look at mitigating factors because
there are so many angles and so many details. That's
only post that on video it should be looked back correctly.
I think it's really hard for a referee right there
in the heat of the moment to go actually that
(06:51):
wasn't deliberate, already fell into that, or go through all that,
and what happens when he's doing it. It slows the
entire game up, so it does take away the emphasis
from the fans.
Speaker 4 (07:00):
Correct And that's why I want to see the referee
be able to make his decisions at the time, so
in real time he sees something, he makes the decision,
just like we used to do in the old days.
Speaker 2 (07:11):
He makes the decision. Is that a penalty? Was it high?
Did he do it deliberately?
Speaker 4 (07:15):
Was it reckless? Makes the decision straight away. If he
doesn't see it, he misses it all he doesn't believe
it is a penalty or on report or a sim Ning
or something like that, and he plays on. And then
later on the Match Review Committee, who go through every
tackle in every game, they see it and they have
a different opinion because they get a different angle. Well,
then they'll take the appropriate action and so be it,
(07:38):
and then that is fair to everybody. Over the course
of the year, it's consistent they.
Speaker 3 (07:43):
Put someone on a report for an obvious shot to
their head, then they march them. Should they just put
them on report and carry on? There's that fine line,
I suppose, between what the referee actually does and how
they react to what they see, because in some cases
it's extraordinary obvious that a guy is targeting other bloke's
(08:04):
head with his shoulder and he should be worked but walked.
But when it's kind of in between, it's a little
hard for them to make that call.
Speaker 4 (08:13):
Yeah, I still support the decision by the NRL when
they brought it in some years ago to say we're
going to add the ten minutes to it, because there
were sometimes when a player would be placed on report,
but the guy that he's actually HiT's been taken off
and have a head goes through the head, you know that. Yeah,
(08:36):
they've got to go through those protocols, or he may
not end up coming back on because he's been whacked
that hard and that crook and the concussion. They don't
let him back on and so all it suffered is
a bike being placed on report. So I get why
they said, and we're going to cost you ten minutes,
And usually that is the ten minutes he's in there,
and a guy might be going under the head protocols
in that same time, So I get that.
Speaker 2 (08:57):
And it's also it's they do that so that the
start of the players.
Speaker 4 (09:02):
Well, if you do go and you hit a bloke's head,
you could end up copping ten minutes in the bin
and your team suffers.
Speaker 2 (09:07):
So I get why they do that.
Speaker 4 (09:10):
But sometimes in this last weekend, I did see some
instances where there were innocuous hits with a shoulder end
of the head and he was end up placed on
report and sent to the bin. And then I've seen
something similar and nothing ended up happening, or it was
just a straight out penalty, and that's when I started thinking, well,
what is happening today, Where is the line in the sand?
(09:30):
What is acceptable, what's not? What's the sim bin what's not?
And I think that's what all fans are throwing your
hands up in the air after the last weekend saying, well,
we really don't know what's what now.
Speaker 3 (09:43):
Bill.
Speaker 2 (09:43):
With the.
Speaker 3 (09:45):
Focus on this and the focus on people changing, athletes
changing their tackle meat, have you noticed from your lounge
room that there is more of an attention to detail
when it comes to tackling. The guys actually know their
head is not a good place, and in general, they
(10:06):
don't they go to the guts, they go to the chests,
they go underneath it. Are you seeing that?
Speaker 4 (10:11):
Yeah, I'm seeing that, But we're still seeing a lot
of them because they're doing this one two three in
the emphasis is not get the bloke on the ground anymore.
The emphasis is hold him up as long as we
can take him backwards. I hate this style of tackling.
I like when you watch back in the nineties and
the early two thousands an where there was a hit,
Let's get him on the ground as quick as we can.
And yes, they did test you back then by trying
(10:32):
to say, Okay, can we turtle him, can we lay
on him a little bit longer, can we hold his
arm down? What can we do? But they were getting
him on the ground as quick as they could these days.
It's hit stick, second man in, hold him up more,
third man in. We're going to take him backwards and
then we'll put him on the ground and then we'll
peel off him and it takes for ages. Then I
don't like that style of tackling. I like to see
(10:53):
they're out of it. But while they're hitting and sticking,
and those first two guys are standing upright and they're
not going to the legs. When they hit one around
the belly and the chest, that's fine. But that other
man's coming in and he's actually gone up around the
top and his arms deflecting off the other the ball
carrier's arm or the ball and just copping him with
a little flick under the chin. And we now know
(11:15):
that that's not good enough and you're going to cop a penalty.
Or they're going in the lead with the shoulder in
towards the chest area, and the ball carrier happens to
lose his footing, starts to get tackled a little bit
and go down and then he hits the shoulder and
ban we've got another penalty. I would like to see, maybe,
and I don't know, maybe it's worth a trial in
(11:36):
a couple of games. At some stage when there's no
impact on the semi finals towards the end of the season,
that the tackle line becomes maybe the nipple across the
chest and that becomes the line. Anything above that you're penalized.
Anything below it or good, see how that goes.
Speaker 3 (11:53):
At the end of the day. It is a collision
based sport. It is an aggressive sport and making these
onwards eggs are going to break. Do you think there's
an acceptance out there the things are going to go
down because of the nature of the sport, and the
athletes just go, you know, that's cool, we can deal
with that.
Speaker 2 (12:11):
Yes, and that is right. It is a very aggressive sport.
Speaker 4 (12:13):
And even the Yanks, when you see how hard they
hit each other with their helmets and all their patterning around,
they still look at us and say, wow, you guys
are mad because of the way we hit, and our
players these days are so much stronger and fitter. It's
like running in the blocks of concrete. I would hate
to be on a kickoff the ball, the guy taking
(12:34):
that ball up when the first play catches it and
passes it to that guy taking the ball up and
then that collision at the twenty thirty meter mark. Wow,
I'd hate to be amongst that because that's the most
dangerous part of the game, I believe, is that first
collision off the kickoff.
Speaker 2 (12:48):
That's massive.
Speaker 4 (12:49):
And when you get two or three players hitting that blake,
so you've got one hundred and ten kilos running at
three hundred and thirty kilos when the three coming and
hitting that collision is tough. It is aggressive, and it
is dangerous, but that's we accept it because that's our
sport and everyone loves that. How can we put it.
It's a battle, it's tough, and that's part of what
(13:11):
is so entertaining the people and it's exciting. So I
think the players will keep putting their hand up saying, well,
we accept that that's part of the game. We're going
in there, but we're still going to make sure we
protect them and we don't have the head nocks. We've
got to reduce the amount of headknocks as far as
we can.
Speaker 3 (13:28):
And on that bill, will you get back on with it?
Great to hear that you're still watching far too much RL.
Once it's in your system, you can't get it out,
can you mister Harrigan.
Speaker 4 (13:37):
Well, it's a great career that I had. FOOTAG has
been my life, so I'm still a part of it.
Speaker 1 (13:42):
For more from sports talk, listen live to news Talks.
It'd be from seven pm weekdays, or follow the podcast
on iHeartRadio.
You're listening to the Sports Talk podcast with Darcy Wildergrave
from news Talk zed Be.
Speaker 2 (00:12):
And it's warm.
Speaker 3 (00:13):
Welcome now to Bill Harrigan, former NRL referee and arguably
one of the greatest to ever hold a whistle to
his lips. He joins us now to talk about the
amound of trouble at mill players are finding themselves in
when it comes to high tackle and the said adjudication.
Hi Berl Good evening, Darcy Drama over the weekend in
(00:35):
the NRL, eighteen players sent to the bin and round eight,
a lot of them high tackles the suggestions there's been
a crackdown from upstairs. They're saying, no, that's not the case.
We're pretty consistent in what we do. What's your read
on what's happened?
Speaker 4 (00:50):
Bill, Now, we're not being privy to any information that
goes on with the referee in that anymore.
Speaker 2 (00:55):
So long time since retired.
Speaker 4 (00:58):
I don't know if there was a crackdown set or whatever,
but to see eighteen players sending right across the eight games,
something was said somewhere that they're going to do it,
But after watching it, I'm confused. I think a lot
of the people I've spoken to are all confused about
what is a high shot? When is it intentional or illegal?
(01:20):
And when was it an accident? And what are we
going to do about it? And I understand they've got
to keep the integrity of the game and the safety
of the players. We've also got to be remember, we've
got an entertainment out there, and you know, just some
of the I'm shaking my head eyes with some of
the decisions compared to some of the others that weren't
acted upon over the weekend.
Speaker 3 (01:39):
Consistency in applying a law like this, this is always
going to be problematic, like back in your day when
you're refereeing umpires referee sorry aren't built the same. They're
going to see different things. So it's actually quite a
fraught thing to lay down, isn't it.
Speaker 2 (01:56):
It is?
Speaker 4 (01:57):
And I go back to way back, And I know
they've done it this year, and I applaud the NRL
for doing it this year and making the players play
the ball with their foot. It's a basic of our
game and I'm happy that they got stuck into that.
We were given an instruction many many years ago, I
think just after the Super League started, well after the
NRL first started back in the late nineties early twos
(02:20):
that we had to get to play the ball with
a foot on it, And poor old Stephen Clarke ended
up being a scapegoat because he was the first game
that weekend and he went out and blew around about
thirty penalties.
Speaker 2 (02:30):
So when he played it.
Speaker 4 (02:30):
Even just missed putting their foot or their studs on
the ball, well they end up copying a penalty. And
I know after that game there were quite a few
of us rang around and said, are we going to
do this? And so we decided that we weren't going
to do it as badantic is what he did, and
anyone that looked like they were touching the ball we
(02:51):
allowed to play on because we knew we still have
to keep an an entertaining game, an empathy for the game,
and not have thirty penalties in a stop start game,
which is most people turn off after that. I understand
what they've done and where they're coming from, but with
eight referees across the board each weekend, I just find
it's probably they've found it very difficult to determine what
(03:13):
was to be penalized, sin binned, or placed on report duty.
Speaker 3 (03:19):
Of care to the athletes is one thing, but I
suppose I shouldn't really make light of this, but duty
of care to the paying fans, the people paying for
the broadcast at some of their laundroom, and people actually
going to the games. It surely has to be taken
into account.
Speaker 4 (03:33):
I think they do, and I think I've heard the
NRL this morning have said that they're going to take
the bunker out of the play by play, and I'm
happy with that. That's a really good thing that they
can do straight off. Different to last weekend is to
stay right. We will not be going back four or
five tackles when the bunker has seen something stopping play,
(03:55):
going back and giving a penalty, putting a play report,
and in some occasions sin binding them back. Then my
opinion is, if the referee doesn't see it, you play
on and you let the match. You've got in place
to do their job post the game, and if some
player has to be charged, well then they charge him.
(04:16):
And I know the negative on that is where a
team will say, well, hang on, we were disadvantage because
nothing happened to that player during the game, But the
team that plays him next week gets the advantage. Out
of it because he's now got a week, two week,
three weeks suspension. Well, that's just bad luck. That's the
way the game is. If the referee doesn't see it,
play on. If he sees it, he'll pull it up,
he'll penalize it, he'll send in it, or he'll put
(04:37):
it on a report. But at least he's doing it
and the continuity of the game stays there. He gets
an opportunity to let the game flow and referee that
game with the empathy that is required.
Speaker 3 (04:48):
If that was to happen and the referees were not
see it and they would adjudicate based on that, does
that open the way for players maybe to be a
little fast and loose if they feel they're not being
seen or is that just over the top.
Speaker 4 (05:05):
No, they won't because if the referee, like most of
the times, the referee is going to get it. It's
only these little innocuous ones which they're trying to you know,
like the bloke's head goes down into the guy's shoulder.
The referee will still get most of them. And if
he doesn't, the player's not going to escape if he
has done something loose, because he's going to get picked
up by the Match Review Committee albit not in that game,
(05:27):
but he's still going to get picked up, and he
still could end up suffering a charge in a penalty
financially or a couple of weeks.
Speaker 2 (05:34):
So they're not going to get away with it.
Speaker 4 (05:35):
So I don't think it'll open up the gates where
players will think new beauty. I can go a little
bit loosier and knock a few blokes around.
Speaker 2 (05:41):
But the thing that.
Speaker 4 (05:43):
It's concerning mur at the moment is in some stages
there are players which are getting hit and falling, and
a player is already committed to a tackle where he
might be hitting him around the legs, and I say,
e g. Latrell Mitchell, he was going in low, the
player fell down and end up falling into him and
coppying it, And yet Latrell gets charged and everything. Just
(06:06):
think for what was he supposed to have done. Isn't
this going to be silk some accidental contact. I think
I could wear that if they had to said, look,
you've whether it's accidental or not, your video in the head.
We've got to blow the penalty. But boy, I don't
see sin binning and placed on an important charged for
something like that which he had no control over with
an accidental player. And there are sometimes that situation.
Speaker 3 (06:30):
I suppose, when a referee is trying to do that.
Looking at a video replay in the heat of the moment,
it's a little hard to look at mitigating factors because
there are so many angles and so many details. That's
only post that on video it should be looked back correctly.
I think it's really hard for a referee right there
in the heat of the moment to go actually that
(06:51):
wasn't deliberate, already fell into that, or go through all that,
and what happens when he's doing it. It slows the
entire game up, so it does take away the emphasis
from the fans.
Speaker 4 (07:00):
Correct And that's why I want to see the referee
be able to make his decisions at the time, so
in real time he sees something, he makes the decision,
just like we used to do in the old days.
Speaker 2 (07:11):
He makes the decision. Is that a penalty? Was it high?
Did he do it deliberately?
Speaker 4 (07:15):
Was it reckless? Makes the decision straight away. If he
doesn't see it, he misses it all he doesn't believe
it is a penalty or on report or a sim Ning
or something like that, and he plays on. And then
later on the Match Review Committee, who go through every
tackle in every game, they see it and they have
a different opinion because they get a different angle. Well,
then they'll take the appropriate action and so be it,
(07:38):
and then that is fair to everybody. Over the course
of the year, it's consistent they.
Speaker 3 (07:43):
Put someone on a report for an obvious shot to
their head, then they march them. Should they just put
them on report and carry on? There's that fine line,
I suppose, between what the referee actually does and how
they react to what they see, because in some cases
it's extraordinary obvious that a guy is targeting other bloke's
(08:04):
head with his shoulder and he should be worked but walked.
But when it's kind of in between, it's a little
hard for them to make that call.
Speaker 4 (08:13):
Yeah, I still support the decision by the NRL when
they brought it in some years ago to say we're
going to add the ten minutes to it, because there
were sometimes when a player would be placed on report,
but the guy that he's actually HiT's been taken off
and have a head goes through the head, you know that. Yeah,
(08:36):
they've got to go through those protocols, or he may
not end up coming back on because he's been whacked
that hard and that crook and the concussion. They don't
let him back on and so all it suffered is
a bike being placed on report. So I get why
they said, and we're going to cost you ten minutes,
And usually that is the ten minutes he's in there,
and a guy might be going under the head protocols
in that same time, So I get that.
Speaker 2 (08:57):
And it's also it's they do that so that the
start of the players.
Speaker 4 (09:02):
Well, if you do go and you hit a bloke's head,
you could end up copping ten minutes in the bin
and your team suffers.
Speaker 2 (09:07):
So I get why they do that.
Speaker 4 (09:10):
But sometimes in this last weekend, I did see some
instances where there were innocuous hits with a shoulder end
of the head and he was end up placed on
report and sent to the bin. And then I've seen
something similar and nothing ended up happening, or it was
just a straight out penalty, and that's when I started thinking, well,
what is happening today, Where is the line in the sand?
(09:30):
What is acceptable, what's not? What's the sim bin what's not?
And I think that's what all fans are throwing your
hands up in the air after the last weekend saying, well,
we really don't know what's what now.
Speaker 3 (09:43):
Bill.
Speaker 2 (09:43):
With the.
Speaker 3 (09:45):
Focus on this and the focus on people changing, athletes
changing their tackle meat, have you noticed from your lounge
room that there is more of an attention to detail
when it comes to tackling. The guys actually know their
head is not a good place, and in general, they
(10:06):
don't they go to the guts, they go to the chests,
they go underneath it. Are you seeing that?
Speaker 4 (10:11):
Yeah, I'm seeing that, But we're still seeing a lot
of them because they're doing this one two three in
the emphasis is not get the bloke on the ground anymore.
The emphasis is hold him up as long as we
can take him backwards. I hate this style of tackling.
I like when you watch back in the nineties and
the early two thousands an where there was a hit,
Let's get him on the ground as quick as we can.
And yes, they did test you back then by trying
(10:32):
to say, Okay, can we turtle him, can we lay
on him a little bit longer, can we hold his
arm down? What can we do? But they were getting
him on the ground as quick as they could these days.
It's hit stick, second man in, hold him up more,
third man in. We're going to take him backwards and
then we'll put him on the ground and then we'll
peel off him and it takes for ages. Then I
don't like that style of tackling. I like to see
(10:53):
they're out of it. But while they're hitting and sticking,
and those first two guys are standing upright and they're
not going to the legs. When they hit one around
the belly and the chest, that's fine. But that other
man's coming in and he's actually gone up around the
top and his arms deflecting off the other the ball
carrier's arm or the ball and just copping him with
a little flick under the chin. And we now know
(11:15):
that that's not good enough and you're going to cop a penalty.
Or they're going in the lead with the shoulder in
towards the chest area, and the ball carrier happens to
lose his footing, starts to get tackled a little bit
and go down and then he hits the shoulder and
ban we've got another penalty. I would like to see, maybe,
and I don't know, maybe it's worth a trial in
(11:36):
a couple of games. At some stage when there's no
impact on the semi finals towards the end of the season,
that the tackle line becomes maybe the nipple across the
chest and that becomes the line. Anything above that you're penalized.
Anything below it or good, see how that goes.
Speaker 3 (11:53):
At the end of the day. It is a collision
based sport. It is an aggressive sport and making these
onwards eggs are going to break. Do you think there's
an acceptance out there the things are going to go
down because of the nature of the sport, and the
athletes just go, you know, that's cool, we can deal
with that.
Speaker 2 (12:11):
Yes, and that is right. It is a very aggressive sport.
Speaker 4 (12:13):
And even the Yanks, when you see how hard they
hit each other with their helmets and all their patterning around,
they still look at us and say, wow, you guys
are mad because of the way we hit, and our
players these days are so much stronger and fitter. It's
like running in the blocks of concrete. I would hate
to be on a kickoff the ball, the guy taking
(12:34):
that ball up when the first play catches it and
passes it to that guy taking the ball up and
then that collision at the twenty thirty meter mark. Wow,
I'd hate to be amongst that because that's the most
dangerous part of the game, I believe, is that first
collision off the kickoff.
Speaker 2 (12:48):
That's massive.
Speaker 4 (12:49):
And when you get two or three players hitting that blake,
so you've got one hundred and ten kilos running at
three hundred and thirty kilos when the three coming and
hitting that collision is tough. It is aggressive, and it
is dangerous, but that's we accept it because that's our
sport and everyone loves that. How can we put it.
It's a battle, it's tough, and that's part of what
(13:11):
is so entertaining the people and it's exciting. So I
think the players will keep putting their hand up saying, well,
we accept that that's part of the game. We're going
in there, but we're still going to make sure we
protect them and we don't have the head nocks. We've
got to reduce the amount of headknocks as far as
we can.
Speaker 3 (13:28):
And on that bill, will you get back on with it?
Great to hear that you're still watching far too much RL.
Once it's in your system, you can't get it out,
can you mister Harrigan.
Speaker 4 (13:37):
Well, it's a great career that I had. FOOTAG has
been my life, so I'm still a part of it.
Speaker 1 (13:42):
For more from sports talk, listen live to news Talks.
It'd be from seven pm weekdays, or follow the podcast
on iHeartRadio.
Popular Podcasts
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com