Commission to outlaw 'shoulder charge'

[andrew057]

Terrible thread.

 

[Ram Man]

The amount of high tackles opposed to shoulder charges gone wrong in the NRL this year is a no contest...why cant we keep the current system...if you run the risk and it goes wrong, you arse is on the sideline...this is all a storm in a teacup...

I would love to see the stats of shoulder charges that have not hit the head in the first 6 round this year...there would be a tonne of them

 

[Ram Man]

If a player gets shoulder charged - let's face it - they usually deserve it.

Now if a player delibrately charges the head, then that's what should be penalised.

I'm quite over this soften up the game attitude.

A player with little awareness of his surroundings should get what he deserves.

The defence should be trying to charge down ever kick.

Kickers should not be a protected species, as long as it isn't a dangerous tackle, then it should be fair game.

High ball kick catches should be a contest in mid air as long as the defence isn't put into a dangerous position.

It shouldn't be a wrestling match. It's a game of colliding opposing forces.

This...if you are too dumb to know 3 blokes are flying out of the line and you cant get out of the way...then so be it....if it goes high, then you get penalised

 

[Big Pete]

Terrible thread.

0/10 post.

 

[docbrown]

This...if you are too dumb to know 3 blokes are flying out of the line and you cant get out of the way...then so be it....if it goes high, then you get penalised

Exactly. It's a punishment for poor awareness.

These are grown men playing a professional contact sport. Why should the spectacle of the game be sacrificed because one shot in a hundred goes awry?

It's the same kind of mentality that annoys me when teams are in defence now. They're so scared of attacking the kicker that most kicks are uncontested.

That's the whole reason for having defence in the first place - to stop the attack!

Do we really want a game where it's all about unopposed attack because the defence is too scared of being penalised or causing injuries to themselves or the opposition and won't throw their bodies on the line?

If I wanted that I'd watch soccer.

 

[Desert Qlder]

I understand where the OP is coming from on this one. Last nights hit from Teo was an almost picture perfect shoulder charge, but collateral damage from the hit was the ball carrier's head ended up hitting Teo's shoulder. There's no way Teo intended any malice, his technique was spot on and he justifiably argued the decision.

So by extension there is the argument that can be made that if perfectly executed shoulder charges are going to have this result we may as rule them out of the game, if this is the way referees are going to call it.

The most perplexing element here is that a number of other contacts to the head continue to be allowed. What is most irksome to me is that refs are frowning on Teo's type of contact yet continue to allow the countless contacts we see in almost every tackle. Tacklers are invariably wrapping arms around the top portion of the body in the tackle, heads and necks are getting squeezed to buggery when this occurs. Yet no one bats an eyelid to this.

It's frustrating in the extreme to me that we are swiftly on the way to eliminating a spectacular element of the game in the shoulder charge, because of incidental contact with the head. But more insidious forms of contact are seemingly allowed.

 

[attila_the_gorilla]

If they don't ban them, there must be severe suspensions if they go wrong. Same with high swinging arms to the head. The penalties are too soft.

 

[Grail]

I dont think they should ban the shoulder charge.

I think we just need to raise the suspension, for when it comes off wrong.

100% agree.
The penalties aren't severe enough to act as a true deterrent. Make the penalties harsh for any head contact and players will learn or be wiped out of the game for continued infractions. Then legitimate tactics can still be employed by those who are good enough to use them without endangering the opposition.

 

[BranVan3000]

Just be harsher and more consistent that shoulder charges hitting the head are a massive no. Make it 10 in the bin if need be, but there is no need to take it from the game entirely.

Or honestly speaking, a yellow card red card system could work.

 

[adamkungl]

If a player gets shoulder charged - let's face it - they usually deserve it.

Now if a player delibrately charges the head, then that's what should be penalised.

I'm quite over this soften up the game attitude.

A player with little awareness of his surroundings should get what he deserves.

The defence should be trying to charge down ever kick.

Kickers should not be a protected species, as long as it isn't a dangerous tackle, then it should be fair game.

High ball kick catches should be a contest in mid air as long as the defence isn't put into a dangerous position.

It shouldn't be a wrestling match. It's a game of colliding opposing forces.

This 1000 times. The cotton wool kickers are placed in now is ridiculous. You want to see less tries from kicks? Make defenders be allow to legitimately hit the kicker again.

Anyway, back on topic, no, harden the f**k up.

 

[HowHigh]

Nope, love seeing a good shoulder charge drop someone

 

[Coastbloke]

Whenever a debate is started on rule changes, why does it always start with "Should the NRL....."

Last time I looked there was about 40 nations playing rugby league and a - admittedly laughable - controlling body called the RLIF...

 

[Big Pete]

You just answered your own question.

 

[Tonearm Terrorwrist]

Shoulder charges are for people who can't tackle.

 

[Red Bear]

I understand where the OP is coming from on this one. Last nights hit from Teo was an almost picture perfect shoulder charge, but collateral damage from the hit was the ball carrier's head ended up hitting Teo's shoulder. There's no way Teo intended any malice, his technique was spot on and he justifiably argued the decision.

Headbutted him right in the shoulder did he? Bitch please.

When tackling the onus is on the tackler to not make contact with the head. Shoulder charges by their very nature are reckless because at the point of impact the tackler isnt looking at the player he is about to tackle. Thus it's a high risk tackle because alot can go wrong, and if the tackler hits the opposition player in the head he deserves every penalty, suspension he gets, because he's paying little attention to where he hits the player.

 

[ME SO HORNBY!]

Ban shoulder charges? Chris Sandow may as well quit the sport.

 

[Grapple]

100% agree.
The penalties aren't severe enough to act as a true deterrent. Make the penalties harsh for any head contact and players will learn or be wiped out of the game for continued infractions. Then legitimate tactics can still be employed by those who are good enough to use them without endangering the opposition.

Agree with this.

In the case of Teo, placing him on report had no effect on the immediate game apart from an interchange. Meanwhile Groat goes off absolutely hammered. I think if you brought in the 18th man onto the bench in that scenario and he could immediately come on, and stay in the game for the match, it would work. Galloway ran back on, after barely sitting down. No real advantage to Wests for that play.

 

[Desert Qlder]

Headbutted him right in the shoulder did he? Bitch please.

When tackling the onus is on the tackler to not make contact with the head. Shoulder charges by their very nature are reckless because at the point of impact the tackler isnt looking at the player he is about to tackle. Thus it's a high risk tackle because alot can go wrong, and if the tackler hits the opposition player in the head he deserves every penalty, suspension he gets, because he's paying little attention to where he hits the player.

Then get all huffy about every contact with the head. You can't pick and choose this, and neither can the refs.

 

[macnaz]

Big penalties for high ones, then players will eventualy cut out using them over time because of the risk of massive suspensions

 

[*Paul*]

Harden the f*ck up.

Im sick of trying to appeal to the mums , the reason I love rugby league is because it's the toughest footy code in the world. Take that away and it's going to be a pale imitation.

I have to agree. Every year I get the letter to renew my season ticket, every year I go through a moment of "Is it worth the 300-odd bucks?". Well, for the last 15 years I've decided it is, but things like the Teo incident chip away at the resolve.

Scoring tries when bouncing the ball, disallowed tries because a defender took out the decoy runner, being able to knock-on because you didn't mean to, having to stand and watch whilst the defending fullback catches a bomb etc. etc. all put their hand up to say "Just don't bother any more". And one day I'll agree.