JUST what constitutes a good tackle nowadays?

Is it a) the perfectly-timed sweep from the side that takes the ball and fells the man, or is it b) the bone-cruncher of yesteryear; a full-blooded, studs-up challenge that is meant for the ball, but with little regard for the player's well being?

Of course, the answer is a). But events of recent weeks and even the last two or three seasons gone by have led me to question just what today's professionals are hoping to achieve with some of these – shall we say – agricultural lunges.

This week a media circus has surrounded Manchester City midfielder Nigel de Jong. The Dutchman launched into a robust challenge on Newcastle's Hatem Ben Arfa at the weekend and snapped the Frenchman's leg in half.

De Jong was not even shown a card for the incident, while Ben Arfa left the pitch on a stretcher, wondering whether his career would ever recover.

You may not think such a tackle is out of the ordinary in the Premier League, but subsequent events were interesting; De Jong was promptly dropped from the Netherlands squad by coach Bert Van Marwijk, with the manager explaining: “It was a wild and unnecessary offence.

“I have a problem with the way Nigel needlessly looks to push the limit.”

His words may have a hollow ring to them, given that his Dutch side were roundly castigated for their approach to this summer's World Cup final against Spain, with the country's greatest-ever player Johan Cruyff among the most vehement critics, in what was one of the dirtiest games of football in recent memory.

Holland adopted the philosophy - not foreign to some Premier League teams – that went a bit like: If we can't beat them, beat them. Literally.

Oddly, Van Marwijk did not object so much to De Jong's kung-fu kick on Xabi Alonso - a challenge that bordered on assault and was surprising only by the fact that his studs did not puncture the Spaniard's lung – as to haul him off the pitch there and then.

Despite the obvious hypocrisy, it is nevertheless reassuring to see one of the game's big names coming down hard on these players. Someone has to, because the governing bodies certainly are not.

Granted, referees have been told to clamp down on over-the-top, studs-up challenges during matches, punishable by a red card. But, for all my misgivings about the standard of worldwide refereeing, the officials are not perfect. There are challenges that appear innocuous to the naked eye that are in fact potential leg-breakers; Bolton defender Paul Robinson's dreadful lunge on Arsenal's Abou Diaby last month, or Michael Essien's stamp on the same player for Chelsea on Sunday are two prime examples.

In the absence of a good view from his assistant, the referee's hands can often be tied, and any decision can therefore be based around guesswork. Some will dish out cards based on a player's reaction, while others, rightly, will not give what they have not seen.

In such circumstances, the Football Association – in the case of the Premier League – must step in. Retrospective punishments are the only way to stamp out – pardon the pun – these reckless challenges that are threatening to ruin players' careers.

The video technology is there. Employ some former players and officials to sit on a disciplinary committee that is actually disciplined and schooled in the ins and outs of the game, with the authority to mete out punishments to offenders.

Too many players are suffering horrific, career-threatening injuries at the hands of reckless players who - I don't doubt - are not looking to hurt an opponent, but are simply throwing themselves into situations with little regard for the consequences.

Take Karl Henry, of Wolverhampton Wanderers. By all accounts, he seems a pleasant enough fellow, but he has been guilty of some dreadful tackles in recent weeks. Ironically, his least-dangerous one, was a relatively well-timed challenge that unfortunately resulted in Fulham striker Bobby Zamora breaking his leg.

Incredible then that, having been responsible for such a terrible injury, he flies in two-footed and off the ground on Wigan's Jordi Gomez with such force that his opponent virtually cartwheels in mid-air. There is no doubt that, had Gomez's feet been grounded at the time, Henry would have snapped his legs in two. To think he even had the temerity to argue the subsequent red card is ludicrous.

What will Henry's punishment be, then? A three-match ban. Hardly a suitable deterrent for such a mindless act of violence and a persistent offender.

There are some that argue a player's ban should mirror the amount of time his 'victim' is sidelined for. I'm afraid such a system would never work, as the worst tackles are not always the ones that cause the most damage. Take Ryan Shawcross's challenge that broke Aaron Ramsey's leg last season. The Stoke defender was guilty of a reckless lunge, yes, but it was more a case of bad luck than stupidity that his foot deflected up over the ball and into the midfielder's leg. In that case, a straight red and a three-game ban is sufficient.

It is those like Essien's, Robinson's and De Jong's that need scrutinising. All three are high, reckless, studs-up challenges that could have – and in De Jong's case, did - seriously injured their opponents.

None have been picked up by the referee and, as a result, will not face punishment. It is a ridiculous system. Especially when one considers it places complete faith in the official to have got the decision correct. Then, the next week, they will demote a referee for failing to award a penalty for an innocuous handball. There is no consistency.

In Essien and Robinson's case, a three-game ban would be adequate. In De Jong and Henry's cases, both proven, serial offenders, a ten-game suspension would be more appropriate.

It's the only option open to football's governors if they want to protect players' careers and preserve the integrity of the game.

Let one thing be clear; this is not a call to remove tackling from the game. A well-timed sliding tackle is as much an art as a 20-yard curler that finds the top corner. It can turn defence into attack in the blink of an eye and is an essential part of football.

But there are far too many players on our pitches today who do not possess that gift. They need to learn what is acceptable and what is not. Anybody who cannot see that a studs-up lunge should be totally outlawed should not be playing the game.

There is no danger that the pen-pushers at the FA will implement such a disciplinary panel. But, until they do, we will see more careers wiped out by football thuggery. It is too late for Hatem Ben Arfa, who faces a lengthy spell on the sidelines, but others can be prevented. How many more will it take for something to be done?