Commission to outlaw 'shoulder charge'

[betcats]

...

 

[Frailty]

1. The problem isn't just shoulder charges contacting the head. All of them are dangerous. Including the until now legal ones.
2. low tackles are completely different. If you get injured doing that it is because YOU made a mistake. There is no way you can sue the NRL for that. That is completely different to being on the recieving end of a shoulder charge. You're just running the ball up, nothing wrong with that. The other bloke is just doing a shoulder charge which until now has been legal, nothing wrong with that. And yet the 70% increase in g-forces your brain goes through compared to an average tackle can cause you long term brain damage.

Brain damage caused by an event that the sport you playing was warned about, brain damage caused by 2 players doing nothing wrong or against the rules. Brain damage like that would see the NRL paying out of its arse.


The point of this is that brain injuries don't only come with direct contact to the head. Even your standard "good" shoulder charge that doesn't touch the head can cause long term brain damage. The issue is the 70+% increase in g-forces. That makes the neck and head snap backwards. That is the danger. That can cause serious health problems 10 or 20 years down the line.

"Bad" shoulder charges are bad. "good" shoulder charges are bad. Doing it right or wrong, it is still dangerous.

I'm sorry, I was going to not worry about this thread anymore, but you keep bringing up absolute rubbish.

- There is NO evidence legal shoulder charges cause any damage on the brain or increase concussions. Only medical evidence used was US NFL study of contact directly with the head/neck of players.
- The G-Forces quoted were derived from GPS devices in the players uniforms - there is NO evidence the 70% increase in G-Forces are directly attributed in the head.
- The 70% increase figure is flawed because it is compared against average of all other tackles - including soft tackles and half breaks which would drag the average down.
- Neoroscientists and neuropsychologists have found the concussions cause 95g's on the brain. The report claims 10g's in a shoulder charge.
- The legal system in the US is completely different and was a result of NFL concealing research that directly linked to the game.
- US experience is also flawed by the fact that helmet-to-helmet contact was allowed all through junior grades meaning players were experiencing 20 years of contact to the head. Shoulder charges, tackles above the armpits, and any lifting tackle is banned in the junior rugby league competitions.
- There has been no experience of death or permanent injury caused by shoulder charges since the games inception.

 

[betcats]

1Brain damage caused by an event that the sport you playing was warned about, brain damage caused by 2 players doing nothing wrong or against the rules. Brain damage like that would see the NRL paying out of its arse.

Someone may have answered this but what you have written is no different to boxing.

Getting punched in the head can cause brain damage. It is not against the rules of boxing to punch someone in the head. All boxing organisations know this.

This is such an over reaction by the hand wringers its not funny.

I mean how many brain damaged NRL players are their out there? And how many can directly tie their brain damage to shoulder charges?

What a joke, the hysterical newspaper headlines have more say in the running of the game then most.

 

[Dragonwest]

One more point..

mothers will prevent sons playing the game if doctors are saying brain damage from shoulder charges...will occur...

AFL have reduced physical head contact.... and they are as popular as ever...

Incorrect.

The AFL is not as popular as ever! Crowds are down and there is a lot of general discontent from the fans about the softening of the game ... well here in Perth there definitely is.

Secondly the AFL have not banned a hip n shoulder. They have just increased the penalty for contact with the head or off the ball incidents. Exactly what the NRL should be doing with the shoulder charge.

 

[Masoe_eats_babies]

I love reading dunniesgirl's dribble, it's good value, he's such a young, know nothing, dope...

He's a dishonest merkin and one that shouldn't be taken seriously.

Even if we pretend he's right in his statements, the bottomline is that he still ignores that x% increase in g-force that is brought about by gang-tackles, kick returns and the 10 metre line.

He apparently cannot think for himself and merely parrots doctors. He thinks that because doctors were asked about shoulder charges specifically and gave their views about shoulder charges specifically, that there are no other areas of the game with similar dangers.

The dude is f**ked, mentally.

 

[Masoe_eats_babies]

I'm sorry, I was going to not worry about this thread anymore, but you keep bringing up absolute rubbish.

- There is NO evidence legal shoulder charges cause any damage on the brain or increase concussions. Only medical evidence used was US NFL study of contact directly with the head/neck of players.
- The G-Forces quoted were derived from GPS devices in the players uniforms - there is NO evidence the 70% increase in G-Forces are directly attributed in the head.
- The 70% increase figure is flawed because it is compared against average of all other tackles - including soft tackles and half breaks which would drag the average down.
- Neoroscientists and neuropsychologists have found the concussions cause 95g's on the brain. The report claims 10g's in a shoulder charge.
- The legal system in the US is completely different and was a result of NFL concealing research that directly linked to the game.
- US experience is also flawed by the fact that helmet-to-helmet contact was allowed all through junior grades meaning players were experiencing 20 years of contact to the head. Shoulder charges, tackles above the armpits, and any lifting tackle is banned in the junior rugby league competitions.
- There has been no experience of death or permanent injury caused by shoulder charges since the games inception.

Mate, don't let facts get in the way of Bunniesman and kmavs logic :lol::lol:

 

[hitman82]

That's right, but you see by the figures(0.3 shoulder charges a game) that they only considered the very worst, gone wrong shoulder charges as actual shoulder charges, so they got the injury outcome they were hoping for.

All the other shoulder charges, those many shoulder charges a game you see without injury or controversy, they weren't acknowledged to be shoulder charges. They systematically ignored what most fans know to be shoulder charges, of the legal variety, because if they did the injury rates and g force wouldn't differ all that much.

They say there are 3 shoulder charges per round of NRL football, according to their flaky study. Next year, I put my house on the fact the whistle for shoulder charges goes more than 3 times a round.

To define shoulder charges for their study they used a narrow scope. In policing the ban they'll use a wide scope. BET IT.

Ahhh so it's like initiating a holocaust as a sneaky means to exterminate not only the jews, but also any person with a hook nose or curly hair...
Next time someone says they are planning to exterminate the jews, I will have to carefully consider my curly-haired but non-jewish friends before ticking the holocaust approval box.

 

[flamin]

The ARLC need to come out and say what exactly they will be penalising. The definition of what a shoulder charge is is very vague.

After that happens we can debate whether or not it is the right decision.

 

[Springs]

The so-called "experts" who have been pushing for this ban such as Roosters doctor Sam Orchard have been proven to have zero idea what they are talking about.

I asked him to give me a single player throughout the history of league that is suffering from the damages of shoulder charges. He couldn't name one, but when pressed decided to name Josh Miller. Josh Miller, the player who is known for knocking himself out WHILE ATTEMPTING LEGS TACKLES.

The only argument that the club docs driving this ban have is that league causes concussions. They have absolutely zero proof that shoulder charges are the leading cause of concussion in the sport, or even that they are more likely to cause concussion than any other form of tackle.

I'd like them to name one player who has been knocked out from shoulder charges more than Dallas Johnson has been knocked out from low tackles. By their logic, tackles around the hip should be banned, or Dallas Johnson should be banned.

The point of this is that brain injuries don't only come with direct contact to the head. Even your standard "good" shoulder charge that doesn't touch the head can cause long term brain damage. The issue is the 70+% increase in g-forces. That makes the neck and head snap backwards. That is the danger. That can cause serious health problems 10 or 20 years down the line.

Show me the proof of that Bunniesman. Show me a rugby league player that has had brain damage from a shoulder charge. Show me a rugby league player that has brain damage later in life full stop.

2. low tackles are completely different. If you get injured doing that it is because YOU made a mistake. There is no way you can sue the NRL for that. That is completely different to being on the recieving end of a shoulder charge. You're just running the ball up, nothing wrong with that. The other bloke is just doing a shoulder charge which until now has been legal, nothing wrong with that. And yet the 70% increase in g-forces your brain goes through compared to an average tackle can cause you long term brain damage.

Brain damage caused by an event that the sport you playing was warned about, brain damage caused by 2 players doing nothing wrong or against the rules. Brain damage like that would see the NRL paying out of its arse

But it's part of the game isn't it? It's part of the risk? I'd say if you ran straight at Sonny Bill and got shoulder charged it would be a mistake as well.

So brain damage caused by putting your head in the wrong place, often warned about, nothing wrong or against the rules. How much compensation should Dallas Johnson get?

 

[Perth Red]

Watched a bit of the thanks giving cowboys v redskins game this morning. Counted at least 5 shoulder charge tackles in the first 5 mins of the third qtr. Geez for an org under pressure from legal cases the NFL don't seem bothered about below the neck shoulder charge tackles! I wonder why?

 

[royce10]

The annoying part is SBW never rendered anyone injured or concussed to my knowledge (maybe Marcus Bai). Just hits the sweet spot like a home run hitter.

Now we will never know if can pull them off on the current forwards. FMD.

 

[newman]

Watched a bit of for skin this morning. thanks. giving cowboys at least 5 neck in the first 5 mins. under pressure. Geez. Bothered!

 

[Patorick]

http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2012/s3638135.htm

Warren Ryan and others on Wednesday's 7.30, in case anyone missed it.

I'm torn. Love legitimate shoulder-charges, but the risk of contact to the head, concussions, and so on, take away the enjoyment a bit.

 

[betcats]

Thats a terrible effort newman. The sharks will win 5 premierships before you make anyone laugh.

 

[Perth Red]

Thats a terrible effort newman. The sharks will win 5 premierships before you make anyone laugh.

Leave him alone, bless. it's his way of coming out of the closet.

 

[Springs]

http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2012/s3638135.htm

Warren Ryan and others on Wednesday's 7.30, in case anyone missed it.

I'm torn. Love legitimate shoulder-charges, but the risk of contact to the head, concussions, and so on, take away the enjoyment a bit.

But that's part of the game itself! Every run, every tackle carries that risk. If it takes away from your enjoyment of shoulder charges it should take away from your enjoyment of rugby league.

 

[Billythekid]

http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2012/s3638135.htm

Warren Ryan and others on Wednesday's 7.30, in case anyone missed it.

I'm torn. Love legitimate shoulder-charges, but the risk of contact to the head, concussions, and so on, take away the enjoyment a bit.

This position makes absolutely no sense imo. Shoulder charges make up a tiny fraction of total injuries we see in rugby league. If the risk of contact to the head, concussions and 'so on' take away from your enjoyment how can you enjoy the sport at all?

I find the fact that concussions are mentioned the most misleading part of this whole saga. How many concussions do we see in league every year? A sh*t load. How many come from shoulder charges? You would be lucky if you needed more than one hand to count them.

 

[newman]

Thats a terrible effort newman. The sharks will win 5 premierships before you make anyone laugh.

Certainly not my best effort and disappointing considering the material on offer, but I was in a rush. In fairness, this campaign is about quantity, not quality. And PR, I'm comfortable in my sexuality. No closets required.

 

[newman]

coming out of the closet.

 

[attila_the_gorilla]

I think the game started a downhill journey when they introduced the 10 metre rule. Took so much skill and vision out of the game. Just wind up and run into the opposition. The shoulder charge fits the mold.

Hopefully this decision is the start of a reverse trend.