See ya Slater

[Chimp]

The wording is below:

"• The contact is forceful, and;
• The player did not use, or attempt to use, his arms (including his hands) to tackle or otherwise take hold of the opposing player."

I'd argue that even if the hand makes contact, it was incidental and he did not use, nor attempt to use, his hands or arms to tackle.

The idea that someone could make a hit from side on with the left shoulder and claim that the right hand was in any way a part of the tackle just seems ridiculous to me.

Left arm is tucked into his body, leading with shoulder for contact... That is a shoulder charge.
The quote is 'arm (including hands)', that means arm and hand, not just hand. The arm needs to be tackling, with the hand included - essentially a wrap/grab. This is so that you can't lead with the shoulder contact and just stick your arm out straight (as that gets more impact than if you're having to include hand in a wrapping motion). The rule was brought in to reduce impact - they said it's not just attacks on the head, it's all shoulder charges because of the impact and potential to cause whiplash type brain injuries.
It's an absolute bullshit rule, and we're making the game soft. Slaters tackle should be legal, but in the current rule interpretations, it simply isn't. He led with his left shoulder, yes his right hand ends up involved, but that's more in a bracing, pushing position - when you do a shoulder charge, generally you tuck your body tight to protect yourself and also increase your impact (tight, smaller body = more velocity). Essentially, he is not using his right arm, including his hand to make a tackle, it's there as part of the shoulder charge motion with his left shoulder.
Its absolutely nailed on a shoulder charge action under the interpretations.
As I say, I believe this tackle should be legal (in any part of the field), but as it stands, it's illegal and has a mandatory ban.
It all goes back to the very fundamental reason they chose to ban the shoulder charge completely and not just for high/dangerous contact - to reduce impact levels and potential whiplash brain injuries. Games gone soft, Billy should pay the price as a result of this. If he doesn't, it is clearly favourable treatment.

 

[bileduct]

This is an actual shoulder charge.

 

[YoHadrian]

If Slater gets off then the NRL Judiciary should consider sponsoring the Fred Hollows Foundation. Obviously the great work that the foundation does is something that they can empathise with if they're even considering excusing something that wasn't even close to the sporting definition of a tackle.

 

[twesty]

But he didn't miss him. That's a poor analogy.

yes the analogy wasnt perfect, but the outcome must surely come into account. The rule should be adjudicated so shoulder charging which results in significant enough force to cause injury is penalised, not bumps which barely push someone of off their feet

 

[mave]

yes the analogy wasnt perfect, but the outcome must surely come into account. The rule should be adjudicated so shoulder charging which results in significant enough force to cause injury is penalised, not bumps which barely push someone of off their feet

But players have previously been suspended for "bumps" and "bracing" that have caused no injury.....
Why should Billy boy get a free pass now ?

 

[Uncle Kraka]

So it's ok to knock someone senseless provided you get a glancing touch first

HHaha exactaly what I was thinking. Shoulder charges are back as long as one of your flailing arms brushes the attacking player first.

 

[mave]

Lol...ch9 news doesn't worry about reporting facts anymore.
It has become an opinion based sports segment.

 

[Someguy]

Yes it was. Even if his hand makes contact, he wasn't using it to make the tackle.

It’s like the trip rule first contact with a hand and it’s all good.

I would love to see how someone could abuse the rule and do a full speed front on shoulder charge but make it legal by touching with his other hand first

 

[Chimp]

It’s like the trip rule first contact with a hand and it’s all good.

I would love to see how someone could abuse the rule and do a full speed front on shoulder charge but make it legal by touching with his other hand first

This is exactly why he has to be banned if the shoulder charge ban is staying.
If not, your big forwards will master the technique of steaming out of the line, shoulder cocked, but just making sure their opposite hand touches first - would make a mockery of the rule.
If this tackle was made front on, nobody would be arguing. It's a textbook shoulder charge. Most of the classic shoulder charge hits would include the opposite hand also being in contact in the same way Billys was. Think Sonny Bill, Adrian Morley etc, they hit with their shoulder, but didn't just have the other arm by their side.

 

[Headless Chook]

It depends in the reasoning they give for overturning it.

Just toss a coin and be done with it. Whatever the result is it’s not going to please everybody. Maybe that’s how the judiciary works anyway, but honestly who the f**k knows.

 

[kdalymc]

How bout we solve all problems and make everyone happy- bring back the shoulder charge.
Getting rid of it was a load of shit, nobody got hurt (of course penalise when you contact the head) and it’s a joke that Friends spear tackle can actually snap your neck and is carrying less penalty than Billy’s shove.
Bring it back, solve all problems

 

[Saxon]

I still don't understand how what Slater did to Feki is considered by the NRL to be twice as bad as Friend spear tackling Inglis.

 

[JamesRustle]

A shoulder charge requires no use of the arms, it’s quite clear that Slaters arms were involved. The first point of contact is his right arm reaching around the front, and he’s using his left arm to push

Get ya hand off it.

 

[Valheru]

I still don't understand how what Slater did to Feki is considered by the NRL to be twice as bad as Friend spear tackling Inglis.

I have already explained that in this thread. The short version is that what friend did is a legal tackle gone wrong and turned illegal by result. What billy did according to the NRL is an illegal tackle/hit without worrying about point of impact etc.

 

[kdalymc]

Brace to take an impact- WORSE HUMAN EVER,
Grab some guy between the legs, flip him onto his skull- not worse human just give him a week.
Yeah the rules suck, fix em. See my above post.

 

[The_Shield]

I have already explained that in this thread. The short version is that what friend did is a legal tackle gone wrong and turned illegal by result. What billy did according to the NRL is an illegal tackle/hit without worrying about point of impact etc.

Lifting with your hand between the players legs is not legal

 

[Pedge1971]

But players have previously been suspended for "bumps" and "bracing" that have caused no injury.....
Why should Billy boy get a free pass now ?

He has always gotten a free pass. He is a certainty to play is ol teflon Billy.

 

[Valheru]

Lifting with your hand between the players legs is not legal

Only if the tackled player goes above the horizontal.

 

[The_Shield]

Only if the tackled player goes above the horizontal.

And it’s only a shoulder charge if there is no arms involved

 

[Springs09]

If Slater uses the defence that his other hand was affecting the tackle and therefore it's not a shoulder charge and gets off then the shoulder charge is effectively back. It means you can smash someone into next week as long as your other hand brushes them slightly.