Tackling issues killing off defensive excellence

Two sports, both alike in dignity. Both plagued by very similar issues. We'll ignore the star-crossed moneygrabbers Wayne Rooney and Vincent Jackson from the footballs Association and American respectively, and instead examine the issue of tackling, which has caused great divisions of opinion in both sports in the last month. In an effort to improve player safety, the NFL has started imposing hefty fines for what it deems to be illegal hits, whereas the British media has gone crazy for the spate of hefty challenges produced by the likes of Nigel de Jong and Karl Henry, to name but a few. Many people have applauded the efforts to stamp out these risky situations. I however do not.

Whatever sport you follow, you like to see and even match, be it between bat and ball, Federer and Nadal or, in this case, offense and defense. Every classic encounter in any sport worth remembering features a fine balance, decided on key moments that tip the scales one way or the other. If the authorities begin imposing themselves on one party, the likelihood of such tension occuring is minimised. Take Test cricket for example - for the most part on the sub-continent, matches are played on flat and slow wickets, allowing the batsmen to boost their averages, whilst the bowlers toil and pick up niggling injuries in the heat. Modern day groundsmen have tilted the balance towards the bat. In the same way, both FIFA and the NFL are hampering defensive play.

Don't get me wrong - I don't like seeing players get hurt, least of all when it is the fault of a fellow professional. But sometimes, a little perspective should be saught. Take de Jong's challenge on Hatem Ben Arfa for example. Yes, it was a hefty challenge, yes, it is unfortunate that Ben Arfa's leg was broken but it was a fair challenge and one where de Jong took the ball. The referee was right not to penalise de Jong. Yet he has been villified (possibly owing in part to his previous track record) for hurting a so-called "creative player". The reality is this - accidents happen. We should not go so far as absolving the likes of Martin Taylor from blame, that tackle on Eduardo remains unwatchable to this day. But to jump down the throat of a player who has actually done nothing than show commitment and skill in winning a tackle is wrong. To drop him from the national side for his "behaviour" was disgraceful, particularly when Bert van Marwijk has abandoned the Total Football principle and built a team of hardmen around de Jong. If we insist upon punishing every tackle that injures a player, fair or not, we run the risk of losing the contact element of football. The same holds true in the NFL. Dunta Robinson of Atlanta was fined $50,000 for a massive hit than concussed the Eagles' DeSean Jackson. Now, normally I wouldn't have a great deal of sympathy with Robinson, but a fair hit is a fair hit. Jackson's (and Robinson's) injury was simply an unfortunate consequence of a game in which risk is involved. If you flag every single play that ends in a violent but fair hit, you'll have every single defense backed up against their own goal line for most of the game and some impoverished DB's.

Not that the case for the defense has been helped by various soundbites from around the respective leagues. James Harrison, LB for the Pittsburgh Steelers, came out after concussing Mohammad Massaquoi and Josh Cribbs of the Browns and said "I don't aim to injure players but I aim to hurt them". Unwise in these politically correct days of censure. It landed Harrison a $75,000 fine, driving him to thoughts of early retirement. Which obviously was never going to happen while he stands a chance of another Superbowl Ring. Before that came the finger of blame pointed by Fulham's Danny Murphy at Blackburn, Wolves and Stoke. Which didn't go down too well. These teams are not blessed with any creative geniuses but must find a way to survive in the field of riches that is the Premiership. The best way for them to utilise their resources is to play hard and disrupt the creative flow of superior opposition.

So long as this is done legally and fairly, I see no reason to change any rules in either sport. It's tactics like these that allow underdogs to prevail. No matter how "functional" it looks!
RM