Super League stalwarts hit out at RFL’s new rule claiming their unsafe

The RFL have confirmed new tackling laws for the community game which will come into force in the professional game in 2025, including with Super League.

These law changes will see that tackles above the armpit will become illegal and to help fans understand the RFL issued a video that explained these new rules with examples.

They took a tackle from Leeds Rhinos star Morgan Gannon in round two against Hull FC which is a head on collision where Gannon is tackling the ball, but it would be illegal due to being above the armpit and creating a risk of head on head contact.

They compare this to a tackle from Round One last year between Leigh Leopards vs Salford Red Devils with a leg tackle.

However, former Huddersfield Giants, St Helens and Castleford Tigers star Jordan Turner highlighted these two tackles, claiming that the legal tackle is more of a risk because of players swinging around and colliding heads or head to hip contact.

Turner explained: “One of these tackles will become ‘illegal’ because of concussion risk. The other will be deemed ‘legal’ and carries less risk of concussion. If you have played the game then you will understand which has less risk.

“As a kid lacing the boots up you know there’s a chance your going to get hurt, I’ll debate that with anyone. Anyone saying any different should have their motives questioned. Contact is the reason we chose rugby league. Contact embodies everything RL is about. Take it away and we’re done.

“In my opinion it doesn’t show much understanding of preventing CTE though, I would contest that the new technique that is being promoted actually puts more risk on collisions with the head. I can tell you that from experience.”

Meanwhile, his former teammate and Leigh Leopards star Oliver Holmes who played in that game between Leigh and Salford added: “There was a head injury in this very tackle. Just saying.”

Many are questioning the decision from the RFL and there has even been a petition made to challenge the rule change in the hopes that it will be reversed.