Commission to outlaw 'shoulder charge'

[Springs]

Burgess hit, all force and contact through the forearm, not unusual. What interpretation could cover this? And if it's not covered, everyone will just hit like this. Fools game this ban.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VFV6G0QKF3E

They would penalise it straight away. They will penalise anything that looks bad in their eyes.
You can guarantee all the fans will go off if one big hit is penalised and then they don't penalise the next one because it was off the arm.

This is just the dumbest rule.

And good to see you can still get knocked out by an attacker using the shoulder charge, hypocritical f**ks.

what about breathing ?

its tiring.... ban that tooo

You get tired by breathing? f**k how lazy are you? Go see a doctor mate. :roll:

 

[southwalesrabbitoh]

Referees make mistakes, furthermore they make far less than players do. Live with it, they're human, not even us Aussies are perfect. Lol.

 

[miguel de cervantes]

RFL snub Australian bid to ban shoulder charges


PUBLISHED: 20:57 GMT, 28 December 2012 | UPDATED: 20:57 GMT, 28 December 2012


The Rugby Football League has decided not to follow the lead set by Australia in banning shoulder charges, at least for now.
The NRL outlawed the technique ahead of the 2013 season, but it remains legal under international rules and the RFL's laws committee has decided to keep it in their domestic competitions until the Rugby League International Federation concludes its consultation process.
The RFL decision was made after consulting with players, clubs and coaches in this country.

RFL spokesman Blake Solly said: 'The RFL laws committee has renewed its commitment to standardising the laws of the game across all nations and competitions wherever possible and noted that this process is under way within the RLIF at the moment.
'The RLIF has proposed standardising a number of the laws of the game, including the use of the shoulder charge, and we are in the process of responding to these proposals.
'We believe that this process is an important way of reducing the number of differences in the laws across the various nations and enhancing the credibility of the sport.
'To that extent we will assist the RLIF as they discuss the topic in coming months and will support any decision they make.'

​

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/ru...RFL-snub-Australian-ban-shoulder-charges.html

Horray! Kudos to the RFL for standing up to the "defacto" rule makers of rugby league. Hopefully they stick with their decision.

 

[Parra]

​

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/ru...RFL-snub-Australian-ban-shoulder-charges.html

Horray! Kudos to the RFL for standing up to the "defacto" rule makers of rugby league. Hopefully they stick with their decision.

Seems the right way to go about things.

 

[adamkungl]

NRLs attitude to rule making is arrogant and embarrassing

 

[I Bleed Maroon]

I'm happy to repeat myself:

This rule change is just a blatant concession (read: submission) to the naysayers, the soccer mums and the wowsers, especially in the mainstream media, who think that the onus is on the code to wrap its players in bubble wrap, not the onus is on the player to understand the risks involved in playing a full contact sport that has been going on for over 100 years, with one very clear set of rules without any major incident on field.

Come mid season next year, with all the negative press amongst footy commentators and the fans after numerous dud calls (as if the code needed more referee stuff ups giving wash ups like Phil Rothfield something to put in their columns. Wasn't Harrimerkin sacked for that??) the ARLC will already regret this decision as just flat out stupidity.

Cowardice and spinelessness are not the first things you wanna demonstrate as traits if you want to win over the supporterbase that keeps you afloat with their money. Fans will not tolerate the best players in their sides being suspended for 2-3+ games for what is a mundane, typical, run of the mill shoulder charge that is legal everywhere else except the NRL. They would have to be absolute dribblers to allow the English Super League to get one up on them like this, it is just ridiculous; and after the fans start chucking their shit around the room, the clubs and coaches will be next. Imagine if a penalty from an otherwise normal shoulder charge cost the Knights 2 points; Bennett would be spewing and in a weird way I hope that does happen to at least one club. We need as many real world examples as possible to prove just how dumb this whole fiasco is.

Roll on the shitstorm so we can finally put some vocal pressure on the ARLC to reverse this short sighted farce.

 

[adamkungl]

Well said.

I honestly hope this is a completely farcical mess. I hope games are ruined.

 

[Parra]

I'm happy to repeat myself:

This rule change is just a blatant concession (read: submission) to the naysayers, the soccer mums and the wowsers, especially in the mainstream media, who think that the onus is on the code to wrap its players in bubble wrap, not the onus is on the player to understand the risks involved in playing a full contact sport that has been going on for over 100 years, with one very clear set of rules without any major incident on field.

Come mid season next year, with all the negative press amongst footy commentators and the fans after numerous dud calls (as if the code needed more referee stuff ups giving wash ups like Phil Rothfield something to put in their columns. Wasn't Harrimerkin sacked for that??) the ARLC will already regret this decision as just flat out stupidity.

Cowardice and spinelessness are not the first things you wanna demonstrate as traits if you want to win over the supporterbase that keeps you afloat with their money. Fans will not tolerate the best players in their sides being suspended for 2-3+ games for what is a mundane, typical, run of the mill shoulder charge that is legal everywhere else except the NRL. They would have to be absolute dribblers to allow the English Super League to get one up on them like this, it is just ridiculous; and after the fans start chucking their shit around the room, the clubs and coaches will be next. Imagine if a penalty from an otherwise normal shoulder charge cost the Knights 2 points; Bennett would be spewing and in a weird way I hope that does happen to at least one club. We need as many real world examples as possible to prove just how dumb this whole fiasco is.

Roll on the shitstorm so we can finally put some vocal pressure on the ARLC to reverse this short sighted farce.

You could just as easily argue that shoulder charges are only enjoyed by armchair heroes who like cheap shots.

 

[East Coast Tiger]

And the blokes who, you know... play the game.

 

[Parra]

Well some of them. Gotta keep selling those papers.

 

[East Coast Tiger]

The only armchair heroes in this is the commission and the non-players who advocated this ban. Look at the % of fans against it, consider that players will be against it in the same sort of numbers and also that administrators of the game outside the NRL don't even support it and it's clear that the ones out of touch are the select few who unilaterally and without consulting the true stakeholders made the decision.

 

[Parra]

Most fans wouldn't know or care.

Players are put in a very tough spot when they are asked about this. Most don't use the shoulder charge anyway, but they can't be seen as fearing them or being called soft.

Seems stupid for the ARLC to have done this, when they could have gone through the RLIF and achieved some consensus.

 

[Knownothing]

The only armchair heroes in this is the commission and the non-players who advocated this ban. Look at the % of fans against it, consider that players will be against it in the same sort of numbers and also that administrators of the game outside the NRL don't even support it and it's clear that the ones out of touch are the select few who unilaterally and without consulting the true stakeholders made the decision.

The "select few" are the ones who will get sued sooner or later, that is the main reason they are taking steps to rid the game of a dangerous aspect.


By the way, were you in favour of spear tackles being banned? What about the coat-hanger, which was more or less legal when I played?

 

[East Coast Tiger]

Most fans do know and are against it.

The only players who have spoken in favour of it are the kind of fence-sitters who toe the party line WHEN asked about it.

And administrators at other levels of the game, like the CRL and RFL, are against it and are either not going to enforce a ban or will only do so if forced to.

That's a pretty damning set of facts for a "governing body" that has made a decision without consulting with any of these groups.

 

[East Coast Tiger]

The "select few" are the ones who will get sued sooner or later, that is the main reason they are taking steps to rid the game of a dangerous aspect.


By the way, were you in favour of spear tackles being banned? What about the coat-hanger, which was more or less legal when I played?

The shoulder charge in itself makes NO contact with the head. So any lame reference to tackles that do is irrelevent. It is NOT dangerous. The "select few" will absolutely not be sued. Where is there any evidence of this? And if they can be sued because a legal tackle is performed illegally, then the same goes for ANY style of tackle that is performed illegally. If this imagined litigation is a real threat, then this ruling won't prevent that litigation anyway. So from every angle this is a geniused decision.

 

[Knownothing]

The shoulder charge in itself makes NO contact with the head. So any lame reference to tackles that do is irrelevent. It is NOT dangerous. The "select few" will absolutely not be sued. Where is there any evidence of this? And if they can be sued because a legal tackle is performed illegally, then the same goes for ANY style of tackle that is performed illegally. If this imagined litigation is a real threat, then this ruling won't prevent that litigation anyway. So from every angle this is a geniused decision.

Informed medical opinion disagrees with you. The forces unleashed in a shoulder charge do have a damaging effect on the brain, of both the tackler, and the tackled player. That is why they are banned in RU, and that precedent would be used sooner or later to sue the Commission. We are in an increasingly litigious world, like it or not.


Another important point to consider is that the game needs to attract more blue chip advertisers, organisations who do not want their brand associated with perceived brutality, which is what some shoulder charges are.

 

[hillbillyjazzer1954]

Well said.
I honestly hope this is a completely farcical mess. I hope games are ruined

FFS, get over it you Girl


are you sooky girls going to stop watching RL because of this ?, is it going to diminish your enjoyment of RL because of this ?

if you answer yes to any of the above questions, you should really f**k off and watch AFL

 

[East Coast Tiger]

What informed medical opinion? Where is the study on rugby league players and the impact of shoulder charges? There isn't one. Case closed. The morons at the ARLC based their case on the NFL. That's how out of touch they are with the game of rugby league. And if they want to put the idea of litigation into people's minds when it did not exist they are setting the game up for trouble anyway. If an illegal shoulder charge can be litigated then ANY illegal action on the field could lead to litigation as well. So they have done nothing to prevent it. All they have done is put the idea into people's heads. AND by doing so they have opened up other governing bodies who have not banned it, and rightly so. Governing bodies like the RFL who actually consulted with the stakeholders of the sport instead of ignoring them.

 

[AlwaysGreen]

<P></P>
<P>&nbsp;</P>
FFS, get over it you Girl</P>
<P>&nbsp;</P>
<P>&nbsp;</P>
<P>are you sooky girls going to stop watching RL because of this ?, is it going to diminish your enjoyment of RL because of this ?</P>
<P>&nbsp;</P>
<P>&nbsp;</P>
<P>if you answer yes to any of the above questions, you should really f**k off and watch girls tiddlywinks</P>
<P>&nbsp;</P>

You alright circle jazzer?

As we are yet to see a game, yet alone a season, it is impossible to tell if banning the shoulder charge will make the game 'soft'. A lot of knee jerk reaction to a rule that has yet to be enforced really.

 

[bluey]

Surely the Commission has better things to worry about that opening this can of worms.