Um, exactly how long can pass in a game before players get in a ref's ear and 'he' decides to place an incident on report.

No case to answer and frankly embarrassing it was even referred in the first place.

It was only put on report so that the substitution of green didn't count as an interchange

Shouldn't be any problem as the arm is by his side and the main contact is chest on chest, but you never know with the rfl

Seriously, if that's deemed an illegal tackle, I'm done with the game.

That's not what the shoulder charge rule was brought in to protect against.

Little man smashes big man, the only way physically possible.

Soft reffing from Hicks. Only put it on report after the man went off injured and it was shown on the big screen.

Nothing wrong with the tackle.

Shoulder charge.Would be looked at on review regardless of being put on report.

It's not a shoulder charge.

Couldn't agree more, we said the same at the time, Hicks only put it on report after watching it on the big screen.

Awful officiating, as a lot of Leeds fans have said, Hicks was terrible for both teams, he's just incompetent.

Agree. I wasn't meaning to say he was biased in favour of HKR. Just that he messed that situation up. As he did with the Charnley and Tautai incidents last week.

The shoulder charge should never has been banned. The problem at the time was the late tackle after the ball had been passed. For me, the shoulder charge is an art form that can lift a team.

Totaly agree it has to come back and only charges to the head punished, if a player say new it a 8 game ban for contact with head then they no to keep the shoulder down abit , it was only ever banned because of contact to the head , but the shoulder charge hardly ever did hit the head ! Let the players decided if they want it back ,but if done right it a superb tackle .. bring it back.

You might want to ask Luke Burgess about shoulder charges hardly ever hitting the head. Cost him a Wembley appearance IIRC.

The problem is that while shoulder charges hardly ever hit the head, the potential damage they can cause is much higher than an ordinary high tackle. It's as dangerous as a player using the elbow to the head, IMO.

good tackle imo

Shoulder charges were part of the game for less than a decade. They were a thuggish form of 'tackling' requiring zero skill and endangering both players involved due to the complete lack of control. They were banned to avoid the sport being sued out of existence by ex-players, and will never return. I don't miss seeing players knocked senseless and commentators baying about great hits.

Both the Segeyaro tackle and Ferres high shot highlighted on this weeks disciplinary but decision is no charge.

The shoulder charge should never have been banned! As a rugby player myself it doesn't endanger you! I still don't understand how people moan about ahoulder charge but continue to turn a blind eye to cannonball tackles which are carried out with the intention to injure people

This is your opinion not mine ,you speak as if we should all listen as there is no other opinion other than yours.my opinion bring it back you were never allowed to shoulder charge the head any way so should never been banned,as i say let the players decide its there bodys giving or recieving it.if they keep it banned they have spoken, if they want it back they have spoken , ill respect any decison .
.

How were shoulder charges part of the game for less than a decade? They didn't start with Sonny Bill Williams, they've been around for as long as I've watched the game and been greatly appreciated from the terraces.

There was a real corker in the NRL this week but because it was delivered by the ball carrier it was completely ignored by the officials - there's a huge anomaly right there.

Agree. The pic of Burgess's jaw split in half was horrible. Don't want my lad playing a game where any fuc*wit with no sense of his own safety can hurl himself like a meat torpedo at another player rather than actually attempting a genuine tackle.
Shoulder charge is dangerous and frankly not rugby. There is plenty of physicality in the game, perhaps we should be asking for more skill?

You are told by coaches and when you learn the game that your shoulder should be the first point of contact in a tackle, I think the grey area is when that contact is big and it's hard to get arms involved . I don't see an issue with that, what had been banned is where the shoulder is the only intended point of contact. To me that's just an idiot trying to hurt someone.

Simple way to solve it, any shoulder charges that make contact with the head or hit a player who has released the ball results in a 10 game ban
This would mean that shoulder charges would start and end with collisions by a tackler on someone of equal or greater size, which the fans want to see and belong in the game imo

What is bizarre to me is that the game is so worried about shoulder charges contacting the head but do little about high tackles, compared to union players league players can get away with murder, even with direct contact to the head excuses are offered like 'he was changing direction' or 'it was a reaction' when the tackler should be getting a minimum of a sin bin

THe current interpretation on shoulder charges seems quite sensible. You can hit just with your shoulder as long as youre not side on with no attempt to wrap your arm around.

Union's interpretation of the shoulder charge is much more severe. If you don't wrap your arms around its considered a shoulder charge. I've given penalties away and been binned for making a big tackle where the guy has flown backwards and I've not been able to get my arms around.

On danger, its dangerous for both the tackled player and the tackler. I shattered my collarbone into 5 pieces trying on 5 years ago, and it took a 6inch plate and 6 months out of the game to recover. Big collisions are good but the mechanics of a shoulder charge make it more likely to cause injury to either party

The shoulder charge was a legitimate form of 'big hit' that has been ruled illegal and now gone from the game and the spectacle of league IMO is subsequently diminished.

There was always an issue where the shoulder occasionally contacted the head of an opponent (SBW on Bai, Bailey on Fa'asavalu) and the sport took too long to address but now the solution has harmed the show.

If someone wants to put in the shot and gets it wrong then throw the book at him at the disciplinary.

Agreed. The sport misses the big hit as you say. Of course it can be harmful if done incorrectly but so can any tackle.

"The solution has harmed the show"?

There are still plenty of big hits in RL. The difference is, these are done with significantly less risk of serious injury to the tackler or ball carrier than a barely controlled shoulder charge presents.

If anyone can give me a memorable, legal example of a shoulder charge that stuck in their memory and didn't result in injury to one party or the other, go ahead.

Completely agree. My mate played in the academy with Singleton, and he's talked about when they played Wigan and Fielded was coming back from injury. Fielden ran it in and Singo sent him flying with a shoulder charge. My mate talks about how it lifted the Leeds team and gave them a boost. Done in that scenario, it's a brilliant part of the game. The issue was/is when players use them on people after they've passed the ball. I've been on the end of those and time out because of whiplash. We still see those tackles and there should be a hefty ban attached. This is a tough sport, but it seems to have softened over the years