See ya Slater

[Valheru]

It's funny how we didn't hear the same narrative for Latrell last week.

"Everyone wants to see him play; let him off".

All I heard was that we need to stamp crushers out of the game and he must be suspended.

Which btw was true.

But it ain't the line they're using for Slater...

Well said

Not to mention the refs didnt bin him for clear and deliberate foul play. There have been 3 binnings for that all year, all of them roosters players.

 

[Vic Mackey]

As funny as it would be to see him rubbed out of the GF I didn’t think it was that bad. Wasn’t a traditional shoulder charge and seemed more like a brace at the last second then anything else.

Like Sam this week he will be looked after.

 

[Differ To The Coifed]

If it was round 6 he gets charged 100%. This will set a standard. It’s a charge at least. No way can he be let off without it being a review minimum.

 

[Last Week]

The shoulder charge literally killed a bloke, though.

And only by some miracle did Dean Young not die or suffer brain damage when GI hit him with the worst one I've ever seen.

So there's just as much reason to stamp out the shoulder charge as there is the crusher.

It's not the shoulder charge, it's contact with the head. Which has always been banned.

 

[JokerEel]

As funny as it would be to see him rubbed out of the GF I didn’t think it was that bad. Wasn’t a traditional shoulder charge and seemed more like a brace at the last second then anything else.

Like Sam this week he will be looked after.

Brace? He used force before during and after the contact....

 

[Tommy Smith]

Well said

Not to mention the refs didnt bin him for clear and deliberate foul play. There have been 3 binnings for that all year, all of them roosters players.

The hot oil really cooled on that rule after Radley was binned and suspended.

Ramien went full Liu Kang on Slater off the ball tonight...



... and yet the refs didn't even give a whiff of a sin bin.

These flash flood rules made on the run seem to start and end with us.

 

[Johns Magic]

Deep down I actually think this is spot on; but I'm a biased, flawed human so I'm gonna roll with the lynch mob and say he should be suspended.

But then that's mainly because I'm a Roosters fan.

Of course if Souths win I fully support the justifiable exoneration and exaltation of Billy Slater.

Lynch mob is right. People saying this was a classic shoulder charge are clutching at straws. A classic shoulder charge is blindsiding someone front-on to try and knock the bejeezus out of them. They are dangerous and are the reason the law was brought in.

Slater and Feki were both heading for the corner post so the dangerous level of force was never an issue. Feki knew Slater was there. In a normal situation away from the try line Slater would have ridden Feki's back a bit and dragged him down. He couldn't in this case without letting him fall over the line, and he couldn't go in for a regulation chop tackle without the very real risk Feki steps back inside and his hip smashes into Slater's ducked head.

He should be cleared, he will be cleared.

 

[Tommy Smith]

Lynch mob is right. People saying this was a classic shoulder charge are clutching at straws. A classic shoulder charge is blindsiding someone front-on to try and knock the bejeezus out of them. They are dangerous and are the reason the law was brought in.

Slater and Feki were both heading for the corner post so the dangerous level of force was never an issue. Feki knew Slater was there. In a normal situation away from the try line Slater would have ridden Feki's back a bit and dragged him down. He couldn't in this case without letting him fall over the line, and he couldn't go in for a regulation chop tackle without the very real risk Feki steps back inside and his hip smashes into Slater's ducked head.

He should be cleared, he will be cleared.

Such a display of logic tends to get you fired at NRL HQ.

Slater won't get off for the perfectly valid and accurate reasons you've mentioned. I actually think he'll get charged but get off at the judiciary purely on sentiment.

 

[JokerEel]

Lynch mob is right. People saying this was a classic shoulder charge are clutching at straws. A classic shoulder charge is blindsiding someone front-on to try and knock the bejeezus out of them. They are dangerous and are the reason the law was brought in.

Slater and Feki were both heading for the corner post so the dangerous level of force was never an issue. Feki knew Slater was there. In a normal situation away from the try line Slater would have ridden Feki's back a bit and dragged him down. He couldn't in this case without letting him fall over the line, and he couldn't go in for a regulation chop tackle without the very real risk Feki steps back inside and his hip smashes into Slater's ducked head.

He should be cleared, he will be cleared.

How so you blind side someone front on?

Sounds like you are in fact clutching at straws it was a shoulder charge by Slater...
I dont care if you are 10 out making a hit up or attempting to score a try what Slater against the laws of the game..

 

[JokerEel]

Btw if Slater gets off fine but I dont want to see another player penalised for a shoulder charge again...

 

[Johns Magic]

How so you blind side someone front on?

Flying in at someone watching the pass coming to them? Or jamming from the outside in from a different channel in the defensive line? Pretty obvious I would have thought.

Sounds like you are in fact clutching at straws it was a shoulder charge by Slater...

No, from your above comment it sounds like you haven't really thought this one through, or dare I say it played much footy and been on the receiving end.

I dont care if you are 10 out making a hit up or attempting to score a try what Slater against the laws of the game..

The laws weren't aimed at what Slater did. He had justifiable cause why he couldn't make a regulation tackle there. There was no malice and Feki was never in an unsafe position. Slater was trying to save a try, not commit foul play.

It was a very justifiable effort from Slater and for a game like this the charge should get thrown out.

 

[Dragon Slayer]

For the uneducated it’s got nothing to do with what is a so called “traditional” shoulder charge.

It’s about a tucked in shoulder action and no wrapping of the arms in a tackling action.

Slater fails on both accounts and if the NRL are for real he gets suspended.

It’s as simple as that.

 

[ram raid]

Lynch mob is right. People saying this was a classic shoulder charge are clutching at straws. A classic shoulder charge is blindsiding someone front-on to try and knock the bejeezus out of them. They are dangerous and are the reason the law was brought in.

Slater and Feki were both heading for the corner post so the dangerous level of force was never an issue. Feki knew Slater was there. In a normal situation away from the try line Slater would have ridden Feki's back a bit and dragged him down. He couldn't in this case without letting him fall over the line, and he couldn't go in for a regulation chop tackle without the very real risk Feki steps back inside and his hip smashes into Slater's ducked head.

He should be cleared, he will be cleared.

A legal tackle wouldn't have stopped the try - so Slater used the only tackle that could - a 'charging' tackle,leading with his 'shoulder'. The angle of approach or the inherent danger have absolutely nothing to do with it. Neither does him 'bracing' ( of course you brace before a collision). The argument Storm will make, I assume, is that his right arm got there simultaneously. But really his right arm was just pushing to assist the shoulder, and it didn't connect. All in all it was a brilliant f**king tackle. It just wan't a legal one according to the rules as they stand. Nobody complained about the penalty when it was blown.

 

[Knight76]

The still image in the news article below, front on with Billy putting his arm there will get him off no doubt.

https://www.news.com.au/sport/nrl/l...k/news-story/07ee9d7769de34692a6b0b1010d9dfad

I doubt he will even be charged.

 

[JokerEel]

Flying in at someone watching the pass coming to them? Or jamming from the outside in from a different channel in the defensive line? Pretty obvious I would have thought.




No, from your above comment it sounds like you haven't really thought this one through, or dare I say it played much footy and been on the receiving end.



The laws weren't aimed at what Slater did. He had justifiable cause why he couldn't make a regulation tackle there. There was no malice and Feki was never in an unsafe position. Slater was trying to save a try, not commit foul play.

It was a very justifiable effort from Slater and for a game like this the charge should get thrown out.

Ignoring all.the other bs you just spewed out..

The laws were created for the exact reason.. stop players leading with shoulder and then accidentally coming in contact with the head..

Justifiable effort? Making a tackle is making a tackle next thing we should allow players to dive in with their feet to save tries.....

A game like this? So a major semi should be officiated differently to a regualar season game?

Like I said in a previous post, if he gets off fine but I dont want to see anyone charged in 2019 with a shoulder charge..

 

[typicalfan]

Btw if Slater gets off fine but I dont want to see another player penalised for a shoulder charge again...

Slater was penalised.

 

[Danish]

How anyone can think that they are actually going to suspend their Billy is quite amusing.


The NRL is firing up the “warning letter” typewriter as we speak

 

[JokerEel]

Slater was penalised.

But will he be suspended as per the rules?

 

[Johns Magic]

A legal tackle wouldn't have stopped the try - so Slater used the only tackle that could - a 'charging' tackle,leading with his 'shoulder'. The angle of approach or the inherent danger have absolutely nothing to do with it. Neither does him 'bracing' ( of course you brace before a collision). The argument Storm will make, I assume, is that his right arm got there simultaneously. But really his right arm was just pushing to assist the shoulder, and it didn't connect. All in all it was a brilliant f**king tackle. It just wan't a legal one according to the rules as they stand. Nobody complained about the penalty when it was blown.

Agree but of course the inherent danger comes into it.

The shoulder charge law exists for player safety. Feki was not put in a harmful position by Slater. That brings into question why he is being charged under this law.

If it's purely because he led with his shoulder, Slater can argue why he was put in that situation - saving a try while preserving his own safety, without endangering the attacker.

 

[Chimp]

To those saying 'what else could he do to stop the try' as an excuse, does that mean in a try scoring position, if you can't stop the man with an arm, you're ok to trip? Or if you're a tiny fullback with Nelson Asofa-Solomona charging at you right on the line, 1 on 1, you're ok to jump up and forearm him in the chops?
Regardless of where on the pitch, or under whatever circumstances, the tackler has a responsibility to only attempt at legal tackle. If the play cannot be stopped with a legal tackle, resorting to foul play is not an option, and should therefore be subject to appropriate disciplinary action.
Slater 100% forcefully led with the shoulder, arm tucked and therefore 100% should be charged. But as much plenty of others, I'm also pretty damn sure he'll get off using the most tenuous of loop holes.