The dangerous act is back in the spotlight after the NRL launched a crackdown last week to help eliminate it from the game.

The edict saw the base penalty for a crusher increased to 200 points, with Dragons prop Paul Vaughan one of the first players to fall victim to the new grading system.

Read more: Wollongong president calls for plan to grow junior cricket numbers

Vaughan's tackle was seen as innocuous by many, with the ball-carrier's head ending up in an awkward position. Despite this, he received a grade one charge.

With prior loading adding to the penalty, The NSW forward will miss two weeks after taking the early guilty plea.

McInnes recognises the NRL is in a tough spot, but said there must be flexibility in separating the accidents from the malicious acts.

"The beauty of our game is how physical it is," McInnes said. "Obviously things that are dangerous like the crusher or the chicken wing, things like that where it's slow and intentional, I think it goes without saying that should be policed.

"But when collisions are happening at full speed and these things happen, I think probably common sense should be used.

"At the same time, I do understand they're wanting the game to be as safe as possible, not only for the players, but for the people watching at home and young kids playing, so it is very tough."

Crusher tackles were discussed in detail at Monday's weekly football briefing, with Graham Annesley emphasising player safety lies at the centre of every decision.

The NRL's head of football said the organisation is hopeful the increase in punishment will lead to a change in tackling method from defenders.

Michael Buettner, head of the match review committee, also attempted to clear up confusion surrounding how tackles are graded.

Buettner confirmed the onus is on the defender to avoid putting attackers in a position where pressure will come down on their head and neck.

While contact is often accidental, Buettner said the tackler will still be charged if they are deemed to have acted carelessly and the contact made with the head and neck is dangerous.

There are mitigating factors, however, with the body position of the attacker also contributing to the decision to charge defenders.

The tackler will also be looked on favourably if they attempt to reposition themselves to avoid putting pressure on the back of the head or neck.

With debate growing around how to eradicate crusher tackles from the game, Annesley confirmed a full review will take place at the end of the season.

One solution that has been floated is for referees to call held earlier in the tackle.

McInnes recognises rule tweaks might be required, but said care must be taken not to eliminate physicality from the sport.

"I don't want that to be called held, because sometimes when you're fighting in the tackle, that's part of the competition. You're trying to get an offload away or throw someone off you, you can't get rid of that either.

"I don't really know the answer. I guess as players we just have to be careful and look after each other, which is quite hard to do in a contact sport."