See ya Slater

[SadShark]

Napa got charged for dangerous contact not a shoulder charge

Absolutely. You have 2 x JPEG’s of evidence that will clear Slater.

No need to worry.

It’ll be fine..........

 

[SadShark]

Not really, that's just you being geniused.

Contact with the head is still contact with the head, genius.

No problem. You’ve cleared him.

You’re wasted on this forum And should consider a career as a solicitor

 

[SBD82]

Nobody is saying that. All we are saying is that he’s hands are clearly involved. And as the rules state, of arms/hands are involved then it’s not a shoulder charge

You're paraphrasing the rules to suit your argument.

"The player did not use, or attempt to use, his arms (including his hands) to tackle or otherwise take hold of the opposing player."

Regardless of whether his hands are involved, I've seen nothing that suggests to me that he was using his hands to take hold of the opposing player.

 

[roostersrule2]

If Slater gets off it’s a farce.

Every analyst saying he should get off for sentimental reasons should be sacked. It’s the stupidest thing I’ve ever heard.

 

[SBD82]

If Slater gets off it’s a farce.

Every analyst saying he should get off for sentimental reasons should be sacked. It’s the stupidest thing I’ve ever heard.

The worst part of seeing these "experts" argue Slater's case, is that they are the same "experts" whose tabloid style journalism pressured the NRL into writing the shitty rule in the first place.

 

[bileduct]

No problem. You’ve cleared him.

Of course I have. I looked at the rule and the evidence.

 

[roostersrule2]

The worst part of seeing these "experts" argue Slater's case, is that they are the same "experts" whose tabloid style journalism pressured the NRL into writing the shitty rule in the first place.

Indeed they’re saying it’s stupid how it’s worth that many points yet they’re half the reason for that. Honestly anyone of them who says by the rules he should get done but he should and will get off is a f**king moron.

It’s like when these “experts” were begging for something to be done about the amount of teams giving away penalties on their own line. So the NRL starts sin binning people for it and the “experts” start to whinge again.

In the eyes of the NRL media the NRL administration will never win. They’ve obviously realised them whinging sells papers so they’ll change agendas whenever they want. Much to the detriment of the game just to get an extra couple clicks online.

This is a really easy decision, Slater should be gone.

 

[bileduct]

You're paraphrasing the rules to suit your argument.

"The player did not use, or attempt to use, his arms (including his hands) to tackle or otherwise take hold of the opposing player."

Regardless of whether his hands are involved, I've seen nothing that suggests to me that he was using his hands to take hold of the opposing player.

He attempted to use his right hand but Feki fended it off.

Pretty clear in the video, imo.

 

[The_Shield]

He attempted to use his right hand but Feki fended it off.

Pretty clear in the video, imo.

Attempted is the word I think most of these guys are missing, or choosing to ignore

 

[SBD82]

Attempted is the word I think most of these guys are missing, or choosing to ignore

I'm neither missing nor ignoring it.

He wasn't attempting to use his right hand to effect a tackle imo. He was targeting Feki with his left shoulder, and like the great defender he is, he f**king nailed it. It just sucks that it happens to be illegal.

 

[bileduct]

I'm neither missing nor ignoring it.

He wasn't attempting to use his right hand to effect a tackle imo. He was targeting Feki with his left shoulder, and like the great defender he is, he f**king nailed it. It just sucks that it happens to be illegal.

The rule doesn't say you can't use the shoulder in a tackle.

 

[SBD82]

The rule doesn't say you can't use the shoulder in a tackle.

No. But it does say that you must use, or attempt to use, your arms (including your hands) to tackle or take hold of the player.

I'm saying that based on the footage, I don't think he did.

 

[AJB1102]

Youtube some classic shoulder charges from back when they were celebrated and a good lot have the opposite side hand making contact before the shoulder.

 

[bileduct]

No. But it does say that you must use, or attempt to use, your arms (including your hands) to tackle or take hold of the player.

I'm saying that based on the footage, I don't think he did.

He did use his arm. Look at him, he puts his right arm out there so Feki has to fend it off, and then wham, comes in with the upper left arm. Very smart player.

 

[taste2taste]

Similar tackle in round 17 this year. Not penalised or charged as far as I'm aware.

IMO this is Billy's best chance of getting off. The Blake shoulder charge is identical to Slater's, maybe even worse, and he wasn't charged.

If the judiciary has set a precedent that this style of tackle isn't illegal how can they charge Slater now ?

 

[Pedge1971]

Thats way after initial contact you goose. 1 frame later you could argue Feki fell over without Slater touching him.

Feki clearly has his elbow cocked and poor Billy is just defending himself.

 

[SBD82]

He did use his arm. Look at him, he puts his right arm out there so Feki has to fend it off, and then wham, comes in with the upper left arm. Very smart player.

I gave you the benefit of the doubt and went and rewatched the video. You and I are not seeing that video the same way at all.

I do enjoy your avoidance of the world "shoulder" though. "Upper left arm" is a great euphemism. If billy is looking for a defence counsel I think you'd be great.

 

[bileduct]

I gave you the benefit of the doubt and went and rewatched the video. You and I are not seeing that video the same way at all.

I do enjoy your avoidance of the world "shoulder" though. "Upper left arm" is a great euphemism. If billy is looking for a defence counsel I think you'd be great.

Thanks, but he's already got the guy who had Wighton's charge overturned. He'll be fine.

 

[Storm80]

1. Right hand is the first part of Slater to touch the player. At top speed he attempted to use his right hand to take hold of Feki and push him out.
2. The next body part to hit Feki was Slaters left arm/hand.
3. The third body part is his shoulder.
4. Fourth body part is his hip.

No rugby league supporter in their right mind would ever call this a "text book" shoulder charge. The rule was brought for the Mark Geyer type front on contact big hits where you pick em off in front.

Now of-course, I hope Billy gets off cause I'm a storm fan. But taking that aside, as a league fan, this ruling has to overturned. By definition of the rule, Billy attempted to use his arms and hands to grab or hold on to Feki's right arm. He couldn't hold on or grab because of the impact of the collision.

Rules is rules... And as the rule says "attempt" to grab or hold the opposition player. The fact Slaters first contact with Feki is with his right hand and arm, gives weight to the evidence Billy wanted to grab or hold him. As long as Slater's testimony is "I attempted to grab or hold his right arm before contact with my shoulder" then I can not see, based on how the rule is written, how a judiciary could find Billy anything else other than not guilty.

And as for forceful contact? Feki didn't even miss a beat. Got up like a real man and got on with the game. Hardly forceful contact. Every tackle could be labelled forceful.

Its an extremely sad day for Rugby League if this type of collision is outlawed. Bigger hits in AFL these days.

 

[Philip_Smith007]

IMO this is Billy's best chance of getting off. The Blake shoulder charge is identical to Slater's, maybe even worse, and he wasn't charged.

If the judiciary has set a precedent that this style of tackle isn't illegal how can they charge Slater now ?

Can't use it as never went to the judiciary.
2nd its against the Warriors, you are allowed to get away with stuff like that against them.