Commission to outlaw 'shoulder charge'

[Mr Saab]

What is wrong with this picture?

hint: Notes column

Leeson shoulder charged himself.

 

[joshie]

Why does rugby league want to take away things that make it unique

 

[VictoryFC]

Its not an issue if you don't get hit in the head.

This is a full contact sport. Players are aware of the risks.

This. But if you do hit some in the head, then the punishment should be more severe. If you say that its an automatic 3-5 game ban, I doubt you'll see some of the more wreckless hits. Leave no room for grey areas. Black and white punishment known ahead of time.

 

[Miller was a legend]

Send em off, send em off

 

[adamkungl]

NRL..listen to the medical experts and ban the shoulder charge. The game won't be any less macho.

No no no. The game will be worse for it. Almost every one of those big hits in the highlight reels that we all love - outlawed. Never again.

What is wrong with you people? Stand up for Rugby League for f**ks sake. Fans, players, coaches - everyone who loves the game for what it is needs to stand up against doctors and muck-raking filth like Phil Rothfield and ensure that Rugby League does not soften itself any further.

This. But if you do hit some in the head, then the punishment should be more severe. If you say that its an automatic 3-5 game ban, I doubt you'll see some of the more wreckless hits. Leave no room for grey areas. Black and white punishment known ahead of time.

Harshly punish bad ones.
However not a fan of seeing hits like Wade Grahams a few weeks back in the Broncos game penalised. That was weaaak.

 

[docbrown]

It's just spin to sell papers.

The shoulder charge should stay and simply penalised when done carelessly.

 

[Masoe_eats_babies]

NRL..listen to the medical experts and ban the shoulder charge. The game won't be any less macho.

What the f**k would medical experts know? :lol::lol:

The doctors haven't a clue what they're on about. They're doing what the journalists are doing, they're conflating illegal high shoulder charges with legal shoulder charges.

You might as well ban tackling based on high normal tackles.

 

[Masoe_eats_babies]

Why does rugby league want to take away things that make it unique

The anti-League establishment, who set media-agendas with advertising dollars, are trying to destroy League. They want to bring it down to the level of Rugby, because that's the only way they can see making any sort of inroads with their backwords code.

They cannot compete with League, but they can take away everything good about League.

And you anti-shoudler charge wankers on here still haven't proved that legal shoulder charges are dangerous. Why are you all ignoring me?

 

[blain]

They shouldn't ban it completely, they should raise the penalty of head contact. So if a dickhead like GI goes into a flying shoulder charge which connects with a blokes head, instead of 4 weeks, make an example and make it at least 6-8+ weeks.

 

[adamkungl]

I don't believe this shit is picking up momentum, and alleged Rugby League fans are allowing it.

 

[supercharger]

I'm also still waiting on someone to tell me the last time there was a "proper" concussion from a legal shoulder charge.

:????
kindly elucidate.

 

[adamkungl]

Shoulder charges are not allowed in junior forms of the game, and rightly so. But grown men have entered the game fully knowing the risks of playing it.

Long live the shoulder charge

 

[Masoe_eats_babies]

kindly elucidate.

I mean people are slamming the shoulder charge, but not one person can tell me the last time a player was concussed by a shoulder charge that didn't make contact with the face.

The crux of the matter is contact with the head, not the shoulder charge.

 

[Dresden Dan]

I don't understand union. If this was in union what is Dwyer supposed do when JWH runs straight at him? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ILh-w5LPYo&

 

[gUt]

I don't want the shoulder charge removed from league but I'll try and play diabolus advocatus.

1) Rugby league is tough enough to play without shoulder charges.
2) A shoulder charge is not a tackle. It's not primarily a method of stopping the play. Its main objective is to cause pain and intimidation in the opposition, leading us back to 1.
3) It's not so much the hypothetical damage a legal shoulder charge can cause. It's the fact that there's so many ways for a shoulder charge to go wrong. A tall player charging a smaller man, a defender slipping or being brought down by another player, bad timing or misjudgement all regularly lead to head injuries and sometimes neck injuries.
4) A shoulder charge is a dumb play in any event. Rushing out of the line to put a big shot on usually leads to a gap in the line somewhere.
5) A shoulder charge is a cowardly play. Rarely will you see a shoulder charge from front on when the ball runner is ready for it. Most shoulder charges are done on blokes from outside in, or when the defender knows that the player has to catch & pass or kick it and are therefore more vulnerable to that kind of hit.

These are some of the arguments I've heard against it and they do deserve consideration. I'm not in favour of removing them from the game, but maybe the penalties for getting them wrong and knocking someone out could be jacked up compared to 'proper' tackles that go wrong.

Talk of banning the shoulder charge is in vogue once again. I can see the arguments from both sides. The ‘keep them’ camp says “Hey. It’s rugby league. The shoulder charge stays.” The ‘bin them’ camp says “Hey. It’s rugby league. The game is tough enough without them.”


Both sides cite the example of rugby union’s banning of the big hit. Says the anti-shoulder charge advocate: “You see? Union is still the same without it!” – the pro-shoulder charge advocate replies: “Exactly!”

http://www.theroar.com.au/2012/07/23/protect-ya-neck-nrls-high-shot-blues/

 

[Masoe_eats_babies]

I don't understand union. If this was in union what is Dwyer supposed do when JWH runs straight at him? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ILh-w5LPYo&

That situation would never arise in Rugby. You don't see players running with purpose at the line like that.

 

[Masoe_eats_babies]

I don't want the shoulder charge removed from league but I'll try and play diabolus advocatus.

1) Rugby league is tough enough to play without shoulder charges.
2) A shoulder charge is not a tackle. It's not primarily a method of stopping the play. Its main objective is to cause pain and intimidation in the opposition, leading us back to 1.
3) It's not so much the hypothetical damage a legal shoulder charge can cause. It's the fact that there's so many ways for a shoulder charge to go wrong. A tall player charging a smaller man, a defender slipping or being brought down by another player, bad timing or misjudgement all regularly lead to head injuries and sometimes neck injuries.
4) A shoulder charge is a dumb play in any event. Rushing out of the line to put a big shot on usually leads to a gap in the line somewhere.
5) A shoulder charge is a cowardly play. Rarely will you see a shoulder charge from front on when the ball runner is ready for it. Most shoulder charges are done on blokes from outside in, or when the defender knows that the player has to catch & pass or kick it and are therefore more vulnerable to that kind of hit.

These are some of the arguments I've heard against it and they do deserve consideration. I'm not in favour of removing them from the game, but maybe the penalties for getting them wrong and knocking someone out could be jacked up compared to 'proper' tackles that go wrong.



http://www.theroar.com.au/2012/07/23/protect-ya-neck-nrls-high-shot-blues/

Pretty much all those arguments are dismissible though. The media attacks on the game of Rugby league are being made under the guise of player safety, which is all that matters.

Any talk of "cowardly" and "dumb" is just erroneous union androtropry.

 

[crocodile]

Shoulder charges are not completely illegal in union at all. The ball carrier is completely free to shoulder charge any defender. Two players contesting the ball on the ground are permitted to use their shoulders and hips. The tackler cannot use the shoulder. This has nothing to do with player safety. It is simply the rule that the tackler must tackle using their arms. Tripping, shouldering and pushing are illegal tackles.

 

[hellteam]

The media are idiots. It will be banned and they will be first to complain the game has gone soft.

 

[Masoe_eats_babies]

Maybe I'm slow catching on but are you suggesting this is all some campaign by union powers to bring NRL down?

What about NFL? Do players get carried off with concussion as much as in NRL?

What other reason would there be? You don't buy this player safety myth, do you? If it was about player safety where are the campaigns to ban rucks from Rugby, to ban scrums from Rugby?

This is a media campaign. The media get their agendas from their advertisers, they propagandise on behalf of their advertisers. Look at the people bankrolling the media and make of it what you will. They're not League people, lets put it that way.

I don't see your point about the NFL