Commission to outlaw 'shoulder charge'

[Burrzz]

My two cents;

I saw the hit and wow what a hit BUT isn't that what Rugby is all about?
I don't think there is anything wrong with the Shoulder Charge and they just need to move on, forget it and lets play Rugby.

That's what I am here for.

 

[Burrzz]

Ah, but you musn't have spoken to an NFL fan! The NFL over the last few years have softened up the game significantly to appease advertisers and "soccer moms", and many NFL are outraged about the direction of the game.

If anything I would say keep an eye on North America, because w/e health controversy they have (Football, Hockey, etc) seems to be picked up shortly after in the League world.

This shoulder charge "controversy" at the moment is actually driven by what's been happening in the NHL and NFL recently.

American Football is becoming a Pussies game. AND with the new rules they are getting player hurt and losing fans fast.

Rugby is the game to see/play

 

[WayneBennett]

Yep, Groat took a trip to disneyland on the back of having his shoulder rattled :sarcasmUOTE]

Look you nuffy, go back and have a look at the shot on Warea Hargraeves in the 2010 finals series. Lauded as one of the greatest hits ever. ...And way worse than this normal tackle. :roll:

 

[WayneBennett]

P.S.Groat is.softer than your mum

 

[Pierced Soul]

I'm sick of all this talk to change the game to suit MUMs, .

everytime gallop whinges about something he states he's had all these emails from mums..... where's his f**king email address that mums can find cos i'd liek to send the incompetant prick some suggetsions too

mind you he cant use it in this case because shoulder charegs are banned for kids. it's journo's who find league an easy target. if gallop just came out and said "shoulder charegs have been around since 1908 we're not changing it" the story would be over

But it does beg the question, do we change the game because of sponsors?.

NO. but the reality is the corporate dollar talks and unfortunately has far more influence than it should. I think we have a product where the attitude should be "like it or f**k off" instead of selling it short to make a quick buck. there are plenty of sponsors who grew up watching the game and i'm sure they don't want to see the game played with to apepase some company who ahs their own agenda.

Rugby is the game to see/play

NO. Rugby LEAGUE is the game, rugby on it's own is that stupid yawnion shit

 

[dogslife]

You're now on par with Bunniesman in terms of being an intellectual heavyweight

 

[Red Bear]

Yeah, it was and he'll probably get a couple of weeks for that, be it reckless of careless contact with the head, which is fair enough.

However, I didn't make my point clear, in the sense that there was no intention or malice in Te'o's hit, as opposed to Blair, who had more than enough time to stop, and still blindsided Wallace! I have no doubt there was clear intention in that, and that makes it worse in my book.

I agree with Wok and Morrow here, in that that is bullshit. It's a shoulder charge, it's all about malice and intention to hurt the opposition. Might not have been aiming for the head but it is still intention to f**king hurt the bloke

 

[Big Pete]

Difference between Te'o and Blair.

Te'o was just looking to put on a legal hit and was unfortunate to make marginal contact to the head.

Blair looked to put on a cheap shot that he easily could have pulled out of.

 

[dogslife]

You won't find many people saying Blair isn't a cheap shot merchant. But his was shoulder to shoulder, hence why a penalty was sufficient. Shoulder to chin is a different story, just ask Frank

 

[Big Pete]

Frank would correct me tell me he hit his cheek.

Wouldn't surprise me if Blair actually made some contact to Wallace's head looking at it again. Would have been marginal though.

 

[Perth Red]

Shoulder charges are one of the best parts of the game! Do away with them at our peril..

 

[Pugzley]

All those abolitionist that want to abolish the shoulder charge can go suck on Eddie Mcguire's and Andrew Demetriou's dick. f**king League saboteurs.

 

[Miller was a legend]

All those abolitionist that want to abolish the shoulder charge can go suck on Eddie Mcguire's and Andrew Demetriou's dick. f**king League saboteurs.

I'm with you captain pugswash.

 

[Pugzley]

HARDEN. THE. f**k. UP!! :kicks down to the bottom of the well.:

 

[Miller was a legend]

FFS let's get rid of every thing that made this great game and call it fugging soccer

 

[Pugzley]

I'm with you captain pugswash.

Im a pirate now? http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Captain_Pugwash#section_3

 

[Tonearm Terrorwrist]

FFS let's get rid of every thing that made this great game and call it fugging soccer

If we did that then we can legitimately call it the greatest game of all

 

[Manu Vatuvei]

I don't get how people think that every shoulder charge by definition is not aimed at the head, and that every "shoulder charge gone wrong" is somehow not really a high shot.

Te'o intended to make initial contact with his shoulder. His shoulder was at the level of Groat's chin. How is that anything other than a bad high shot?

Sometimes the attacking player slips. Sometimes the defender intends to make first contact with the arm at chest level, but the shoulder ends up making incidental contact with the head area of the attacking player. This is accidental contact and therefore should not be illegal because the tackler did nothing wrong.

There is nothing inconsistent about this and it's really not that complicated. You look at the part of the body the defender is leading with and you see where it makes impact. If it's high it's a high tackle. If there's other high contact for some other reason, there's no fault on the part of the defender and it's not a high tackle. How complicated is it really?

 

[seanoff]

not sure the NRL will be left with much choice.

there is a worry in the US that the NFL will struggle with the lawyers and they have more money than god. the NRL couldn't survive.

i'm firmly in the camp of if it works fine, if it's high, have a holiday. you decide if you want to take that chance.

Teo hit the guy flush on the chin, he was out on contact. therefore holiday.


but the NRL have a duty of care to protect the players from unnecessary injury, esp to the head and may be forced to outlaw the tackle because of the danger of it going wrong.

 

[Springs]

It's the same as any other tackle. If it's high penalise it, if it's not play on. Might as well ban every tackle.

Outlawing it will bring contentious penalties as well. There are many hits with the arm or the chest that knocks the runner back or down. The refs will penalise any big hit. All big hits will become like Burgess's hit on Pearce a few years back, perfectly legal but penalised just because it looked bad.