Commission to outlaw 'shoulder charge'

[RWB]

It is. I'm proud of the ARLC for showing they have the ability to withstand criticism and make unpopular decisions when necessary. "player backlash" and "public opinion" don't pay legal bills.

Yeh you're right player and supporter opinions should be ignored when tinkering with the fabric of the game.

 

[Lockyer4President!]

Funny how the ARL changed the finals system because of fan and player complaints but won't do so for this, which has caused far more anger

 

[Springs]

It is. I'm proud of the ARLC for showing they have the ability to withstand criticism and make unpopular decisions when necessary. "player backlash" and "public opinion" don't pay legal bills.

Yep. Legal bills. All it comes down to. They are only out to save their own asses. Paranoid idiots worried about non-existent lawsuits. Selfish f**kwits.

Everyone, EVERYONE, who plays league knows the risks. Knows that it can be hard later in life. I don't see how a lawsuit will hold up in court when every god damn player knows the risk.
It would be like going on a rollercoaster with a heart condition then suing the theme park, despite the huge signs everywhere detailing the risks.

save players (not just NRL but park footballers, as well) from serious injury.

When I got knocked out last year I sued the ARL because I'm a 65kg idiot running into a wall of 100kg+ blokes and I had no idea I could get hurt. :roll:

 

[Perth Red]

As an aside could you imagine serie A or bundsaleague changing the rules of soccer in their comp then asking FIFA to change them for the rest of the world? No major rule change should be done without consultation and agreement of the RLIF and other countries IMO.

 

[Perth Red]

Yep. Legal bills. All it comes down to. They are only out to save their own asses. Paranoid idiots worried about non-existent lawsuits. Selfish f**kwits.

Everyone, EVERYONE, who plays league knows the risks. Knows that it can be hard later in life. I don't see how a lawsuit will hold up in court when every god damn player knows the risk.
It would be like going on a rollercoaster with a heart condition then suing the theme park, despite the huge signs everywhere detailing the risks.



When I got knocked out last year I sued the ARL because I'm a 65kg idiot running into a wall of 100kg+ blokes and I had no idea I could get hurt. :roll:

My knee is stuffed, just had surgery on it, pretty sure the years of playing RL caused it, should I sue BARLA who ran the amateur game in uk when I played?

 

[magpie4ever]

As an aside could you imagine serie A or bundsaleague changing the rules of soccer in their comp then asking FIFA to change them for the rest of the world? No major rule change should be done without consultation and agreement of the RLIF and other countries IMO.

Who gives a flying root about soccer; a sport that condones diving. Better examples, please

 

[Springs]

Lillyman is bang on the money. They've gone further than they needed to. All that was required to limit risk of seriously injury is to properly enforce the high tackle rule - That's it. People hit high, ban them for numerous weeks at a time.

The ban on the shoulder charge is basically a response to the NRLs own incompetence in refusing to enforce an already existing rule. That's what's profound in all of this.

If they just laid down the f**king law with high tackles there would be no rhyme or reason to get rid of the shoulder charge, because it's only a problem when high as reiterated throughout the thread and by many of the players.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9wq_PL-GDTI

this is the refereeing we can expect in a few years. The fans are going to make sure that it turns into Rugby like refereeing, as all teams coaches and fans, whether they agree with the ban or not, will be putting every tackle under the microscope and calling for bans and punishment for tackles like the above

^ Listen to the commentators. That's the NRL in 5 years. Players being banned for not "wrapping"(ie hugging)

He had his arms out! The player just bounced off his shoulder.

That will be the problem. Every hard hit will be looked at if not automatically penalised, shoulder charge or not. And fans will complain when a hit isn't given a penalty. It will be so inconsistent.

 

[magpie4ever]

Yep. Legal bills. All it comes down to. They are only out to save their own asses. Paranoid idiots worried about non-existent lawsuits. Selfish f**kwits.

Everyone, EVERYONE, who plays league knows the risks. Knows that it can be hard later in life. I don't see how a lawsuit will hold up in court when every god damn player knows the risk.
It would be like going on a rollercoaster with a heart condition then suing the theme park, despite the huge signs everywhere detailing the risks.



When I got knocked out last year I sued the ARL because I'm a 65kg idiot running into a wall of 100kg+ blokes and I had no idea I could get hurt. :roll:

Excellent self description there, Springs:lol:

 

[Springs]

Yeah, it wasn't sarcasm or anything, dumbass

 

[Springs]

Want to answer those questions about the tackles I asked yesterday?

 

[magpie4ever]

Yeah, it wasn't sarcasm or anything, dumbass

Either was mine, I just keep reeling them in.

 

[magpie4ever]

It is amazing how the real life example of the tragic passing of a school boy footballer due to a shoulder charge connecting with the player's chest is completely overlooked by the doomdayers.

 

[chrisD]

Stop replying to the incoherent imbecile's attention seeking, he was met with more reason and patience than he deserved the first time and it didn't prompt him to contribute anything of worth then as it isn't now as it won't on the hundredth.

 

[Springs]

So, 86% against in this thread. 72% against on the side poll. 81% against on NRL.com.

 

[magpie4ever]

Stop replying to the incoherent imbecile's attention seeking, he was met with more reason and patience than he deserved the first time and it didn't prompt him to contribute anything of worth then as it isn't now as it won't on the hundredth.

jes man, WTF are you on and about. Hopefully, my side:crazy:

 

[magpie4ever]

So, 86% against in this thread. 72% against on the side poll. 81% against on NRL.com.

C'mon Springs, get the rally goin FFS.

 

[Bengal]

It is amazing how the real life example of the tragic passing of a school boy footballer due to a shoulder charge connecting with the player's chest is completely overlooked by the doomdayers.

The passing of any player on a football pitch is sad. An ex school mate of mine, many, many moons ago lost his life to a tackle gone wrong. The common denominator between your example and mine is the tackle and yet the furore here is only over one facet of tackling and not the tackle process overall. That to me denotes that this is not a player welfare issue, it is a legal issue. As such, if other sports like Boxing and the like can soldier on without legal repercussions then League only needs to follow their protocols to continue on as was.

 

[magpie4ever]

The passing of any player on a football pitch is sad. An ex school mate of mine, many, many moons ago lost his life to a tackle gone wrong. The common denominator between your example and mine is the tackle and yet the furore here is only over one facet of tackling and not the tackle process overall. That to me denotes that this is not a player welfare issue, it is a legal issue. As such, if other sports like Boxing and the like can soldier on without legal repercussions then League only needs to follow their protocols to continue on as was.

You are possibly right re: legal issue but if by handling the legal issue there is a flow on effect to the welfare/safety issue (deliberate or unintentional), all the more good.

 

[Frailty]

Whether it was a 16 year old boy being shoulder charged by another 16 year old boy or a 26 year old man being hit by another 26 year old man (which until recently was legal in league); it does not matter - serious damage was done which resulted (the hospital's incompetence is another matter), sadly, in the death of this boy - someone's loved son and a friend too many.

If by banning the shoulder charge and hopefully never seeing another illegal shoulder charge - one player's life is saved over the next XXX number of years, the ARLC has done its job.

I'm stating this now, the current crop of 4-5 year olds in 20 years time will love the game, state how hard and exciting it is and hopefully will have never seen a bloody shoulder charge.

Because the body at 16 years old is exactly the same as a 26 year olds and can withstand the same amount of force....

BTW, did the ARU get sued for this incident? Or the one I mentioned of the professional in a legal tackle? No... Interesting...

Go away fisherman.

The only doomsday prediction is coming from you - "ban this or get sued".

 

[Bruce123]

The passing of any player on a football pitch is sad. An ex school mate of mine, many, many moons ago lost his life to a tackle gone wrong. The common denominator between your example and mine is the tackle and yet the furore here is only over one facet of tackling and not the tackle process overall. That to me denotes that this is not a player welfare issue, it is a legal issue. As such, if other sports like Boxing and the like can soldier on without legal repercussions then League only needs to follow their protocols to continue on as was.

was that in a spear tackle?