Commission to outlaw 'shoulder charge'

[dogslife]

Next stop!

 

[sheepbender]

Wannabe, I rest my case.

You sir, are an idiot.. You're read what I said, but you obviously didn't take it in.. I'm against shots directly to the head, shots to the shoulder but slip up 2-4 week ban depending on severity of any injury if one happens at all.. Shoulder on shoulder contact should not be banned.
It's a trademark of the sport, it does not define the sport, but it is part & parcel, players are aware of it, and accept. To change a core part of the game is to change the game, and it's a slippery slope from there.

 

[miguel de cervantes]

When medical science states this form of tackling (shoulder charge) has a significantly higher risk of causing future brain damage then the normal tackle - the ARLC had no other option.

Rubbish.

Expand on this point in relation to risks of injury or even death in sports such as boxing, martial arts, sumo wrestling, horse racing, formula one, bullfighting or motorcycle racing.

Banning the shoulder charge does little to nothing to reduce the risk of injury - there still exist and always have 100 other ways to sustain severe short or long term injuries in the game. Are you claiming that just because a penalty is attached to the act this prevents players from suing in the future?

Let the risks be known. As long as players are aware of the risks and are willing to sign off on future litigation then it becomes a non issue. No other option my ass.

 

[The Great Dane]

An unfortunate but necessary decision. It will be like the spear tackle, we will all be saying I can't believe we allowed that in ten years time.

As I said I don't like, but I do understand it.

 

[afinalsin666]

Can you still put a hit on when you are carrying the ball? Shoulder on shoulder? How many penalties will be given away by instinctive squaring up when a player runs at you?

Damn it, my head is spinning from this bullsh*t news. Imagine the first carry of Origin! No more intense hits to set the tone, no, somebody may, possibly, in some rare occurence, potentially, get hurt. If the tackle goes wrong. If. For which there are already adequate measures in place.

This stinks of pandering for soccer mums. I guaran-damn-tee that when all the players now were kids, they loved watching the shoulder hits, loved the intensity of football, and that would be, in part, what drove them to the sport.

It starts here, but where does it end?

Better stop players going for a reaching tackle! How many biceps and pectorals were torn in the last 2 years? More than from a legal shoulder charge, i would assume!

Better stop players from trying to catch a ball on the full, they may get falconed! That may give a concussion! Let that bounce, or you give away a penalty!

Better stop warm ups! There have been numerous players leaving the field before the game starts! Cut that sh*t right out!

Should ban crowds from attending a game! The players may hurt their ears from the noise! Deafness is no laughing matter!

Should drop the game to 40 minutes, because a players muscles may get tired!

Should have a forced retirement at 28, or they might get arthritis!

RIDICULOUS!!!


I'll stick with this sport because even with the shoulder charge being taken away it is still the best sport in the world. But the ARLC is dead to me. They were supposed to be our knight in shining armor, the deliverers of a bright and shining future, where rugby league is the dominant sport in Australia! Were...

I've lost my faith in them.

 

[Teddyboy]

Probably more then you realise; only no-one at this stage has taken legal action -although a NZ ex union player is considering it. When medical science states this form of tackling (shoulder charge) has a significantly higher risk of causing future brain damage then the normal tackle - the ARLC had no other option.

It is not about the wannabes in the stands getting woodies over a shoulder charge flatten an opponent, it about player safety (and their health in later life).

Really the game is about scoring more points then your opponents, not how many more hard hits your team does then the opponents - that is for the wankers to do what they do best.

Can't believe I'm on BM's side.:lol:

It become like Amateur Boxing which more about point scoring.

 

[slamminsam246]

Absolute disgrace! Looks like 13% of LU have serious mental problems. Not surprised BM has shown he belongs to that group once again. Shoulder charges ate what give this game an edge over rival codes. It's a MUST have. Highlight reels involve big hits (shoulder charges) and magnificent tries from the season for thats wht the fans love to see. Now one of those is made totally redundant. NRL now = Super 16. Absolutely ridiculous IMO.

"Protection". Crap! Soon the mummies will ruin boxing for no punches will be able to be aimed at the head. MMA won't last another year, hockey will be played with a sponge ball/puck. origin will lose momentum and become waaaaay less popular... Etc....

Penalize head highs, penalize head-high shoulder charges more harshly but don't completely ban one of the two (2) most entertaining and defining factors of our glorious sport.

 

[The Joker]

Steve Matai to be charged in round 1 for a shoulder charge. He's just that dumb

 

[Seti]

I played for around seven years and then started refereeing in the early 2000’s, when the NZRL had recently banned the shoulder charge due to a recommendation by the Accident Compensation Corporation, who cover the cost of injuries in NZ. I was dead against the rule change then believing it was the most exciting aspect of the game. However I’ve grown to accept it over the years.

From the New York Times -

The journal Neurology carried results of a study of 3,439 retired pro football players. It reported that veterans of NFL combat are more likely than the rest of us to die from brain diseases including Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s and amyotrophic leteral sclerosis, known as Lou Gehrig’s disease. Not 50 percent more likely, but three to four times more likely.

America’s ready for some football, but the human brain may never be.

More than 3,000 former players have sued the NFL, charging that the league failed to inform them of the dangers they faced, to protect them against concussions and to provide health care.

As the shoulder is the upper most point of the torso it has a greater chance of hitting an opponents head if the ball runner bends forward slightly, as is common in hit-ups. The NRL has an obligation to reduce contact with the head, and the long term brain injuries that result.

From a refereeing perspective it can be difficult at times to determine some shoulder charges. Often a player will clearly lead front on with the shoulder and then attempt to bring the arms up in an effort to disguise the hit. Some are obvious and are penalised whilst others get the benefit of the doubt. However most are clear cut with the arms by their sides. In saying that I doubt I’ve blown more than two or three penalties, max, in any game over ten seasons, from juniors to premier grade.

Playing numbers and interest in the domestic game in NZ has grown. The league fraternity has accepted the rule and learnt to live with it. In time most NRL followers will as well. The commission has made the correct decision.

 

[LESStar58]

A decision that lowers the skill and bravery ceiling of our sport. That removes the greatest symbol of the unique physically intimidating nature of our sport. And that removes a spectacular differentiating aspect of our sport.

A decision made by bureaucrats under the guise of player protection but without their consultation or consent. A decision that says grown adults are not the most appropriate authority for determining the worthwhileness of the risks to their person in their chosen profession as it has stood for over a century.

A decision that says the fans have no say. That appeasement of commercial groups who routinely ignite, fuel and profit from the sport's inner turmoil is the greater priority than the enjoyment of the lifelong fan. A soulless decision that prizes the path of least resistance over the principles of the sport.

This.

 

[Snappy]

Soft. f**k you John Grant.

 

[bluey]

Last year the refs ,next year all we will be reading about is this decision and how they have got it wrong just like /Benefit of the doubt/two refs/etc
IF IT AINT BROKE DON'T FIX IT>

 

[franklin2323]

It's a rubbish call. You don't see many shoulder charges anyway. Maybe 1 a round if that. You will always have injuries anyway. Just make any head contact bad suspensions.

The players will find away to get around this they always find ways to do it. So if you only have 1 arm in the tackle do you go? Another grey area in RL just what we need.

 

[Canard]

Has there ever been a decision that such an overwhelming majority of fans have opposed?

 

[themacemaceman]

There are already too many grey areas in the game in regards to how rules are interpreted and now we have another.
It's going to be difficult to tell the difference between a strong tackle where the defender rushes in and a shoulder charge.
I guess the difference may be deemed by where the arms are? I'm guessing its still ok for a ball runner to hit the ball up and lead with his shoulder?

What next? Maybe a ban on the tackle around the legs too while we are at it due to the large amount of knee injuries!

 

[Tone83]

FFS it won't be the fans paying the legal bills a decade from now. So the fans opinion doesn't count. That's why we have a commission to decide on important things. Because to put simply, they know better. Otherwise we might as well just govern the game by popular vote from the general public.

This is just wrong. The fans are paying for it now in advance, the whole point of professional sport is to entertain the populace, 100% that is the entire point. If it's dangerous and they're putting their bodies on the line then good. That partially justifies their salaries. It was always a bit off getting paid all that money to play footy and get blowjobs from groupies. Lets dangerous it up a bit. None of you are calling to ban working on an oil rig or crab fishing boat despite the dangers. This is purely fun policing. I swear the nrl is secretly owned by the afl and they're trying to run it into the ground. Theres no other explanation for the baffling counter productive decisions being made.

 

[franklin2323]

Has there ever been a decision that such an overwhelming majority of fans have opposed?

Players as well. Everyone seems to be against it. My issue is what do they do if they suspect a shoulder charge?

I would hate someone to be sent off for one only to get off at the judicary. The team loses the player and probably the game for a 'wrong' call.

SBW did some beauties in his time sadly he returns and we have no shoulder chargers now.

 

[hitman82]

Can't wait until a semi final is decided on a 50-50 call relating to a possible shoulder charge. What a f**kin travesty.

 

[Parraletic]

This is just wrong! What an over reaction! Would not have happened if Gallop was still in charge.
What's going to happen when the first hit up in Origin is a shoulder charge? Would the ref dare penalise?

 

[RufusRex]

It is wrong .... dont ban it BUT ... any shoulder charge that makes contact with the head should be charged as a Grade 1 Intentional Head High (minimum).

A shoulder charge is a deliberate act to dominate the opponent. Therefore it is an intentional decision.

Means high risk yes but also leaves it in the game if you are good enough to do it right.