The shoulder charge debate thread

[The Engineers Room]

All these dumb articles where players complain about suspensions. Don't want to get suspended, don't do it. They were warned and they are too dumb to listen.

 

[bmwpower]

Shoulder charge should be legal and only illegal with contact to the head with a minimum 6 week suspension.

 

[mave]

All these dumb articles where players complain about suspensions. Don't want to get suspended, don't do it. They were warned and they are too dumb to listen.

Watch the Tafua "shoulder charge"......
Then explain to me what he was supposed to do in that situation.

Let Whighton steamroll over the top of him?
Self preservation dictates that you brace for contact.

 

[Parra]

Now they have no choice. Wow.

Just play by the rules, It's not hard and certainly not impossible.

 

[southwalesrabbitoh]

J Taufua won't be banned for that, no way.

I'm in favour of the shoulder BARGE being banned. You can still tackle hard with the top of the shoulder, it's the outside of the shoulder barge that's been banned.

And quite rightly, the problem with it was, was big players blindsiding smaller players. For example, saw a very good example in the England v NZ Maori match in 2010, the Maori winger stepped inside and was shoulder barged hard by an English forward, the winger couldn't see the player coming at him from the back. That forward could have tackled him if he had wanted to, but decided to put a big (cheap) shoulder to him.

 

[Tinkler]

A good point.

Kids who stay at home will elect to play their X-Box, PlayStation or IPad instead of watching footy on TV.

sydney people and lifestyle are very difference to melbourne

 

[Perth Red]

sydney people and lifestyle are very difference to melbourne

Some places are just more passionate about sport than others I guess?

 

[Rabbits20]

J Taufua won't be banned for that, no way.

I'm in favour of the shoulder BARGE being banned. You can still tackle hard with the top of the shoulder, it's the outside of the shoulder barge that's been banned.

And quite rightly, the problem with it was, was big players blindsiding smaller players. For example, saw a very good example in the England v NZ Maori match in 2010, the Maori winger stepped inside and was shoulder barged hard by an English forward, the winger couldn't see the player coming at him from the back. That forward could have tackled him if he had wanted to, but decided to put a big (cheap) shoulder to him.

Well Taufua has been charged by the judiciary.

 

[Tinkler]

If the death of Ackerman from the shoulder charge and was live on tv in first grade the damage to the game would be huge and the conversation very different.

 

[DiegoNT]

If the death of Ackerman from the shoulder charge and was live on tv in first grade the damage to the game would be huge and the conversation very different.

In the week after the Evans shoulder charge I think the majority of league supporters agreed that the shoulder charge shouldn't come back. Wh were reminded of the tragic death of a player and it only confirmed to us that we don't need it in our game. Of course there was a few dinosaurs who wanted it back but I think most agreed that the shoulder charge ban didn't really effect their enjoyment of the nrl. Then of course the NRL bungled the rule change and we are seeing players suspended for little more then bumps, this is where people are outraged. Just because we don't like the way the nrl has introduced this new rule means we want shoulder charges back or we are being disrespectful to someone who's passed away.

 

[Lambretta]

the 16 evil club doctors decided this !!!

doctors are evil....

entertainment before safety !!!!

The doctors said that high velocity shoulder charges where a player runs at a man and uses the force of the shoulder as a battering ram were potentially dangerous because the tackles could go wrong and the impact point could be the head and you could cause brain damage. They are right

The NRL have made an absolute f**king dogs breakfast of the whole situation because they have no idea what constitutes a shoulder charge. They think someone running into someone who is standing still is a "shoulder charge" - they think that players bumping into each other is a "shoulder charge" - they think instances where there are two defenders in a tackle and one player fails to lift his arm sufficiently because his own team mates body gets in the way is a "shoulder charge"

For a shoulder charge to be worth a charge at the judiciary it should have three vital facets

1. Was the shoulder used with the arm cocked or locked into the side of the body for maximum impact?

2. Was the player doing the tackling in the process of "charging" ie was he actually running AT the person he tackled?

3. Was the impact likely to cause damage to the person contacted if the contact point was the head?

If the answer to ALL three is YES then a penalty can be given and a charge levelled at the player by the judiciary

If not, PLAY ON.

It is not that hard.

 

[Nice Beaver]

Some people on here are getting all upset and it would seem confused about what most are saying about the ridiculousness of this new rule.

I (and I think most) are not advocating the return of the shoulder charge in general.

What gets me is the utterly stupid notion that every single piece of contact made by a shoulder is a chargeable offence.

Hitting a bloke on his blind side or coming in with force, dropping your shoulder into a bloke are a world away from someone bracing themselves for impact in a contact sport.

Greenberg and his pack of useless turdlets in the NRL headquarters have f*cked this up big time.

I have no issue at all with banning the classic definition of a shoulder charge. But this handing out of suspensions willy nilly for acts that are in no way shoulder charges is just stupidity.

Revise the ruling and hand your resignation in Greenberg.

 

[Pierced Soul]

all players need to put velcro onto their shorts and get coloured tags

 

[Tinkler]

The reason why NRL has cracked cracked down and implemented this recently is because a player died from a shoulder charge.

On a pure legal basis the game and referees were not enforcing the no shoulder charge rule, players were still doing it and getting away without a penalty or small suspensions.

NRL could be held liable as they were negligent in their enforcement and prevention.

Any company would expose itself to massive lawsuits if they failed to follow the advice of doctors and scientists who warned them.

Jarrod MAcCraken already won $100,000 from a spear tackle injury the game could be sued huge amounts like 20 to 50 million dollars for death.

 

[DiegoNT]

The reason why NRL has cracked cracked down and implemented this recently is because a player died from a shoulder charge.

On a pure legal basis the game and referees were not enforcing the no shoulder charge rule, players were still doing it and getting away without a penalty or small suspensions.

NRL could be held liable as they were negligent in their enforcement and prevention.

Any company would expose itself to massive lawsuits if they failed to follow the advice of doctors and scientists who warned them.

Jarrod MAcCraken already won $100,000 from a spear tackle injury the game could be sued huge amounts like 20 to 50 million dollars for death.

I haven't seen the Ackerman tackle (and don't want to) but it has been described as similar to the Evans shoulder charge. The 'shoulder charges 'we've seen punished in the last two have been different styles off tackles. We already had a system in place for the Evans styled tackles, they were already being penalized and already being punished at the judiciary. The nrl has already been doing steps to eradicate these tackles and they went from a regular thing to becoming a rarity so the legal argument goes out the Window. No one had a problem with getting rid of the Evans style tackles (apart from a few old dinosaurs). The thing that people are in uproar about are the soft bump or brace tackles that are suddenly being suspended. These are completely different to the Evans style tackle, they are usually reactionary unlike the Evans tackle that was preplanned. People say players should simply stop doing these tackles but these bumps are unavoidable. The fact that 9 players have been charged in a fortnight despite all the press and attentions shows these tackles are unavoidable. We are all for the eradication of the Evans style tackle, but the way the nrl has gone about it hasn't been thought through and is a farce

 

[redvscotty]

I saw someone post in the Dragons forum of the same topic:

I've never gone to a game hanging to see a shoulder charge.

Too true, sure it looks good when it's pulled off correctly, but who the f**k goes to a game with their vag dripping and hanging out all over the place frothy at the thought of a shoulder charge?

 

[Tommy Smith]

In what way, shape or form was the Jorge Taufua incident a shoulder charge?

Someone at the MRC needs harpooning if they seriously think that collision where Taufua braced himself for contact constitutes a shoulder charge.

They should be citing the clear cut instances of a shoulder charge, like Evans and even Guerra's this week. But instead they're going way over the top and don't even know themselves what a real shoulder charge looks like.

 

[Nice Beaver]

In what way, shape or form was the Jorge Taufua incident a shoulder charge?

Someone at the MRC needs harpooning if they seriously think that collision where Taufua braced himself for contact constitutes a shoulder charge.

They should be citing the clear cut instances of a shoulder charge, like Evans and even Guerra's this week. But instead they're going way over the top and don't even know themselves what a real shoulder charge looks like.

I'd say the harpoon should be saved and directed straight at the idiot who told them to charge everyone - Todd Greenberg.

If anyone can tell me one tiny thing this moron adds value in I'd be amazed.

 

[thorson1987]

Some people on here are getting all upset and it would seem confused about what most are saying about the ridiculousness of this new rule.

I (and I think most) are not advocating the return of the shoulder charge in general.

What gets me is the utterly stupid notion that every single piece of contact made by a shoulder is a chargeable offence.

Hitting a bloke on his blind side or coming in with force, dropping your shoulder into a bloke are a world away from someone bracing themselves for impact in a contact sport.

Greenberg and his pack of useless turdlets in the NRL headquarters have f*cked this up big time.

I have no issue at all with banning the classic definition of a shoulder charge. But this handing out of suspensions willy nilly for acts that are in no way shoulder charges is just stupidity.

Revise the ruling and hand your resignation in Greenberg.

Still got me stuffed why Manly didn't contest Masons charge.

There was no force used whatsoever in it.

 

[t-ba]

Still got me stuffed why Manly didn't contest Masons charge.

There was no force used whatsoever in it.

He would have missed the Roosters game if they contested it.