The shoulder charge debate thread

[Perth Red]

Loved the Mason spray at the NRL. He said what 90% of NRL fans are thinking.

2 matches for that and none for head butting a player, just about sums up the farce the game is becoming with its penalty system.

 

[Card Shark]

Yeah, good on Willie for having his say.

f**k the people at the NRL are stupid, this knee-jerk rule change to what amounts to 2 weeks suspension for any hint of a shoulder charge will come back so hard to bite them on the arse, it won't be funny.

Actually, it will be funny.

 

[Renowned League Expert]

Jeez, Paul Kent talks some crap. It's not about "player welfare" and never has been. It's about two things: 1. The threat of litigation 2. The fear that some young mother will be sitting at home, see a punch or a hard tackle, and say, "That's it, young Timmy will not be playing this game!"

That's what it's about. Dickhead lawyers in charge of the game.

Like I said, it all goes back to the Super League crap. As soon as the corporate world gets its claws into anything, it just sucks the life out of it. Now we have Rugby League Lite.

Player welfare, my arse. Other sports don't make rule changes that alter the very fabric of the game just because someone gets hurt. Phillip Hughes died 8 months ago from a bouncer. Imagine if the clueless desk jockeys at the NRL were also running cricket? No more bouncers!

These are dark days, indeed.

 

[Penrose Warrior]

:lol: Or it would probably be like League was a mere few years ago, where contact rules were decided based on what was fair rather than what will make the admins look bad in the media.

Hope you're happy with this weeks round of pissweak suspensions and penalties dickhead.

The current NRL football department have shown themselves completely incapable of maintaining a rulebook. They have no f**king clue and every attempt to fix things just digs the hole deeper, and not just the shoulder charge.

Dave Smith might be getting cash results but Greenberg and his colleagues are the worst thing to ever happen to Rugby League.

I'm not happy with this week's round of suspensions, if that makes you feel better. I think it's a joke that Mason got 2 weeks, because that wasn't a shoulder charge. But referees are morons and if the rulebook says no arms, they're completely incapable of getting their head around the fact it isnt a shoulder charge. So I agree there.

And the final paragraph, I don't disagree with that either.

 

[TheVelourFog]

Loved the Mason spray at the NRL. He said what 90% of NRL fans are thinking.

2 matches for that and none for head butting a player, just about sums up the farce the game is becoming with its penalty system.

You exaggerate

Other than the whingers on here i dont think the majority of fans give two shits thay players cant shoulder charge any more

Hasnt affected my enjoyment in the slightest

 

[Penrose Warrior]

You exaggerate

Other than the whingers on here i dont think the majority of fans give two shits thay players cant shoulder charge any more

Hasnt affected my enjoyment in the slightest

IN all fairness, the 'league was tougher in my day' crowd don't listen to reason and anyone else's opinion, so it's a fair stat.

It's also possible that people - ie me - agree with shoulder charges being banned but think it's a nonsense that Mason got two weeks and Matulino got three (ignoring head butts or any comparison, if you can).

Mason's is the biggest joke because it's basically showing that refs have zero feel for the game. What else he could have done in that situation is beyond me. And the Matulino one, the f**king ref didn't even see it and it was put on report 5 minutes later. Buyuka somehow escapes penalty as well.

Tony Archer now knows what it was like to be David Gallop, sitting by his phone with a sense of dread knowing something awful was about to come across his desk. But in this case it's more Archer's fault. What a shit bunch of inept fools our refs are, and our administration too.

 

[adamkungl]

The issue isn't entirely about the shoulder charge though. The shoulder charge ban, and subsequent crackdown last week, are an indication of the direction the game is heading.

It is reasonable that the shoulder charge was among the riskiest tackle techniques, even though I believe that risk is nowhere near as high as the NRL claimed to get their ban through.

But now something else will be the next riskiest thing and that will get sooked about, investigated and eventually banned too. The NRL has changed the precedent from penalising dangerous tackles to penalising tackles that might risk danger. Their rule change last week literally gives them scope to suspend someone for tackling too hard ("with force"). It's the greyest grey area that has ever been introduced into rugby league.

Maybe it will be banning 3+ man tackles. Maybe it will be penalising or suspending the second a player leaves the ground. I doubt we'll have to wait long before NRL crumbles under the next media crusade.

 

[adamkungl]

You exaggerate

Other than the whingers on here i dont think the majority of fans give two shits thay players cant shoulder charge any more

Hasnt affected my enjoyment in the slightest

Take a look at the comments on any NRL article, forum, facebook post... you are incorrect.

Crowds are down. The NRL is losing fans faster than it is gaining them.

 

[Billythekid]

I feel like these sorts of bans are a dangerous road to go down. Where do we stop exactly? So now they have banned shoulder charges but what about other big hits? Guys like Matai, burgess, SBW etc can absolutely f*cking demolish people with or without shoulder charges. The big hits they put on people are just as powerful as the shoulder charges being banned. So do we have to ban big hits in general? Should players be able to take a run up before smashing another player? Should we also ban gang tackles which are dangerous as well?

The simple fact if rugby league is a dangerous sport and takes a huge toll on the human body. You can keep banning these things but that fact won't change unless we completely change the game all together. This is less about player welfare and more about trying to look good for a certain portion of society. We don't want little timmy to play soccer because league is too dangerous. Problem is these changes do nothing to prevent that and the parents who would avoid league for their children because it's too dangerous will still do just that.

Ultimately though the bigger issue is crap like these automatic bans. I can at least accept the shoulder charge ban even if I disagree but automatic suspensions for tackles which aren't even remotely dangerous and not even really shoulder charges is just weak. In general I just don't like how the game is being run. Sure we're making more money but as a fan I've seen no benefit from that and if anything have seen things going backwards.

 

[chrisD]

League is the better for it.

It's gone.

Only dickheads want it back - exhibit A - Willie Mason.

Yeah, Willie Mason is a total dickhead, who would listen to him about rugby league lol. Rothfield is the man to listen to.

 

[adamkungl]

i feel like these sorts of bans are a dangerous road to go down. Where do we stop exactly? So now they have banned shoulder charges but what about other big hits? Guys like matai, burgess, sbw etc can absolutely f*cking demolish people with or without shoulder charges. The big hits they put on people are just as powerful as the shoulder charges being banned. So do we have to ban big hits in general? Should players be able to take a run up before smashing another player? Should we also ban gang tackles which are dangerous as well?

The simple fact if rugby league is a dangerous sport and takes a huge toll on the human body. You can keep banning these things but that fact won't change unless we completely change the game all together. This is less about player welfare and more about trying to look good for a certain portion of society. We don't want little timmy to play soccer because league is too dangerous. Problem is these changes do nothing to prevent that and the parents who would avoid league for their children because it's too dangerous will still do just that.

Ultimately though the bigger issue is crap like these automatic bans. I can at least accept the shoulder charge ban even if i disagree but automatic suspensions for tackles which aren't even remotely dangerous and not even really shoulder charges is just weak. In general i just don't like how the game is being run. Sure we're making more money but as a fan i've seen no benefit from that and if anything have seen things going backwards.

100%

 

[Penrose Warrior]

Take a look at the comments on any NRL article, forum, facebook post... you are incorrect.

Crowds are down. The NRL is losing fans faster than it is gaining them.

As I've said previously, crowds are down for reasons more vast than the banning of the shoulder charge. I know East Coast Tiger thinks market research is made up but I can guarantee if you canvassed fans as to why they don't go to a game, it'd be to do with an issue with the whole match-day experience, and the ability to watch it on a number of platforms and in HD (oh wait, what?). And unless I'm wrong, TV audiences aren't down.

Following on your point about banning potentially dangerous tackles, that's exactly why placing hands between legs should be banned for tip tackles. We've had some shocking ones this year that could've gone down the McKinnon route again but again the NRL don't act on it because the media didn't thump it.

 

[Penrose Warrior]

Guys like Matai, burgess, SBW etc can absolutely f*cking demolish people with or without shoulder charges. The big hits they put on people are just as powerful as the shoulder charges being banned.

So what's the issue, why don't they just do that. The difference being those big hits with arms are very unlikely to make head-high contact unless someone ducks or they get it ridiculously wrong. Shoulder charges on the other hand are much less controlled, and much more likely to make head contact with much stronger force.

 

[Tommy Smith]

Can you imagine Thurston, or ANY player, missing a GF for a shoulder charge like Mason's?

The NRL have now backed themselves into a corner and it'll cost someone a GF spot... all for a soft faux shoulder charge that wouldn't hurt a fly.

The one that Pomeroy did on the weekend. Get that shit out of the game. But what Mason did? A penalty and move on.

 

[cleary89]

Take a look at the comments on any NRL article, forum, facebook post... you are incorrect.

Crowds are down. The NRL is losing fans faster than it is gaining them.

TV is up

 

[TheVelourFog]

Take a look at the comments on any NRL article, forum, facebook post... you are incorrect.

Crowds are down. The NRL is losing fans faster than it is gaining them.

Are crowds the sole measure of the number of fans? It is a measure of how many fans are going to games, sure. I think it's purely hyperbole to say that no shoulder charges affects crowd numbers. Corellation does not prove causation

 

[adamkungl]

Many fans have directly stated that they are spending less money on NRL because they are unhappy with the direction the game is heading in regards to contact.

 

[chrisD]

So what's the issue, why don't they just do that. The difference being those big hits with arms are very unlikely to make head-high contact unless someone ducks or they get it ridiculously wrong. Shoulder charges on the other hand are much less controlled, and much more likely to make head contact with much stronger force.

Matai's tackling style is unlikely to make head-high contact.

An argument by Penrose Warrior.

 

[the_flight_of_the_magpie]

Ask James Ackermans brother how good shoulder charges are

or ask this bloke how good shoulder charges are

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cpQwByUW5aQ

 

[NrlCoach]

Can the NRL please explain to the fans and player why Mason hit was more dangerous then Pritchard shoulder charge. The shoulder charge is not banned. its only banned if you haven't got the ball on you hand. Play safety my ****

[youtube]8lBZ8FZ2SQw[/youtube]