Judiciary Charges 2019

[franklin2323]

Well the game has offically lost the plot. Atleast 50% of the tackles in a game of footy would look the same as this one.

 

[Fangs]

What an embarrassing time to call yourself a rugby league fan. You won't sell this game anywhere until crap like this gets fixed. How can you take it seriously?

What a heinous decision.

 

[Abacus]

Interesting application out of this ruling. Kikau was deemed to have "made no attempt to wrap both arms around" Nicolls, therefore constituting a shoulder charge.

The NRL definition of a shoulder charge includes:
The player did not use, or attempt to use, his arms (including his hands) to tackle or otherwise take hold of the opposing player.

If this definition now requires a player to use, or attempt to use, both of his arms....well I think we're about to see a whole stack of penalties abd suspensions ladies and gentlemen.

 

[forby]

Not if you play for the "right" teams.

 

[gerg]

".. consistency is overrated...". Greenberg, 28 February 2019.

 

[hunters]

Interesting application out of this ruling. Kikau was deemed to have "made no attempt to wrap both arms around" Nicolls, therefore constituting a shoulder charge.

The NRL definition of a shoulder charge includes:
The player did not use, or attempt to use, his arms (including his hands) to tackle or otherwise take hold of the opposing player.

If this definition now requires a player to use, or attempt to use, both of his arms....well I think we're about to see a whole stack of penalties abd suspensions ladies and gentlemen.

Maybe the players are best to resort to tripping and just cop a $1500 fine.

 

[Dave's mate]

Greentûrd is straight up incompetent

 

[Roosters rule]

A disgraceful decision.
You watch there will be a similar tackle like Kikau"s soon and that player will either get off or not get charged.
Maybe Kikau should have changed his name before the hearing to Smith or Slater.

 

[I Bleed Maroon]

Kikau's suspension is a laughing disgrace. 10 years ago that's just football. We're very quickly becoming beyond the pale with this shit.

 

[Surely]

Penrith have just released their back to the future round 20 jersey

 

[TheFrog]

Assuming this was in fact contact with the shoulder, which is quite doubtful, what is the rationale for a shoulder to the body to be chargeable anyway? Player safety? Has any player ever been injured by a shoulder to the body? And if it is player safety, why is it now OK to do it on a player trying to score a try?

NRL have opened a can of worms on this.

 

[Springs09]

Yeah, what a great rule this shoulder charge rubbish is...

Imagine whacking someone with a closed fist swinging arm around the head to stop a try and the NRL saying its alright because it was in the act of stopping a try. Either the shoulder charge is dangerous or it isn't, it doesn't matter where you are on the field. The NRL clearly think it's more dangerous than high tackles as it incurs more points, yet come out with this shit.

Assuming this was in fact contact with the shoulder, which is quite doubtful, what is the rationale for a shoulder to the body to be chargeable anyway? Player safety? Has any player ever been injured by a shoulder to the body? And if it is player safety, why is it now OK to do it on a player trying to score a try?

Because the NFL researched concussions and consequences later in life and even though its a different sport, the NRL went through every tackle and came up with some crap like 'shoulder charges have 1.4x the g-force of regular tackles' which can cause whiplash like concussions so we need to ban shoulder charges to make it look like we are doing something even though we still praise all the other big hits in the game which are just as hard and just as dangerous.

 

[Frailty]

Yeah, what a great rule this shoulder charge rubbish is...

Imagine whacking someone with a closed fist swinging arm around the head to stop a try and the NRL saying its alright because it was in the act of stopping a try. Either the shoulder charge is dangerous or it isn't, it doesn't matter where you are on the field. The NRL clearly think it's more dangerous than high tackles as it incurs more points, yet come out with this shit.

Because the NFL researched concussions and consequences later in life and even though its a different sport, the NRL went through every tackle and came up with some crap like 'shoulder charges have 1.4x the g-force of regular tackles' which can cause whiplash like concussions so we need to ban shoulder charges to make it look like we are doing something even though we still praise all the other big hits in the game which are just as hard and just as dangerous.

Got any evidence of this? Or is it based on presumption?

I was initially against the banning of the shoulder charge, but given our understanding of brain injury and concussion is increasing, I can see why the NRL decided to take action to minimise the amount of risk. I wasn't a fan of the use of NFL as evidence, because a lot of that research focused on helmet to helmet hits which was obviously not an issue with the NRL. However, knowledge of body on body collisions and the impact on the brain has demonstrated there is definitely an area for concern. So the NRL outlawed a tackle which on average produced a greater force on impact than other tackles. Furthermore, this action had be unlawful in Union for long time.

Isolated, the judiciary got the Kikau call right. He cocked his arm, lead with the shoulder, and did not attempt to wrap his arms to make a tackle. That is a shoulder charge. I agree, that the leniency given to prevent a try is ridiculous. There is bumping (similar to when two players side by side contesting a loose ball) which is fine, but the fullback flying across with no attempt at tackle should be penalised every time.

 

[Springs09]

Got any evidence of this? Or is it based on presumption?

Seriously? Have a look at the Matai hit on Tyrell a few years back. Everyone went nuts over it. Hit of the century. Of course it's harder than some of the shoulder charges we see, in particular Dufty's on the weekend. What do you think would have happened if Matai hit Tyrell in the head? Knocked out and concussed. But because his arm was out, it's alright? No, of course it's just as dangerous.

I don't give a shit that the shoulder charge is no longer in the game. 99% of the time it's a silly tactic that rarely comes off. The problem with the rule is that it's hypocritical. We see hits that are just as hard and just as dangerous all the time, outstretched arms don't make hard hits suddenly undangerous. The arm tucked in now gets criticised as dirty and dangerous and worthy of a large suspension, an untucked arm with the same force and same point of impact gets praised and celebrated. The other hypocritical aspect is that attacking players can still lead with the shoulder, even at an opponent's head, and it's fine.

The shoulder charge ban was a stopgap solution for the NRL to make it look like they are addressing the problem. The rule they should have implemented was for contact to the head to be punished a lot more harshly than what it is. Body-to-body contact resulting in brain damage will always be a side effect of the game, same as concussions from low tackles with the head colliding with a hip or knee. The only way to get rid of it is to ban tackling.

The ban has resulted in nothing tackles getting suspensions and the potential for a nothing tackle to result in a player missing a big game. Which of course happened to Slater last year and the NRL knew the tackle was not worthy of a suspension and let him off, which means they know the ridiculousness of the rule.

 

[TheFrog]

I was initially against the banning of the shoulder charge, but given our understanding of brain injury and concussion is increasing, I can see why the NRL decided to take action to minimise the amount of risk.

You are talking about trauma to the head. There can be little argument that hits to the head are dangerous. This is a shoulder charge to the body. If it hit the head it would be a grade 1 dangerous contact and he would have got 90 points for an early plea.

I think they are trying to set an example, and are not too concerned with the circumstances of the matter, so long as a statement is made. It's a pity clubs cannot appeal these suspensions to the courts. There need to be checks and balances.

 

[MightyMoo]

Like most, WTF with Kikau's suspension.

 

[Willie Ray]

FFS....so a player can now be penalised,sin-binned and suspended for
being...well.....big.

 

[Lebbo73]

View attachment 31670


Penrith have just released their back to the future round 20 jersey

Is it possible to send that to the NRL?

 

[BxTom]

Is it possible to send that to the NRL?

Well I guess it might work. It's a picture so no need to be able to read...

 

[t-ba]

Assuming this was in fact contact with the shoulder, which is quite doubtful, what is the rationale for a shoulder to the body to be chargeable anyway? Player safety? Has any player ever been injured by a shoulder to the body? And if it is player safety, why is it now OK to do it on a player trying to score a try?

NRL have opened a can of worms on this.

If a can of worms was to be opened it would have been with the insanely dubious suspension Willie Mason got for it in 2015.

This has been going on forever. You only give a shit now because it's that dude fr your team.

This freak show isn't stopping any time soon.