Hate to say this but I agree with Sadsack. An attack to someone's head is one thing, but someone essentially running into the defender's shoulder is something else.

Absolutely nothing in the Puletua tackle. If Mounis is stupid enough to run straight into someone's shoulder that's his daft fault. You run at gaps, not 6' 4" Pacific Islanders. That said, it's part of the game and it will always happen. I've done it, and I've done it to other people, it's a risk of the collision, and Puletua won that collision.

However, Inglis's attack is something else, he's advancing at speed towards the attacker and aims his upper body at the runner, resulting in the high collision. That's the sort of attack that needs punishing.

This sanitisation of RL is getting petty. Was it Meli who was penalised for a completely innocuous contact off the ball? Rubbish.

Oh come on, Puletua executed a forearm smash not a shoulder charge (dons tin hat)

And tbh, they usually spend their off-season having shoulder surgery. It's not just dangerous for the ones getting hit

jason hooper made a career out of doing nothing but shoulder charging kickers, he ended up retiring having fooked his shoulder up so bad.

People saying it was consistent with the Moa incident are correct that it was consistent, but it was the wrong decision.

Both shoulder charges were powerful hits, that jolted back the attacker in such a way that then propelled their head in to the defender, so this is where the ref says contact with the head, your off, which is utterly stupid!

I used to be a big fan of the "big hit" shoulder charge since I've seen it for many years. I even defended Moa earlier this season. However, my view has changed and I can see it being firmly outlawed going forward.

In March this year I read a newspaper article whilst in Australia which basically was full of interviews with various NRL medics and they collectively warned of the dangers of the shoulder charge. There were numerous stories of significant injuries and due to the technique being different from a normal tackle, the risk of serious injury is higher. Unfortunately I read the article whilst on an internal Qantas flight so cannot reproduce the article to share.

As a neutral watching Friday's match, all the replays indicated to me a clear contact with the head. (I don't care what any Saints fan says on here or otherwise). The tackle/charge looked awful and the decision probably the correct one. Now as for that disallowed Catalan try at the end..................

I agree.

The shoulder charge is horribly bordering on dangerous and reckless. It's one for the crowds though!

You must have watched a different game to me, he did not hit the guys head with his shoulder on initial contact.

To me, Puletua's was a great hit and to be sent off for it was absolutely ridiculous. Inglis wasnt really a shoulder charge, closer to an elbow and to me this is more of a red card. It seems like the in thing to pick up on shoulder charges, but for ones like Puletua's its stupid, they are a part of the game

Agreed - I thought the red card justified.

15 Misconduct (b) when effecting or attempting to effect a tackle makes contact with the head or neck of an opponent intentionally, recklessly or carelessly. It's not a tackle. It should be banned. It's in the rules ^. IMO a crude way of trying to be the 'big man' and incapacitating an opponent. www.therfl.co.uk/a_guide_to_the_ ... misconduct

15 Misconduct (b) when effecting or attempting to effect a tackle makes contact with the head or neck of an opponent intentionally, recklessly or carelessly. It's not a tackle. It should be banned. It's in the rules ^. IMO a crude way of trying to be the 'big man' and incapacitating an opponent. www.therfl.co.uk/a_guide_to_the_ ... misconduct

IT IS FUCKING BANNED! The same as any other "type" of tackle that contacts the head. Why are people talking about banning a certain type of tackle even when it does NOT contact the head?

So we're agreed, a person cannot be knocked out unless the head is attacked/hit?

If this is directed at me, I know it's ing banned. Are we/you in the realm of condoning a tackle that renders an opponent unconscious even if it doesn't contact the head?

A shoulder charge is not a tackle whether it contacts the head or not.

It's purely about cock wagging and trying to injure an opponent.

If a player is in the position to hit somebody with their shoulder then he is in a position to effect a normal tackle.

It's about sitting an opponent his . It's as much a tackle as any other. Softcocks who want tackles that do NOT make contact with the head to be penalised need to go and watch soccer with the rest of the fairies.