On the bright side, Scruton might be getting injured less.

Other side benefit is he will be forced to stop attempting to make big hits every tackle and bouncing off most of the time leaving others to finish tackle of.

Maybe a better idea would have been to ask the players first and get their opinion before making what could be seen as a nanny rule.

You can still make an impact with a tackle without using a shoulder charge, all this will do is force players to improve their tackling technique.
As someone else pointed out on the VT, shoulder charges are actually pretty rare, and most of the time they go wrong anyway!

Players will also be banned from playing Pass the Parcel in case they get a Paper Cut!!

There is no sanctions currently in the RFL specifically for a shoulder charge and it will be interesting to see what wording they will use for further legislation.

Presently Sectiion 15 Misconduct :
(a) trips, kicks or strikes another player.
b) when effecting or attempting to effect a tackle makes contact with the head or neck of an opponent intentionally, recklessly or carelessly.

So will a shoulder charge without an attempt to tackle be deemed a strike under any circumstance and will an attempt to tackle absolve the tackler from punishment

if so to what extent will an attempt to tackle be assessed as absolution

I presume that legislation will be about the defender and not the ball carrier

A ball carrier could deliberately run into a defender in such a way with this new stupid ruling and cause the defender to be pinged! Its not Sporting but every one will look to take advantage, eg slow ptb's are rife cause the Refs are not enforcing it properly, we can expect a plethora of poor calls re the "Shoulder" charge!

We should have told the Aussies to stick it.

It's our game we invented it. The day they invent their own game (I don't count Gaelic football played with a Rugby ball on a Cricket pitch BTW) they can then dictate the rules.

I'm pretty pi$$ed that the RFL have bent over and took one from our Aussie 'mates'.

The only people that want rid of the shoulder charge are those that are in control, the ones that are worried about getting sued when a player makes a claim against them.

I saw Stevo on Sky the other day raging that the game needed to ban this tackle, and I thought, no-one has ever been seriously injured when it was performed correctly. It's only when the player has given a penalty away that the injuries appear more severe. But this is the case for all tackles (i.e. High tackle or a spear tackle).

I play amateur rugby and I'm worried about how this will be policed by referees, I think this rule may actually cause more people to fall out of love with the game.

Scruton's tackle from last week, for example. I actually wouldn't class this as an illegal shoulder tackle, he more or less faced the player straight on, even though he made contact with the shoulder it was in a forward facing motion.

I mocked the other code for banning this tackle, banning players like SBW for something that would have been legal in RL, but now we are a bit of a laughing stock!

As i predicted, I dont think player safety was a massive factor in the boards decision as 90% of players want to retain it.

I think it has more to do with the fact that it is banned everywhere else and we have to tow the line if we want to be included in internationals, and if we want the aussies to come over here.

At the end of the day it should be a matter for the players; they are the ones who matter in this.

Or not at all, as they are the ones who, if seriously injured, would inevitably (and I should add, with every justification) take legal advice about whether they could sue, regardless of what they thought or said beforehand.

We should also not lose sight of what the authorities are banning, whether you agree or disagree. They are banning a tactic which is perceived to carry an unacceptable risk of injury. It is not the shoulder charge per se, but the risk of head/neck contact which it is perceived to entail. If they could find a way to guarantee that no shoulder charge would lead to high contact, it wouldn't be banned.

In my opinion, the NRL, RFL and IRLF should urgently get together to create a compilation of dozens and dozens of "charge" type tackles, there are zillions on the intrenet and they'll hold the rights to all of them between them, and provide specific illustrations from these of what IS and what is NOT now allowed. This should be released on the internet and to all clubs and all coaches. Otherwise we will now have a whole new grey area of "was that a banned tackle or wasn't it"?

Also, nobody has mentioned what the penalty is for a banned shoulder charge. Or does it just depend entirely on the ref? has the IRLF issued any instructions or guidelines as to how the refs should deal with the inevitable transgressions? Is it just a pen, or an auto sinbin, or red card, or what?