Polls Ban the shoulder charge, yay or nay?

[DragonMan]

The fact remains, more people are injured or killed in other sports or means of recreation (swimming, rock climbing etc). It is a risk that can be minimised but never ruled out altogether. It is part and parcel of a physical contact sport and people who participate in it are aware of the risks. You will notice though that I have advocated a ban on shoulder charges during junior development and made provisos for their regulation (not near the head, not from behind or after the player is no longer in possession of the ball and if there is separation (which I am aware is no longer the rule). I would rather follow another sport altogether than see the game I love diminished even further into an alternate version of Oztag.

Some Mothers and Fathers think if their boy/girl plays League and some Islanders kids are much larger, they automatically say "we don't have our kids playing League" It's a lot better than when I played in junior levels.
It's a contact sport what you wrote - it's not Oztag.

 

[SSTID]

Some Mothers and Fathers think if their boy/girl plays League and some Islanders kids are much larger, they automatically say "we don't have our kids playing League" It's a lot better than when I played in junior levels.
It's a contact sport what you wrote - it's not Oztag.

Yes mate but younger kids who do not have the size, experience or technique need to be protected. Up to 16's at least there should be a reinstated weight for age system. There are kids playing before then (regardless of ethnicity) that are twice a big and twice as heavy and it is dangerous and farcical and needs to be addressed.

There was a kid playing when I was in under 12's called "Little Joe" which was intentionally ironic as he was almost THREE TIMES our size! Kids used to fall before him like 10 pins and 3 kids would be dragged behind him as he ran on unimpeded. It was a travesty that coaches and the officials actually allowed this. By the time we had turned 17 we ran into him again on the field and he was almost a head shorter than all of us and we were pulling each other out of the way to line him up and drill him into the ground. He didn't last half a game and was replaced never to be seen again. In time things level up. The game needs to protect kids until then and not risk losing the smaller players who have all the soft skills and instincts that make them ideally suited for a position in a teams spine once they have grown. The NRL has to focus on the bigger picture. Presently they are not and their philosophy of "bigger is better" is allowing a lot of talented kids to be lost to the game.

 

[eels47]

I tend to agree with leaving the shoulder charge out of the game. Yes, I love the spectacle of a big shoulder charge that can often change the momentum of the game, but there is too much opportunity for it all to go wrong. Height differences of players, the tackling player leaving his feet, the ball carrier changing direction or falling a little. All of this plus more can very easily lead to contact being made with the head. As was mentioned above, we have had a death as a result of a shoulder charge as it is. On top of this, the risk for the NRL is just too great, given the carry on in the States with head injuries in the NFL.

Removing the shoulder charge has not reduced the gladiatorial aspect of our game in my opinion, but is has lessened the risk of head injury. One thing is for certain though, the NRL can't have it both ways and use this kind of thing in advertising campaigns.

 

[eels47]

Yes mate but younger kids who do not have the size, experience or technique need to be protected. Up to 16's at least there should be a reinstated weight for age system. There are kids playing before then (regardless of ethnicity) that are twice a big and twice as heavy and it is dangerous and farcical and needs to be addressed.

There was a kid playing when I was in under 12's called "Little Joe" which was intentionally ironic as he was almost THREE TIMES our size! Kids used to fall before him like 10 pins and 3 kids would be dragged behind him as he ran on unimpeded. It was a travesty that coaches and the officials actually allowed this. By the time we had turned 17 we ran into him again on the field and he was almost a head shorter than all of us and we were pulling each other out of the way to line him up and drill him into the ground. He didn't last half a game and was replaced never to be seen again. In time things level up. The game needs to protect kids until then and not risk losing the smaller players who have all the soft skills and instincts that make them ideally suited for a position in a teams spine once they have grown. The NRL has to focus on the bigger picture. Presently they are not and their philosophy of "bigger is better" is allowing a lot of talented kids to be lost to the game.

I agree with this with guidelines in place to then also protect the younger kids who are bigger than most their own age. Size alone obviously isn't the answer. My boy, as an example, looks 3 or 4 years older than what he is, and is often mistaken for such. However, if he was placed in a bracket where he was up against kids even 2 or 3 years older than him there is no way I would allow him to play the game as he would be that far behind in terms of development, both physical and skill, that he would not enjoy himself at all. I am all for a weight for age policy in junior league, so long as it is given a lot of thought first and isn't something that is rushed into. Like I said, we don't need to just protect the smaller kids, but also the younger kids who are bigger.

 

[S J]

I tend to agree with leaving the shoulder charge out of the game. Yes, I love the spectacle of a big shoulder charge that can often change the momentum of the game, but there is too much opportunity for it all to go wrong. Height differences of players, the tackling player leaving his feet, the ball carrier changing direction or falling a little. All of this plus more can very easily lead to contact being made with the head. As was mentioned above, we have had a death as a result of a shoulder charge as it is. On top of this, the risk for the NRL is just too great, given the carry on in the States with head injuries in the NFL.
Removing the shoulder charge has not reduced the gladiatorial aspect of our game in my opinion, but is has lessened the risk of head injury. One thing is for certain though, the NRL can't have it both ways and use this kind of thing in advertising campaigns.

I agree with this with guidelines in place to then also protect the younger kids who are bigger than most their own age. Size alone obviously isn't the answer. My boy, as an example, looks 3 or 4 years older than what he is, and is often mistaken for such. However, if he was placed in a bracket where he was up against kids even 2 or 3 years older than him there is no way I would allow him to play the game as he would be that far behind in terms of development, both physical and skill, that he would not enjoy himself at all. I am all for a weight for age policy in junior league, so long as it is given a lot of thought first and isn't something that is rushed into. Like I said, we don't need to just protect the smaller kids, but also the younger kids who are bigger.

Tend to agree re SC. It can be spectacular.

BUT - it is often a side on thing - out of the blue - that can cause untold damage. It is not always straight on - man to man - where they see it coming and can brace themselves a little. It can be from behind - or slightly behind. I don't see it as a "legitimate' tackle - more something certain players do - and only "certain" players. Often in a very sneaky way.

Not sure on size. I had a mate when I was young - much smaller than me - so he played in a "lighter" group. Ran wild - due to his age and knowledge. When we all came back together - U/11s ? - he was not really that good. I favour weight groups at a young age - but open at about 13/14.

We all remember the big "fat" kid who ran over us all the time. He disappeared from the game at around 15/16 - when he started to cop a bit back. BUT - he may well have caused a few to leave the game. Which ones do we miss ?

 

[S J]

I re-opened the vote to see what new comers thought.

So - please vote.

 

[Rabbits 21]

I voted for it to be kept banned...

 

[SSTID]

Tend to agree re SC. It can be spectacular.

BUT - it is often a side on thing - out of the blue - that can cause untold damage. It is not always straight on - man to man - where they see it coming and can brace themselves a little. It can be from behind - or slightly behind. I don't see it as a "legitimate' tackle - more something certain players do - and only "certain" players. Often in a very sneaky way.

Not sure on size. I had a mate when I was young - much smaller than me - so he played in a "lighter" group. Ran wild - due to his age and knowledge. When we all came back together - U/11s ? - he was not really that good. I favour weight groups at a young age - but open at about 13/14.

We all remember the big "fat" kid who ran over us all the time. He disappeared from the game at around 15/16 - when he started to cop a bit back. BUT - he may well have caused a few to leave the game. Which ones do we miss ?

S J, there's something wrong with the voting option. It ONLY lets me vote ONCE!

Oops! I think I posted this under the wrong comment. I must have copped one too many shoulder charges from my playing days! Do you think that it had anything to do with the fact that I played against Ian Roberts, Michael Andrews, Ross Harrington and Denis Kinchela?

 

[SSTID]

I voted for it to be kept banned...

And I voted that you would vote for it to stay banned Rabbits. You may have heard talk about learning to embrace the game? Well, they aren't talking about soft hugs Rabbits!

 

[SSTID]

And I vote that those in the minority should get another vote! Isn't that what happens in real life?

 

[Pedro the Saint]

My young bloke plays Ra Ra .. and there is not a snow flakes chance in hell i want to see him cop a shoulder charge, the ones that go a stray end up connecting with the head.
He also never plays without head gear... he can take that choice when i cant choose for him.

 

[SSTID]

My young bloke plays Ra Ra .. and there is not a snow flakes chance in hell i want to see him cop a shoulder charge, the ones that go a stray end up connecting with the head.
He also never plays without head gear... he can take that choice when i cant choose for him.

How can I argue with a ZT Jedi Master? I would feel the same way for my son as well mate. Fortunately though, if you have followed my arguments on here and other sites, you will see that I am all for a ban on shoulder charges during junior development but from U20's on it could be allowed with strict provisions. There are so many examples of contact that is initiated by the ball carrier (who can even raise their forearm and elbow to the head and throat of a defender) and who has a 10 - 20 metre run up while the defender stands passively waiting for the impact. Contact with separation as a means of protecting themselves against a collision initiated by the ball carrier should be allowed IMO. Tell me that you didn't enjoy Kane Evans' hit on Sam Kasiano or Sam Burgess's 30 metre run at the Bulldogs line where he ran straight at Mick Ennis and Ennis didn't blink.

 

[S J]

My young bloke plays Ra Ra .. and there is not a snow flakes chance in hell i want to see him cop a shoulder charge, the ones that go a stray end up connecting with the head.
He also never plays without head gear... he can take that choice when i cant choose for him.

Well said Pedro - clearly a man with good judgement ...

 

[Pedro the Saint]

How can I argue with a ZT Jedi Master? I would feel the same way for my son as well mate. Fortunately though, if you have followed my arguments on here and other sites, you will see that I am all for a ban on shoulder charges during junior development but from U20's on it could be allowed with strict provisions. There are so many examples of contact that is initiated by the ball carrier (who can even raise their forearm and elbow to the head and throat of a defender) and who has a 10 - 20 metre run up while the defender stands passively waiting for the impact. Contact with separation as a means of protecting themselves against a collision initiated by the ball carrier should be allowed IMO. Tell me that you didn't enjoy Kane Evans' hit on Sam Kasiano or Sam Burgess's 30 metre run at the Bulldogs line where he ran straight at Mick Ennis and Ennis didn't blink.

Most of those blokes with the beef over the brains for a shoulder charge are forwards - now there was an exception to that rule with Chris Sandow...he was a funny bloke.

 

[Rabbits 21]

And I voted that you would vote for it to stay banned Rabbits. You may have heard talk about learning to embrace the game? Well, they aren't talking about soft hugs Rabbits!

So you're for it or not??

I'm confused sorry?

 

[eels47]

How can I argue with a ZT Jedi Master? I would feel the same way for my son as well mate. Fortunately though, if you have followed my arguments on here and other sites, you will see that I am all for a ban on shoulder charges during junior development but from U20's on it could be allowed with strict provisions. There are so many examples of contact that is initiated by the ball carrier (who can even raise their forearm and elbow to the head and throat of a defender) and who has a 10 - 20 metre run up while the defender stands passively waiting for the impact. Contact with separation as a means of protecting themselves against a collision initiated by the ball carrier should be allowed IMO. Tell me that you didn't enjoy Kane Evans' hit on Sam Kasiano or Sam Burgess's 30 metre run at the Bulldogs line where he ran straight at Mick Ennis and Ennis didn't blink.

The problem is though that you can place all the strict conditions on it you like, it will still go wrong from time to time. Before it was banned, contact with the head was banned, but that didn't stop shoulder charges making contact with players' heads. I will agree with your statement on the ball carrier though, the raising of forearm or elbow by the ball carrier can do just as much damage and should be stopped, in fact I am pretty sure it already is against the rules, just rarely penalised.

At the end of the day the shoulder charge, while it may look spectacular, it proves nothing and is a low percentage play anyway and the NRL must protect themselves from future law suits. As I said above, it does not diminish the gladitorial aspect of the game. What I would like to see though, which is a whole different beast of a discussion, is a good one on one legs tackle rewarded accordingly. It is one of my pet peaves in the game that this tackle is more or less being removed by the game by rules that encourage gang tackles that slow down the ruck.

 

[Archie]

The problem is though that you can place all the strict conditions on it you like, it will still go wrong from time to time. Before it was banned, contact with the head was banned, but that didn't stop shoulder charges making contact with players' heads. I will agree with your statement on the ball carrier though, the raising of forearm or elbow by the ball carrier can do just as much damage and should be stopped, in fact I am pretty sure it already is against the rules, just rarely penalised.

At the end of the day the shoulder charge, while it may look spectacular, it proves nothing and is a low percentage play anyway and the NRL must protect themselves from future law suits. As I said above, it does not diminish the gladitorial aspect of the game. What I would like to see though, which is a whole different beast of a discussion, is a good one on one legs tackle rewarded accordingly. It is one of my pet peaves in the game that this tackle is more or less being removed by the game by rules that encourage gang tackles that slow down the ruck.

Agree - more trouble than its worth. Legs tackle should be rewarded more.

We see more and more of them go down on their knees to get a quick play the ball.

 

[SSTID]

The problem is though that you can place all the strict conditions on it you like, it will still go wrong from time to time. Before it was banned, contact with the head was banned, but that didn't stop shoulder charges making contact with players' heads. I will agree with your statement on the ball carrier though, the raising of forearm or elbow by the ball carrier can do just as much damage and should be stopped, in fact I am pretty sure it already is against the rules, just rarely penalised.

At the end of the day the shoulder charge, while it may look spectacular, it proves nothing and is a low percentage play anyway and the NRL must protect themselves from future law suits. As I said above, it does not diminish the gladitorial aspect of the game. What I would like to see though, which is a whole different beast of a discussion, is a good one on one legs tackle rewarded accordingly. It is one of my pet peaves in the game that this tackle is more or less being removed by the game by rules that encourage gang tackles that slow down the ruck.

"a good one on one legs tackle rewarded accordingly"

Yes agreed. As we have discussed before, Sam Burgess and Jake Trbojevic are the best modern day exponents of tackling low and bringing a player down one on one and are also examples of how this goes unrewarded and they are then disadvantaged in the ensuing play the ball. The rules need to be changed to take the wrestle out of the game and make the game more open in the process.

 

[SSTID]

Most of those blokes with the beef over the brains for a shoulder charge are forwards - now there was an exception to that rule with Chris Sandow...he was a funny bloke.

And it was especially funny when Chris Sandow thought he could shoulder charge Greg Inglis and came off second best! I think Sandow's pride was the only major casualty in that instance. LOL

 

[eels47]

And it was especially funny when Chris Sandow thought he could shoulder charge Greg Inglis and came off second best! I think Sandow's pride was the only major casualty in that instance. LOL

Say what you will about Sandow, but I did like the way he played the game with a smile on his face. Sure, he never reached his potential and was very erratic as a player, but he did enjoy himself on the field and didn't take himself too seriously, which seems to be a rare thing nowadays.