|
 |
| Rank | Posts | Team |
| Club Owner | 14082 | No
Team
Selected |
| Joined | Service | Reputation |
| Apr 2004 | 21 years | |
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| Feb 2017 | Feb 2017 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
|
TO BE FIXED |
|
|
More concussions happen from tackling low and catching the hip of the ball runner. Time to ban low tackles as well?
|
|
|
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| Aug 2022 | Aug 2022 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
|
TO BE FIXED |
|
|
Not convinced either way, In my opinion the thing that needed sorting was the third the man putting the shoulder in when the ball carrier is held & defencless. Do we now stop the ball carrier driving into contact with his shoulder? As said we are backed down this route because the the NRL just do as they please & stuff the rest.
|
|
|
|
|
| Rank | Posts | Team |
| International Chairman | 14970 | No
Team
Selected |
| Joined | Service | Reputation |
| Jun 2002 | 23 years | |
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| Nov 2021 | Nov 2021 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
|
TO BE FIXED |
|
|
As said before on other threads, keep the shoulder charge but have straight reds and long bans when people get it wrong.
|
|
|
| Rank | Posts | Team |
| International Star | 156 | No
Team
Selected |
| Joined | Service | Reputation |
| Feb 2013 | 12 years | |
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| May 2015 | May 2015 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
|
TO BE FIXED |
|
|
First they came for the shoulder charge, and I didn't speak out because I'm unable to engage in logical reasoning.
Then they came for the kick-offs, and I didn't speak out because I'm unable to engage in logical reasoning.
Then they came for the goal-line drop-outs, and I didn't speak out because I'm unable to engage in logical reasoning.
Then I was left watching rugby union because I was unable to engage in logical reasoning and they killed rugby league.
And just in case anyone accuses me of using the slippery slope fallacy, keep in mind that once the shoulder charge is gone the media and do-gooders will have to find another bone to chew. There were hints last year that the kick-off will be the next to go.
www.smh.com.au/rugby-league/leag ... 226km.html
Once the shoulder charge is gone, that [uwill[/u be the next controversy. The NRL will be pressured into another study, they'll find again that injuries are higher in said circumstance, they'll find again that the NFL are worried about it and they'll say they have no choice but to ban it because of threat of lawsuit. My prediction is that in the same swoop, goal-line drop-outs will be taken.
I think it's just a matter of time, sorry to say. Who knows where from there. I think they might draw a line in the sand after that, I can't personally see them reverting to a 5-metre line, but who knows, a Demolition Man style society seems to be a few decades away  |
|
First they came for the shoulder charge, and I didn't speak out because I'm unable to engage in logical reasoning.
Then they came for the kick-offs, and I didn't speak out because I'm unable to engage in logical reasoning.
Then they came for the goal-line drop-outs, and I didn't speak out because I'm unable to engage in logical reasoning.
Then I was left watching rugby union because I was unable to engage in logical reasoning and they killed rugby league.
And just in case anyone accuses me of using the slippery slope fallacy, keep in mind that once the shoulder charge is gone the media and do-gooders will have to find another bone to chew. There were hints last year that the kick-off will be the next to go.
www.smh.com.au/rugby-league/leag ... 226km.html
Once the shoulder charge is gone, that [uwill[/u be the next controversy. The NRL will be pressured into another study, they'll find again that injuries are higher in said circumstance, they'll find again that the NFL are worried about it and they'll say they have no choice but to ban it because of threat of lawsuit. My prediction is that in the same swoop, goal-line drop-outs will be taken.
I think it's just a matter of time, sorry to say. Who knows where from there. I think they might draw a line in the sand after that, I can't personally see them reverting to a 5-metre line, but who knows, a Demolition Man style society seems to be a few decades away | |
|
|
|
|
| Rank | Posts | Team |
| International Board Member | 5750 | No
Team
Selected |
| Joined | Service | Reputation |
| Oct 2003 | 22 years | |
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| Feb 2020 | Feb 2020 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
|
TO BE FIXED |
|
|
Scrum halves and general play kickers will absoulutely love this, anyone who attempts to charge a kick down, just run straight at them, hit the deck and claim a penalty for a "shoulder charge"
|
|
|
|
|
| Rank | Posts | Team |
| International Board Member | 9982 | No
Team
Selected |
| Joined | Service | Reputation |
| Feb 2003 | 22 years | |
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| Aug 2015 | Aug 2015 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
|
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote Bull Mania="Bull Mania"Cannot tell you how much i'm against this. What is this going to achieve? Just because a few people in the media have been moaning about it, the RFL suddenly cave in.
Contact with the head is already illegal, so just making a tackling technique illegal isn't going to change that. All it will do is infuriate fans when it comes to interpretation. Whats the difference between the shoulder charge and someone hitting with their shoulder? How are the referees suppose to define a shoulder charge.
It's changed nothing in protecting the players as they haven't been any "challenges" that people have gotten away with with the shoulder charge been legal. Ridiculous ruling!'"
Couldn't agree more. All this fannying around with the rules is peeing me off, especially when their are more fundamental issues with the game at a more strategic level that should be being addressed. |
|
|
| Rank | Posts | Team |
| Club Coach | 5507 | No
Team
Selected |
| Joined | Service | Reputation |
| Jul 2005 | 20 years | |
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| Nov 2017 | Nov 2017 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
|
TO BE FIXED |
|
|
The Shoulder charge has been banned from the upcoming weekend onwards.
|
|
|
| Rank | Posts | Team |
| Club Coach | 4015 | No
Team
Selected |
| Joined | Service | Reputation |
| Jul 2005 | 20 years | |
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| Jan 2015 | Feb 2014 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
|
TO BE FIXED |
|
|
The problem with the game is not the shoulder charge, but the penalty for getting it wrong. The RFL don't have the balls to install and administer strong enough penalties for getting it wrong.
The Bousquet case is a classic example of what is wrong with the game, he makes a fractious appeal against a 4 match ban that really ought to have been half a season knowing that it could be increased if it failed, so he would have had no complaint about it being 5 or 6 matches, and what do the RFL do to discourage such frivolous appeals? Naff all!
They can ban anything they want but until they install penalties big enough to make players such as Bousquet and Chase think twice before committing such cowardly acts it will be pointless because if they think taking a key player out of a team with a high tackle disguised as a shoulder charge will only incur a 1 or 2 match ban with an option of pleading guilty and getting even that reduced then they will continue to do it.
|
|
|
|
|
| Rank | Posts | Team |
| International Chairman | 5392 | Wakefield Trinity |
| Joined | Service | Reputation |
| Dec 2001 | 23 years | |
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| Jan 1970 | Jun 2022 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
|
TO BE FIXED |
|
|
Whilst I think that a high percentage of shoulder barges don't effect a tackle properly and do clearly increase the chances of injury to both parties I think outlawing it is wrong.
There is far too much of a grey area regarding the actual contact, at what point is it actually shoulder barge?
Given the shoulder should make contact first and foremost in a 'proper' tackle anyway what if the arms do not contact the player even if an attempt is made. How can a referee/touchie who can't even see obvious (and often deliberate) forward passes adjudge in a split second if an attempt was made to put the arms around the opponent at any given point.
Define 'an attempt', do the arms need to be outstretched, do the arms need to make contact at all.
It would reduce concussions/injuries but to a minimal extent but more importantly as many have said there are other things in the game that cause more.
If the RFL want to avoid lawsuits then get the players to sign forms absolving the RFL and clubs from such but allowing them to take civil/criminal proceedings against players who deliberately aim an elbow/blind sided punch/headbutt etc to harm a player, there's never ever an excuse for that.
Attack to the head should be a 10 game suspension with a hefty fine somewhere along the lines of a grand.
The RFL have shown their true colours yet again...s
|
|
|
| Rank | Posts | Team |
| International Board Member | 28736 | No
Team
Selected |
| Joined | Service | Reputation |
| Feb 2003 | 22 years | |
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| Apr 2016 | Mar 2016 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
|
TO BE FIXED |
|
|
Spineless s.
|
|
|
| Rank | Posts | Team |
| International Board Member | 3555 | No
Team
Selected |
| Joined | Service | Reputation |
| Dec 2002 | 22 years | |
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| Aug 2023 | Aug 2019 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
|
TO BE FIXED |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Rank | Posts | Team |
| Club Coach | 8799 | No
Team
Selected |
| Joined | Service | Reputation |
| Aug 2005 | 20 years | |
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| Aug 2015 | Aug 2015 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
|
TO BE FIXED |
|
|
Heres one to divide the masses!
I agree with the banning of it due to the ridiculously thin line between dangerous and reckless. People can throw stats around all they want but a late and aggressive 'charge' with the shoulder can clearly cause serious injury. I darent say it but it was only a matter of time till someone got/gets really badly injured.
It is a shame to see something that made us different from our brother code come falling down around us and it does take something away from our game but as someone said earlier, a proper full blooded tackle can stir crowds up as much as the charge did.
Not much we can do now its happened however. Players reaction hasn't been overwhelmingly positive either.
|
|
|
|
|
|
