Commission to outlaw 'shoulder charge'

[Tone83]

Young getting hit in the head by inglis was 100% his own stupid fault, should have been mocked and ridiculed for it while GI was lauded as a hero.

 

[Springs]

Mate, if he got it wrong he got it wrong, big deal.

I'll would rather have 12 men pushing in a scrum trying to win possessing of the ball (part of the fabric of the game for around 90 years)then 12 men acting out a madri gra huddle - unless you have a bias that way.

The legal cases will be for brain damage; and medical science shows shoulder charges cause significantly higher subconcussions (bouncing of the brain off the skull ) then the normal tackle. Excuse the pun - it is a no brainer; take action or face future legal action. It is not about toughness or being hard; its above saving players from the onset of brain damage in their later years and possible legal cases - look at the NFL.

f**k the NFL for once for f**k's sake. I want to see where medical science proves that EVERY shoulder charge does more damage than EVERY tackle.

And you would rather bring back something that has always been more dangerous than the shoulder charge with the risk of neck injury and collapse? People have been paralysed in scrums, anyone been paralysed shoulder charging?

If you want to save players from brain damage you have to take out the tackle. I was driven into the ground in my last game this year, my head hit the ground, knocked out cold, headaches for weeks, neck still isn't right. Should I sue the ARL for not outlawing the tackle? Or should I put up with it because there's clearly a risk for a 65kg young bloke running into a line of 100kg+ forwards?

And yeah he got it wrong, as I'm sure plenty of refs will next year.

Stupid Kiwis, England better not cave. No way PNG will! If they rule out the shoulder charge for the WC that will be all the fun of watching PNG gone.

 

[hutch]

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/sp...rom-rugby-league/story-e6frexnr-1226520747167

In the meantime, the ARLC will negotiate with England's governing body and other member nations of the Rugby League International Federation to ensure the move is mirrored at all levels.

Honestly, who do we think we are! This is why the rlif should be the governing body of the entire sport.

 

[betcats]

f**k you Greg Inglis.

 

[chrisD]

Rugby League now punishes players for hitting too hard, a fundamental shift in mentality. Yet these f**kers want to say it doesn't change anything.

 

[Usain Bolt]

ITT a bunch of bogans think they know more than doctors :lol:

 

[Frailty]

"Greatest game of all... So let's change the f**ker."

 

[Springs]

Stop quoting NFL f**king bullshit, it is not the same, and they still allow f**king big hits for f**ks sake.

 

[Frailty]

ITT a bunch of bogans think they know more than doctors :lol:

Doctors who happily bend rules already existing for concussion. The same doctors that readily admit that 4% of these tackles result in injury. Same doctors that admit there are no long term studies (despite the game existing since 1908). Same doctors that have not shown how these tackles differ from strong ball and all tackles.

How many leg injuries have occurred due to tackling and sidestepping? We better ban them too. The worst injury of the year came from a player jumping and contesting for a bomb - we should ban that too.

 

[Hutty1986]

haha and right on cue, ChrisD, the wannabe tough guy who likes head high tackles.. derp! Poor simple merkin

 

[Frailty]

Stop quoting NFL f**king bullshit, it is not the same, and they still allow f**king big hits for f**ks sake.

People don't even understand why the NFL were getting sued, which is the most annoying thing.

The NFL were sued for two reasons:
- There was evidence they knew of the extent of injuries (with thorough developed studies) but concealed these reports from players - not informing them of the known risks.
- Lenient duty of care laws in the US.

Had the NFL been public with this information, and the players consented to the risk - it wouldn't have been an issue, but because they did not inform the players and get consent they put themselves at risk in the US system.

The context is completely different here.

 

[betcats]

haha and right on cue, ChrisD, the wannabe tough guy who likes head high tackles.. derp! Poor simple merkin

Hahaha I remember now, the GI hit wasnt high, Young got knocked out by a strong shoulder to the chest.

ChrisD, look at the back of todays tele, there is a big picture showing Inglis' shoulder/upper arm making contact with Youngs head.

 

[chrisD]

ITT a bunch of bogans think they know more than doctors :lol:

Want to try and stop your hit and run derping and instead defend your argument against the many posts that have shredded it or are you happy with your inferior position to bunnisman on the scale of articulation?

 

[Danish]

People don't even understand why the NFL were getting sued, which is the most annoying thing.

The NFL were sued for two reasons:
- There was evidence they knew of the extent of injuries (with thorough developed studies) but concealed these reports from players - not informing them of the known risks.
- Lenient duty of care laws in the US.

Had the NFL been public with this information, and the players consented to the risk - it wouldn't have been an issue, but because they did not inform the players and get consent they put themselves at risk in the US system.

The context is completely different here.

Spot on.

And even with all the impending lawsuits and issues the NFL is having, they STILL have not seen a reason to ban shoulder tackles. They have simply banned helmet-on-helmet tackles which is where the majority of their issues come from.

We are basically bastardising our game without any legal or scientific proof that things need to change.

acknowledge the risk, explain it properly to the RLPA and be done with it. Same thing that happens in other dangerous sports such as boxing, motor racing, horse racing etc.

 

[chrisD]

Hahaha I remember now, the GI hit wasnt high, Young got knocked out by a strong shoulder to the chest.

ChrisD, look at the back of todays tele, there is a big picture showing Inglis' shoulder/upper arm making contact with Youngs head.

Yeah, I remember too, the MMA experts. The clowns who could reveal that Young must have been knocked out by a hit to the head because they've seen a lot of MMA in their time.

 

[El Diablo]

Brent Read ‏@brentread_7
Just been told one player - that's right ONE player - responded to shoulder charge survey for research board. #embarrassing

well they can't complain


they were given a chance to offer input and only one player bothered

 

[Hutty1986]

Yeah, I remember too, the MMA experts. The clowns who could reveal that Young must have been knocked out by a hit to the head because they've seen a lot of MMA in their time.

You're pretty close to a MMA expert.. wait, maybe it's too much MDMA you've had?

 

[El Diablo]

Brent Read ‏@brentread_7
Players lose right to complain with such apathy. Shows lack of respect for their own players union. Told survey was on @rlpa2012 website

 

[Jono1987]

The poll really needed a third option;

'Who cares'.

While I can enjoy a good shoulder charge just as much as the next guy, each and every one of them fade from my memory quickly. It's the great tries or try saving tackles, moments of individual and team brilliance that stick in my mind.

Although, it has been fun to read all the self righteous rage in this thread and please don't let me stop you. Even if the banning of the shoulder charge will have zero effect on the game.

 

[chrisD]

well they can't complain


they were given a chance to offer input and only one player bothered

What do you mean they can't complain? An overwhelming non-reply would suggest an overwhelming feeling of "Shit's fine, f**k off".