www.therfl.co.uk/news/article...layers-charged I really hope we fight this - it was a high tackle but it wasn't a shoulder charge.

www.therfl.co.uk/news/article...layers-charged I really hope we fight this - it was a high tackle but it wasn't a shoulder charge.

Theres a photo on other forum of it showing Walmsleys other arm was around Robinson (ergo not a shoulder charge) - cant remember where though

Can't spake.

I think 2 to 3 games is justified tbh.

Seems harsh compared to Moon's horror show.

Quote: Magic Superbeetle "Theres a photo on other forum of it showing Walmsleys other arm was around Robinson (ergo not a shoulder charge) - cant remember where though'" www.redvee.net/forums/showthread ... ed-Grade-C I cant post the photo here due to technical reasons lol .. It's never a shoulder charge but difficult to argue with contact to the head

Quote: Magic Superbeetle "Theres a photo on other forum of it showing Walmsleys other arm was around Robinson (ergo not a shoulder charge) - cant remember where though'" www.redvee.net/forums/showthread ... ed-Grade-C I cant post the photo here due to technical reasons lol .. It's never a shoulder charge but difficult to argue with contact to the head

Still cant find the photo

But hes not up before the disciplinary for a high tackle, hes up before the disciplinary for a shoulder charge, of which he is innocent.

Can anyone actually find a definition of a 'Shoulder charge' in the rules? I've had a quick search but can't find it. I'm sure Cummings refers to a tackler having one arm down by their side and rotation in the hips? If that is the case, then at no point does this happen. Walmsley is genuinely making a tackle and his arm is up to effect a tackle.

Therefore, surely the correct charge would beCharge 15(b)

But it depends on what they actually define a shoulder charge as! Either way, they carry the same punishment but obviously depending on the state Walmsley's mind; i.e. intentional, reckless etc

It was certainly direct contact with the head using his shoulder but it was certainly not what I would consider a shoulder charge to be. They've got that wrong IMO. It might be worth a challenge on a technicality but I doubt you'd get away with it.

Quote: Eastbourne Warrior "It was certainly direct contact with the head using his shoulder but it was certainly not what I would consider a shoulder charge to be. They've got that wrong IMO. It might be worth a challenge on a technicality but I doubt you'd get away with it.'" www.redvee.net/forums/showthread ... 2014/page5 Couple of posts down - initial contact is over the shoulder, and has an arm wrapped around.

Quote: Eastbourne Warrior "It was certainly direct contact with the head using his shoulder but it was certainly not what I would consider a shoulder charge to be. They've got that wrong IMO. It might be worth a challenge on a technicality but I doubt you'd get away with it.'" www.redvee.net/forums/showthread ... 2014/page5 Couple of posts down - initial contact is over the shoulder, and has an arm wrapped around.

Wrong arm though. If his right arm had been wrapped around then it wouldn't have been a shoulder charge. He used his right shoulder. If you watch the replay in slo mo as Sky showed it, the right arm is behind him following the momentum of his right shoulder. That picture only shows what his left arm is doing, which would be fine if he had gone in with his left shoulder.

Doesn't have to be the impact arm wrapped for it to not be a shoulder charge, just an attempt to wrap the tackler in the tackle. Walmsley's was just a solid hit.

It quite simply isn't a shoulder charge. Reckless, stupid high tackle - yes; shoulder charge - no.

With that clip it looks as though the hand came in first before the shoulder hits the head.
So technically the charge from the RFL could be wrong, as the ruling says INITIAL direct contact, which in this case the initial contact was by hand, direct contact shoulder.