See ya Slater

[firechild]

No way he should miss a GF for that. He barely knocked him off balance. Surely the outcome of the hit needs to be taken into account. If you swing a punch at someone do you get suspended if you miss them?

But he didn't miss him. That's a poor analogy.

 

[The_Shield]

Which tackle was worse, the Slater bump or the Friend lift? Friend lifted and dropped Inglis on his head and is free to play, Slater bumped Feki out of the field of play and now he has to fight a 1 week suspension to be able to play.

 

[Cockosh]

I wonder if Greenburgess will be at the judiciary to ensure the right decision is made like he did with Napa.

 

[Valheru]

Which tackle was worse, the Slater bump or the Friend lift? Friend lifted and dropped Inglis on his head and is free to play, Slater bumped Feki out of the field of play and now he has to fight a 1 week suspension to be able to play.

A lifting tackle in and of itself isn't illegal. It requires conventional arm wrapping tackling technique and becomes illegal based on result i.e. going above the horizontal and grading is then determined by hand placement, force etc. It is no different to a high shot in that regard.

The shoulder charge has been deemed to be an illegal action by the NRL in all circumstances regardless of point of contact or result and that is the reason it holds a higher base penalty.

 

[Roosters rule]

All of a sudden roosters fans want him suspended......

I don't.

 

[Cockosh]

All of a sudden roosters fans want him suspended......

Nope, read my earlier post.

 

[WepnutV]

Whare got cleared for that hit.....and that was a full on shoulder charge. Billy's was a very side on hit. What was Slater supposed to do? ....let him run and score?

Clear him to play.

No.. There are massive differences. Billy should not get off where the tackle in that video there was nothing wrong with..

 

[The_Shield]

A lifting tackle in and of itself isn't illegal. It requires conventional arm wrapping tackling technique and becomes illegal based on result i.e. going above the horizontal and grading is then determined by hand placement, force etc. It is no different to a high shot in that regard.

The shoulder charge has been deemed to be an illegal action by the NRL in all circumstances regardless of point of contact or result and that is the reason it holds a higher base penalty.

A shoulder charge requires no use of the arms, it’s quite clear that Slaters arms were involved. The first point of contact is his right arm reaching around the front, and he’s using his left arm to push

 

[Valheru]

A shoulder charge requires no use of the arms, it’s quite clear that Slaters arms were involved. The first point of contact is his right arm reaching around the front, and he’s using his left arm to push

Lol no, it was a textbook shoulder charge.

Although i have no doubt that will get him off.

 

[blaza88z]

I just knew The_Shield would be in here trying to defend nothing but a blatant shoulder charge, literally everyone in here knows it was a shoulder charge, it's not even up for debate at this point

The only way he gets off is if Melbourne present other tackles which were similar that weren't charged but if you look down the list of what a shoulder charge is, Slater's tackle ticks every box

 

[Babyface O'reilly]

Have kept quiet on this on fear that I might be biased, but far out the more you watch it the more it looks like a good hit. I do understand rules are rules, but I wish it were a case by case basis because that shouldn’t warrant missing a Grand final

Hence the stupidity of outright banning the shoulder charge

 

[greenBV4]

Slater’s hopes of playing one last NRL game will rest in the hands of a three-man judiciary panel of ex-players next week, after he was hit with a grade-one shoulder charge offence for Friday night’s hit on Cronulla winger Sosaia Feki.

Melbourne were expecting their veteran fullback to go uncharged over the try-saving hit that pushed Feki into touch, but swept into action quickly after receiving the news on Saturday morning.

The Storm confirmed immediately they’d challenge the charge and hired Ghabar, who is considered as one of the best lawyers available when players attempt to evade a ban.

Ghabar was responsible for freeing Jack Wighton to play in the 2016 finals series after an apparent shoulder charge on Michael Ennis, when the Canberra fullback’s prospects looked bleak.

He also successfully defended Sam Burgess against a shoulder charge claim at the start of last season after he cleaned up Canterbury’s Greg Eastwood.

“We’re going to leave no stones unturned and do everything we can to get Bill up,” Melbourne football director Frank Ponissi said.

“We think we’ve got a strong case, we were disappointed he was charged.

“We’ve put the request in (for a Monday hearing). Our preference would be interests for the player and the game so everyone can move on and start talking about the grand final.” Whether the hearing can be pushed forward will depend on a number of logistical challenges for the NRL.

However, also working in Melbourne’s favour is the fact that since the shoulder charge laws were rewritten at the start of last year, the panel has sided with the player four times out of six when challenging their charges.

Slater was adamant after the game the incident was just an “unfortunate collision”, as both he and Feki were running at top-speed for the corner.

“He’s obviously disappointed, but Bill being Bill he’s on the offensive straight away to do what he can to help with the defence case,” Ponissi said.

“Whilst initially shocked and disappointed to be charged, he’s putting everything into the defence. That’s typical Bill.”

Melbourne captain Cameron Smith also missed the Storm’s 2008 grand final loss to Manly through suspension, while Kiwi hooker Issac Luke is the last big name to have missed a decider due to a ban when he was playing for South Sydney in 2014.

Losing Slater would be a massive blow to the Storm, given he is still close to his best despite being 317 games into his NRL career.

If he is suspended from what would be a seventh grand final, rookie Jahrome Hughes would likely come in for just his 18th NRL match and first finals clash.

- https://www.foxsports.com.au/nrl/nr...s/news-story/3fe28cda9c7e5ec8a7eea44afd6209ed

dont know if this has been posted
apparently goes in the players favour 4 times out of 6 when challenged

 

[The_Shield]

I just knew The_Shield would be in here trying to defend nothing but a blatant shoulder charge, literally everyone in here knows it was a shoulder charge, it's not even up for debate at this point

The only way he gets off is if Melbourne present other tackles which were similar that weren't charged but if you look down the list of what a shoulder charge is, Slater's tackle ticks every box

It’s obvious you don’t know what your talking about. 1st they can’t use any tackle that wasn’t charged as a defence and 2nd the rule states that a shoulder charge must have no use of the arms, which as you can see, Slaters arms are involved and not tucked into his body

 

[Someguy]

It’s obvious you don’t know what your talking about. 1st they can’t use any tackle that wasn’t charged as a defence and 2nd the rule states that a shoulder charge must have no use of the arms, which as you can see, Slaters arms are involved and not tucked into his body

View attachment 23681

Pretty conclusive that shot right there

 

[blaza88z]

It’s obvious you don’t know what your talking about. 1st they can’t use any tackle that wasn’t charged as a defence and 2nd the rule states that a shoulder charge must have no use of the arms, which as you can see, Slaters arms are involved and not tucked into his body

View attachment 23681

His arm might be there but it's not a wrapping motion, it's just there by chance, his arm is only there by the way of his running technique, that arm plays no role in the tackle what so ever

 

[bileduct]

It’s obvious you don’t know what your talking about. 1st they can’t use any tackle that wasn’t charged as a defence and 2nd the rule states that a shoulder charge must have no use of the arms, which as you can see, Slaters arms are involved and not tucked into his body

View attachment 23681

Yep, first contact is made by Slater's right hand.

https://www.nrl.com/news/2017/02/04/nrl-statement-on-shoulder-charge/

As part of a change to the Judiciary and Match Review system, a player will be charged if:

• The contact is forceful, and;
• The player did not use, or attempt to use, his arms (including his hands) to tackle or otherwise take hold of the opposing player.

Slater will play in the GF.

 

[firechild]

Yep, first contact is made by Slater's right hand.

https://www.nrl.com/news/2017/02/04/nrl-statement-on-shoulder-charge/


Slater will play in the GF.

The side on shot shows clearly that this is not the case. His right arm is in the air and not anywhere near making contact.

 

[bileduct]

The side on shot shows clearly that this is not the case. His right arm is in the air and not anywhere near making contact.

Here's all the angles.


First contact is clearly Slater's right hand on Feki's forearm.

 

[sempmrh]

His arm might be there but it's not a wrapping motion, it's just there by chance, his arm is only there by the way of his running technique, that arm plays no role in the tackle what so ever

But the rule doesn't say anything about a wrapping motion, only that an attempt needs to be made to use a hand or arm to tackle the player.

 

[Exsilium]

I’m not sure to what extent the judiciary use still images but in full speed it’s a shoulder charge.

You hand pick a frame and it can be interpreted a number of ways.

I see the key words as being “tackle” and “hold”. What slater did is not a tackle, it’s a bump, shoulder charge or whatever else you want to call it. He also makes no attempt to “hold” the player or wrap his arms.

I think he’s done.

It should have also been a professional foul on the night but that’s all in the past now.