What do people think, would it have even been a "thing" now?

[youtube7wXaltwdCDY[/youtube

I think today the ref would call a 'surrender' rather than penalise it as a voluntary tackle, particularly in that situation where you don't want to call a penalty unless it is absolutely unavoidable. If memory serves, weren't they penalised more often in general around that time as well? Can't remember the last time I saw one given at SL level, they just use surrender instead.

If the site hadn't crashed I reckon the thread would still be going

It has popped up few times. viewtopic.php?f=19&t=585030

It has popped up few times. viewtopic.php?f=19&t=585030

By the way I have tried to trace the original thread few times, I think a jumpy moderator must have deleted it from the site and all the backups too

all the Bulls were offside anyhow.....

defo a voluntary tackle and blatant as as well, Russel smith bottled it. of course there was no guarantee he would get the kick it was not a easy one with pressure on.

I know that interpretations/Rules have changed over the years but IMO that was a dead set voluntary tackle and should have been penalised as such

15 years on, and people still don't know what a voluntary tackle is!

15 yrs on, and he Bulls are still bitter...still wouldn't of stopped them being in the lower divisions though..

See post above yours, Smith bottled giving the Bulls offside first of all....

The funny thing is if Deacon doesn’t move out of way and tell Gilmore not to touch Joynt it is a voluntary tackle...the fact Joynt gets up and runs again makes it no different to if he had tripped and got back up. Rules around a voluntary tackle state the tackle has to be completed and that one never was due to nobody fully effecting it