Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Blotto

Shoulder charge banned (merged threads)

122 posts in this topic

Because I think the Australians will soon realise it's a bad idea, and go to either reversing the rule change completely or decide to turn a blind eye to it unless it's a real bad one.

I think they'll change it back the week before the World Cup... and not tell anyone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think they'll change it back the week before the World Cup... and not tell anyone.

This would involve them realising there's a World Cup.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This would involve them realising there's a World Cup.

That'll be the morning of deciding to bring back to shoulder charge, busy day for the Vauxaroos, not to mention an evening of how clean is thier p"ss.

Anyroad, so what happens when trying to barge someone into touch? Y'now like Slater epic failed on at Wembley.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

what happens when trying to barge someone into touch?

Find the captain of the team with the green jersey and ask him what decision he'd like.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyroad, so what happens when trying to barge someone into touch? Y'now like Slater epic failed on at Wembley.

according to this

The definition of an illegal shoulder charge is: “Where a defender, without attempting to tackle, grabs or holds the ball-carrier (or any opposing player) using the arms or hands, makes direct physical contact using the shoulder or the upper arm (tucked into the side)”

it should be a penalty try...cos slaters arm was "tucked into the side"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

it should be a penalty try...cos slaters arm was "tucked into the side"

And then hanging by the side.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Which is why an incorrect shoulder charge should have a higher punishment than an incorrect tackle.

I believe the gist of what McDermott (who was all in favour of keeping them) was: It's not being policed properly so we might as well ban it

Yep - see my post just above yours, I agree with you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the shoulder charge should be banned because it causes an extra risk of injury to both the tackler and the tackled player. That overrides any concerns about whether or not we are following RU's lead by banning it.

does it?

can you back that up with some facts, statistics and scientific data

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay - very quickly, in my opinion (which also hasn't changed), a shoulder charge never properly controllable not least because of the changes in posture and direction the player about to be hit may make which can often make things worse. Banning it is simpler and fairer that arbitrarily deciding what is and is not 'dangerous'.

That said ... my opinion doesn't matter. It's banned in the colonies. It's banned in international football. How is Super League helping anybody by keeping it in its rules when it's gone everywhere else?

the answer is it shouldnt have been banned by anyone, the players (ex and present), coaches, pundits etc were preetty much unified in their disbeleif and condemnation of the decision to ban it down under.

There should be better policing of dangerous tackles no matter what the type and there should be harsher punishments for transgressions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

does it?

can you back that up with some facts, statistics and scientific data

The NRL did. Their decision followed a detailed sports science study. Our decision was based on, well, not following theirs I suppose.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The NRL did. Their decision followed a detailed sports science study. Our decision was based on, well, not following theirs I suppose.

no they didnt because the studies done show that the shoulder charge is reponsible for a fraction of a percentage of injuries in the game.

please point me to the studies used by the NRL in proving their case, I'll stand corrected if I read the data and its irrefutable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

so it gets banned 4 days before the wcc game thus giving melbourne a massive lift and forcing leeds to change there tackling drills at short notice .

why did they even need a short notice video conference about it they shoud have waited until there next regular meeting in june

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

no they didnt because the studies done show that the shoulder charge is reponsible for a fraction of a percentage of injuries in the game.

please point me to the studies used by the NRL in proving their case, I'll stand corrected if I read the data and its irrefutable.

Was published via the ARLC so probably still there. The reason for the banning shoulder charge was statistical data showed there was a significant greater liklihood that an injury would occur to the tackler and tacklee the study also showed there was a greater force exerted on than a conventional tackle. That information was extracted on the report commissioned. I do not believe the full report has been published publicly just the major findings and statistics/data to support those findings. You are right most injuries do not result from shoulder charges, but shoulder charges are not very common so it stands to reason the account for a minority of injuries, though they are much kliklier to cause injury. The sheer mechanics of shoulder charges should tell you that they are more likely to cause injury.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So does this mean the end of the shoulder barge, where two players running in the same direction can use their shoulders to barge the opponent off his running line?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

so it gets banned 4 days before the wcc game thus giving melbourne a massive lift and forcing leeds to change there tackling drills at short notice .

why did they even need a short notice video conference about it they shoud have waited until there next regular meeting in june

Are they likely to incorporate shoulder charges in their tackling drills?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If banning shoulder charges is giving Melbourne a massive lift their players must be in a terribly awful state coming into this match. If Leeds are so dependent on shoulder charges I would be very worried for them. Though shoulder charges or not will in reality change very little.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is there any other sport in the world where a competition in one country can change its rules, and then the "international governing body" decide to discuss such a rule change, a couple of months after said competition has already made the change?..

If the RFL are serious about stopping dangerous tackles to the head, which they clearly are not, all they have to do is dish out some proper sentences to the offenders, and they'll soon see a change.

We'll still see swinging arms and players using the head in a tackle and such like, all because the RFL haven't got the nuts to dish out appropriate bans.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is there any other sport in the world where a competition in one country can change its rules, and then the "international governing body" decide to discuss such a rule change, a couple of months after said competition has already made the change?

I believe that in ice hockey the NHL makes up its own rules which may or may not follow what the rest of the world does.

People who know more than me might confirm that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe that in ice hockey the NHL makes up its own rules which may or may not follow what the rest of the world does.

People who know more than me might confirm that.

Not sure about that but I do know from my more general exposure to US sport that the NHL isn't afraid to make new rules or amend existing ones "on the fly" (to use an ice hockey term) and have even done so during the play-offs in recent years. The general opinion on their discussion shows (Pardon The Interruption and the like) is that this is a good rather than bad thing and they receive plaudits for it. They (the NHL) recognise that ice hockey (like rugby league) is an evolving sport witnessing breakthroughs in player fitness/stamina etc. and that what fit the bill 10 or even 5 years ago rule-wise doesn't necessarily now.

Would be interested to know how many of the shoulder charge advocates actually play/played the game. It's easy to scream for maximum carnage for our own gratification from the sidelines isn't it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So does this mean the end of the shoulder barge, where two players running in the same direction can use their shoulders to barge the opponent off his running line?

Only if an English player does it to an Australian when Tony Archer is officiating. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So does this mean the end of the shoulder barge, where two players running in the same direction can use their shoulders to barge the opponent off his running line?

Presumably that is still allowable because it can't be classed as a tackle. If it was classed as a tackle, it would never have been allowed in the first place as it would constitute tackling a man who did not have the ball.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

does it?

can you back that up with some facts, statistics and scientific data

Apparently the ARLC have some. As dhw says, the mechanics of the shoulder barge action means that the collision-momentum of both tackler and tacklee is focussed to impact on a smaller part of their bodies than would be the case if the tackler had raised his arms and, by doing so, flattened the point of his shoulders to effect a conventional tackle.

I think that it's also harder to jump into making a conventional tackle than into a shoulder charge.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Shoulder charge now banned by RFL effective this weekend onwards

"To all Match Officials

The RFL Board of Directors have today agreed to the Law change that will

mean that the shoulder charge will not be a legal tackle in all RFL games

with immediate effect.

Anyone making a tackle must now do so using the arms or hands. Failure to do

this will result in a penalty being awarded. This applies to "hits" on the

ball carrier, hits on a player who has passed the ball, "hitting on

suspicion" and challenges on the kicker.

I have also attached the Referee Policy with guidelines on the shoulder

charge and the an updated version of the Laws of the Game.

While I appreciate that all this is very short notice I am confident that

you will be able to manage the situation this weekend with your usual

professional approach.

Stuart

Stuart Cummings

Match Officials Director"

I received the above email a couple of minutes ago

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



Rugby League World - April 2017

League Express - Mon 10th April 2017