The Shoulder Charge

[eagle-rock08]

I just spent a few pleasurable hours watching the 2011 and 2008 grand final replays the other day.

I witnessed a lot of "deliberate" shoulder charges and some that could easily be taken to be "accidental" shoulder charges that would incur a penalty in 2013.

Obviously with the rule in place, players will not attempt to do shoulder charges but these "accidental" ones will still get penalised under the new rule.

For example I saw Joe and Choc hit a Warriors player. It was just a great tackle. Joe had his arm up so it could be seen as legitimate but Choc didn't raise his arm in the tackle and could be seen as an "accidental" shoulder charge.

If this happens and all "accidental" shoulder charges are penalised Rugby League may start to resemble Rugby Union with stoppages in play with a large number of penalties given.

I foresee scores like 14 (seven penalty goals ) to 10 (one try and the three penalty goals.)

This may then put more pressure on the referees to be consistent and not let some accidental shoulder charges go. But it may also increase the pressure to increase the value of tries for they may become more infrequent over time to 5 points due to less tries being scored and then looking even more like Rah Rah.

I wish they'd try these rule changes in the NYC for a year and then evaluate it rather than make knee-jerk decisions and regret them later.

What are your thoughts? Gee I hate the off-season by the way.

 

[globaleagle]

They've outlawed knee-jerking as well.







(sorry)

 

[Rambo1987]

They should just keep it and suspend players for hitting the head. Next they will ban tackle above the waist...

 

[Chip and Chase]

The big issue is how they intend on policing this rule. Your garden variety rush out of the line shoulder charge ala sandow and $BW is pretty cut and dried but what of all the other shoulder contacts in the game ? I can see a big grey area here which will lead to pressure on refs and controversial penalties.

Probably get the normal NRL penalty blitz in the first 2 or 3 rounds followed by a slackening off as season progresses.

They need a clear definition of what constitutes a shoulder charge so that there is no confusion.

 

[Stevo]

As discussed (more like i pointed out. lol) The shoulder charge doesn't include all accidental contact with the head. It only refers to the kind of tackle where the "tackler" braces himself for the impact by tucking his elbow into his side. If the arms are out and the shoulder is the first point of followed at least by an attempt to use arms the tackle will be ok.

 

[eagle-rock08]

As discussed (more like i pointed out. lol) The shoulder charge doesn't include all accidental contact with the head. It only refers to the kind of tackle where the "tackler" braces himself for the impact by tucking his elbow into his side. If the arms are out and the shoulder is the first point of followed at least by an attempt to use arms the tackle will be ok.

What I am talking about is not a shoulder charge that hits the head but a legitimate shoulder charge to the body.

It also seems to have a lot of grey area for referees to misinterpret what a shoulder charge is or isn't.

 

[Mals]

I think you are overstating the effect the banning of the shoulder charge will have in a game of NRL. I cannot see it leading to a glut of penalty kicks at goal. A common sense approach will hopefully be adopted by Daniel Anderson. We will have to wait & see once the edict comes out.

 

[mozgrame]

As discussed (more like i pointed out. lol) The shoulder charge doesn't include all accidental contact with the head. It only refers to the kind of tackle where the "tackler" braces himself for the impact by tucking his elbow into his side. If the arms are out and the shoulder is the first point of followed at least by an attempt to use arms the tackle will be ok.

A good description of a Matai tackle. Sadly, some opposition players stagger and drop right before contact and the point of contact is then the head.

 

[rmd]

I'd buy it but I don't think the Judiciary would!

 

[Pablo]

They'll prob reverse the decision bout the ban before next season anyway. Just to make it appear the commission cares what players and fans think.

 

[master blaster]

They should just keep it and suspend players for hitting the head. Next they will ban tackle above the waist...

and then rename it to the NRLTFA,which is,The National Rugby League Touch Football Association,the game is becoming a joke

 

[The Eagle]

Why don't we change the ball to a balloon and use tinfoil helmets as part of the uniform

And have the players be really nice to eachother in order to advance down the field

And make a new sort of sports drink that is both gooey and salty, that would make rugby league the greatest game of all (the preceding I may in fact have stolen from a TV show)

 

[globaleagle]

from nrl.com

Having determined at its November meeting that the shoulder charge would be deemed an illegal tackle from 2013, the Commission has today approved an amendment to the NRL Rules that provides a definition of the outlawed tackle:

“Where a defender, without attempting to tackle, grab or hold 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).”

Under the amended NRL Judiciary Code Rules, players will no longer be automatically referred to the judiciary panel for illegal contact from shoulder charges.

Instead, penalties for shoulder charges under the NRL Judiciary Code will range from a base of 200 points (two-match suspension) for a Grade 1 charge increasing to 800 points for a Grade 5 charge.

 

[Rex]

Pretty simple really.

If you want to use the shoulder/upper arms, you only need to attempt to tackle, grab or hold the attacker with arms or hands.

Similar to the tripping rule.
You're able to use your legs/feet to trip a player who you're tackling with arms/hands.

 

[globaleagle]

I must admit I got 3/4trs of the way through the game and went 'oh yeah, no shoulder charges anymore.'


Did anyone else miss them?

Did you think the game was softer?

To early to tell?

Send me a dollar?

 

[Stevo]

I think Sonny's game was fairly limited. I really wanted him to jam Sam Burgess. I dislike both of them. He did score me good supercoach points though!

 

[MWSE]

Didn't miss it last night. I think we will see a lot more quality tackling like the shot Burgess put on Pearce last night.

 

[The Royal Soup]

I'll be interested to see if Burgas gets suspended for his hit last night with his shoulder smashing into a roosters player, it was similar to the way Matai tackles, I'll see what president is set by the morons at the judiciary.

 

[Chip and Chase]

Burgess got put on report for high contact, not for a shoulder charge. Not that it was a shoulder charge anyway.

I don't know whether there is any subtlety in the wording of the charges, but I assume that "shoulder charge" has it's own category for penalties only ?? You can have a shoulder charge that isn't high but still worrthy of a penalty. If the contact is high then the report / charge will just be high contact/contact with head , not shoulder charge with high contact. The only thing they may take into consideration with the high contact grading from a shoulder charge is whether it is deemed more reckless than "normal" high contact, given that it is an illegal method of tackling. By definition if you use a shoulder charge then you are being reckless. I expect a shoulder charge high contact would be graded higher than something like Burgess's effort last night.

 

[manlyfan76]

Shoulder charge is minimum a penalty and minimum on report. Taking pressure off the refs.