Commission to outlaw 'shoulder charge'

[macnaz]

Rodeo's will be using ponys next !!

 

[El Diablo]

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

no it doesn't

it means they were too lazy to provide feedback be it for or against

 

[Frailty]

well they can't complain


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

I'm sorry, but if they really wanted the player input they would have made it compulsory and run it through the clubs.

Not to mention, how well publicised was the player survey, were they even told, how long was it open for, would the players have any real reason to go to the union site? When was the last time you went on your workers union website? I haven't been since I started my current job 19 months ago.

 

[betcats]

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.

What?

He was clearly hit in the head and then fell to the ground unconcious. You don't need to be an MMA expert to work out the contact with the head is what knocked him out.

 

[applesauce]

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

It's not about going times extremes as people in their examples here do: "what's next stop tackling". It's about the ARLC reducing risk and not neglecting safety. If this ever goes to court they can say we did x y and z n an attempt to minimise risk.

Sub-concussive brain impacts are being shown to be a factor in long term brain disorders. Because the impacts of shoulder charges have a much greater force than the average tackle the ARLC acted.

To the people who say the NFL and NRL are different in regards to concealment the NRL prevented the Newcastle Knights from having their players brains studied through the season and post any conclusive symptoms last year as results would be made public. Obstructing the study into the health effects of your employees as a direct result of the job could be seen as concealment now the negative effects well known.

 

[chrisD]

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

herp derp were you the MMA expert or the Tyson right cross boxing analyst? Either way go necro the other thread you expert muppets ran from if you want to talk about the Inglis reckoning.

 

[Hutty1986]

herp derp were you the MMA expert or the Tyson right cross boxing analyst? Either way go necro the other thread you expert muppets ran from if you want to talk about the Inglis reckoning.

:lol: Still completely blind I see.

 

[Bobby DIGital]

It really f**ks me off when Australian administrators arrogantly change the rules of the game and expect the rest of the world to adjust.

And this is the worst rule change they've ever made. f**kin idiots.

I think i'll be watching a lot more ESL in 2013.

 

[chrisD]

no it doesn't

it means they were too lazy to provide feedback be it for or against

Interesting considering plenty have had no issue providing feedback since it's been banned. Again suggesting there was no problem with the status quo.

 

[kmav23]

I told you guys this will be banned !!!

once all the club doctors said it should be banned....end of story

The Lawyers told advised the game/Administrators will be legally liable for damages for any injuries...

there is a reason why afl and rugby banned this....

some player will sue in the future for damages

 

[kmav23]

It really f**ks me off when Australian administrators arrogantly change the rules of the game and expect the rest of the world to adjust.

And this is the worst rule change they've ever made. f**kin idiots.

I think i'll be watching a lot more ESL in 2013.

they have no choice legally once all 16 club doctors wrote that letter

 

[Springs]

It's not about going times extremes as people in their examples here do: "what's next stop tackling". It's about the ARLC reducing risk and not neglecting safety. If this ever goes to court they can say we did x y and z n an attempt to minimise risk.

Sub-concussive brain impacts are being shown to be a factor in long term brain disorders. Because the impacts of shoulder charges have a much greater force than the average tackle the ARLC acted.

To the people who say the NFL and NRL are different in regards to concealment the NRL prevented the Newcastle Knights from having their players brains studied through the season and post any conclusive symptoms last year as results would be made public. Obstructing the study into the health effects of your employees as a direct result of the job could be seen as concealment now the negative effects well known.

Show me where it says that every damn shoulder charge had a greater force than every tackle. THere will be plenty of tackles next year that will have greater force than the worst shoulder charge this year. Not to mention everybody who plays league f**king knows the risk. It's not like in NFL where they are suing for the withholding of information. Not to mention shoulder hits are still legal in the f**king NFL.

Preventing the brain study, well now players still can sue because the NRL has done this shit. Banning the shoulder charge won't do shit! It won't stop them suing for concealment.

This banning is an overreaction. We have had no players for 100 years complain about injuries from shoulder charges.

 

[El Diablo]

It really f**ks me off when Australian administrators arrogantly change the rules of the game and expect the rest of the world to adjust.

And this is the worst rule change they've ever made. f**kin idiots.

I think i'll be watching a lot more ESL in 2013.

http://wwos.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=8567953

derp

 

[Babyface O'reilly]

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

Is there a sport anywhere in the world that tinkers with its rules more than rugby league?

 

[kmav23]

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.

Legally you cant write a contract waiver with employee to accept brain damage from shoulder charges...

you cant sign away legal rights to workplace safety...when it comes to serious brain injuries...

Employer must take reasonable action to prevent foreseable risks to employee...

All 16 club doctors wrote a letter saying it should be banned...

 

[Frailty]

http://wwos.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=8567953

derp

Herp derp, doesn't say the kiwis were lobbying the rest of the world to change to their rules.

 

[kmav23]

Be angry at the doctors....if you must....

All they care about is people welfare..bassstttards...!!!

Punch one next time your sick...and need them

 

[Frailty]

Legally you cant write a contract waiver with employee to accept brain damage from shoulder charges...

you cant sign away legal rights to workplace safety...when it comes to serious brain injuries...

Employer must take reasonable action to prevent foreseable risks to employee...

All 16 club doctors wrote a letter saying it should be banned...

Legally you can.

It's the same reason you can legally box. The same reason players can't sue for knee injuries, etc.

Funny that all club doctors also willingly needle players and bend the already existing concussion rules.

 

[Danish]

Legally you cant write a contract waiver with employee to accept brain damage from shoulder charges...

you cant sign away legal rights to workplace safety...when it comes to serious brain injuries...

Employer must take reasonable action to prevent foreseable risks to employee...

All 16 club doctors wrote a letter saying it should be banned...

So how do boxing and MMA exist you f**king muppet.

 

[applesauce]

Show me where it says that every damn shoulder charge had a greater force than every tackle. THere will be plenty of tackles next year that will have greater force than the worst shoulder charge this year. Not to mention everybody who plays league f**king knows the risk. It's not like in NFL where they are suing for the withholding of information. Not to mention shoulder hits are still legal in the f**king NFL.

Preventing the brain study, well now players still can sue because the NRL has done this shit. Banning the shoulder charge won't do shit! It won't stop them suing for concealment.

This banning is an overreaction. We have had no players for 100 years complain about injuries from shoulder charges.

The G force of a shoulder charge is around 10 where a conventional tackle is 6 so a shoulder charge is inherently more powerful and dangerous but doesn't mean their won't be an occasional outlier conventional tackle that may be greater than a shoulder charge from time to time. You also said the NFL still have big hits but they are fining players tens of thousands of dollars for what are still completely legal hits but considered dangerous or risky. this is their attempt to change the culture of the game. sportsillustrated.cnn.com/multimedia/photo_gallery/1209/nfl-fines-2012-season/content.1.html?mobile=n