As I've said on the other thread, I'm fuming about this decision. While there is a whole lot more to RL than big shoulder hits, they're a part of the game most of us love to see. They're a stirring sight that can lift your team and the crowd massively.

No justification has been provided by the RFL beyond a limp press release. I'm not aware of swathes of players being damaged for life or even seriously injured by what is normally just a dramatic looking but harmless collision, and I'm not aware of any pending law suits. They talk about 'managing the welfare and safety of players' - so where's the evidence a shoulder charge is in fact so dangerous? We've had it for a hundred years. What's changed to make it suddenly such a critical issue? And we've had the 10m rule and big powerful players for many years, so that can't be it. They're not even that common! It simply didn't need changing.

Attacks to the head should be (and are) punished harshly. Shoulder charges, done correctly, are fine. Now all we'll have is controversy over interpretation, additional penalties, and the media blowing it up out of all proportion as they have been doing for weeks - and for me they're the ones responsible for forcing this issue. No-one else.

RL is often described as repetitive, and in my opinion the RFL have just made it more so, with little chance of a big shot taking place in defence.

What does the RL public think??

I think the RFL is correct in banning the shoulder charge but only because I think the laws of the game should be standardised across the world. I think the RLIF were wrong to ban it.

Not many players happy about it. Almost every single player comment I've seen is against it:

Danny McGuire: Games gone to the dogs! Shoulder charges are fine if you do them correctly. #changeisnotalwaysgood

Mark Flanagan: Disappointed with the shoulder charge decision in RL. IMO it should have stayed however any contact with a players head = a hefty suspension

Vinnie Anderson: I'm a RL player, I know the risks involved in my sport..That's why I play! I love the "legal" contact! Only prob with S/Charge was in head contact, but that applies to any tackle..I KNOW..Lets ban all tackling and make it touch! #CandyAssRFL Players liked shoulder charging..Fans liked seeing the big hits..Whats the damn problem RFL? Whos game is this if not ours (players/fans)?

Shaun Lunt: Defo shouldn't of been banned, it's only a problem when contact is made with the head.. Same as when a high tackle is made

Cory Paterson: Players no the consequences every time we take the field. For someone who hasn't played the game to make this rule is disappointing. awful decision. Was good fun while it lasted. Shit decision to ban shoulder charge. It's what players n fans love. Nothing better than one of ya mates putting a good shot on. #Go

Richie Myler: I don't see what the problem is with shoulder charges! Been hit late is a different story #shouldercharge

Ben Evans: Lets all play touch rugby just incase someone gets hurt lads !!! #shouldercharge #joke Every player who iv spoken to disagrees with the shoulder charge ban .... So why do it

Jake Webster: Got 2 shoulders for sale. Regrettable sale as I have worked hard to get them up to standard. But they are not needed anymore.

Sia Soliola: Congratulations to those who helped contribute banning the shoulder charge! Sleep easy knowing u wrecked it for all of us who loved it

Stefan Ratchford: The tackles that brought on the #shouldercharge ban aren't even shoulder charges, they've just been late tackles! Apart from maybe chase!!

Ben Currie: I disagree with it myself! Everyone loves to see a good shoulder charge don't they

Gareth O'Brien: part of our game i think. Wrong to ban it. And that's coming from me who can't give em out but is on the end of em

Alex Walmsley: the banning of the shoulder charge for me isn't good for the game at all...we won't be able to tackle next #TurningIntoUnion

John Bateman: Bet Bradley wiggins won't think rugby league is to tough to pal now you can't even use a shoulder charger now #joke

Brett Kearney: I don't think you'll see a big change in the games. Most of the time we talk about shoulder charges we talk of the ones that have gone Wrong. I think much harsher suspensions and fines would have been sufficient. Because as a spectator there are not many better things to See than a big hit.

Carl Forster: If all the players are happy with the shoulder charge why are so called "experts" making decisions for us? #clueless

Dale Bloomfield: The decision to ban the shoulder charge in rugby league is ridiculous we pride ourself on our sport being a contact sport! #realmen

Sam Gee: Anyone whos been part of the decision to ban the #shoulderchargein the #rfl ever even played rugby? Or are they all geeks amd pen pushers?

Tom Spencer: Can't believe shoulder charge has been banned, sad day for rugby league #disgrace

Kyle Eastmond: What's this big thing about the 'shoulder charge' Keep It!!! If it connects high it's a high tackle!! Simple!!

The RFL have followed the RLIF's line, who voted 10/2 for the banning of shoulder charges.

There are probably more injuries from a swinging arm and reckless/careless tackling than through a shoulder charge but these seem to have been ignored in the hysteria around the shoulder charge.
Head injuries are a concern but this could have been dealt with by the disciplinary panels having a stronger stance on attacks to the head with tariff at say a minimum 2 matches as a starting point and rising to 8+ matches according to severity of offence for ANY head/high tackle whatever the technique. This would have consequences for tacklers who continually hit high and I'm pretty sure that coaches would soon be addressing technique if they keep losing players to lengthy bans and would also welcome the extra protection it offers their own playmakers.

Poor decision but the Leeds Rhinos club and fans cried about it after Chase's hit on Hardaker so action was therefore deemed necessary.

Precisely.

A shoulder charge done well is a stirring sight that lifts teams and supporters. A big but mostly harmless body-to-body collision that's impressive to see but mostly does more harm to someone's pride than physical being.

What they're penalising is players putting shoulders into heads. That's SOMETHING ELSE ENTIRELY. That's a reckless tackle/collision that can be avoided - just like when players put forearms, elbows, etc into heads. You're correct: harsher penalties for those offences would be the better option, with a video sent round the clubs showing the type of tackle that is now strictly outlawed. After a few 8-game bans players would soon be more picky about when they dipped the shoulder for a big shot.

I'm still fuming, and I blame the media for blowing this issue out of all proportion and the NRL/RLIF/RFL authorities or actually paying attention to them and ordering independent bodies to carry out risk assessments. OF COURSE they're going to find more risk in the biggest shots - and in other stunning news, bears sh*t in woods. So, all you RL journos who jumped on the bandwagon for a good story, I hope you're proud of yourselves. You've helped kill one of the best sights in RL, a well-executed shoulder charge.

So they ban shoulders for the (very) occasional shoulder-to-head. Should we also ban arms in the tackle for the occasional clothes-line?

Said in a recent blog post that they shouldn't ban the shoulder, but I do understand that player welfare is of prime importance.

The RFL always seem to ask the players and coaches for their opinion on things but don't appear to have this time as most of the players both here and the NRL are against the idea.

The game is already under massive pressure and if we take away the physicality on which we pride ourselves (see the Bradley Wiggins advert) then we're in even more trouble.

Really disapointed its been banned. Should have let the players have a say in the matter.

Then they should of had some stones and banned Chase for 10-12 games.
Maybe then the message would have got across that that is unacceptable.

I played amateur RL at prop forward and at 5'7 I was obviously smaller in height that most of the other props. The shoulder charge was my go too big shot as I obviously couldn't BOOM somebody else any other way.
Shame.

Weak RFL management, taking the biff out of rugby, might as well watch netball !

Wouldn't go that far

It had to be banned based both on the evidence and the fact that players seemed unable to do it properly. Anyone who claims to be "fuming" about the loss of this area of marginal importance to the sport of Rugby League needs to reconsider their grasp on reality.

What evidence? None has been given!

It's nothing but a knee-jerk reaction to a handful of high-profile reckless challenges - starting with the Inglis hit last year and being blown out of all reasonable proportion by a weak and pathetic media, most of whom have never played.

If it's so dangerous show me all those players who've been killed by, been disabled by, had their careers ended by or been permanently injured by, a shoulder charge. Can you? And the consider how many have suffered all of the above from other challenges - legal or otherwise.

As for 'reality' - the reality is they've removed even the possibility of one of the most dramatic sights and uplifting sights in the game. The reality is that we've had it for 113 years without anyone's career being ended by a shoulder charge. The reality is if we're banning shoulders because some are high, we should ban arms as some of those are also high. The reality is almost without exception players agree with me, most fans agree with me and [url=http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-league/21535457SL coaches agree with me[/url.

The reality is RL has just become even more repetitive and that little bit more dull.

Luke Burgess? Maurie Fa'asavalu? Any concussion is a serious injury, with the potential for it to be life threatening, repeated concussions will bring about serious health problems. The game has to show that when contact with the head is made it is unacceptable. Completely so.

There are two options, either the shoulder charge is banned and everyone is punished or we see 10-15 game bans for those that do make contact with the head.

would the game be accepting of Rangi Chase missing a third of the year and Bousquet probably half the year?

I'd have kept it personally.

Hits like the one from Tommy Leuluai on Maurie Faasavalu are fantastic.

I said 'permanent injury'. I'm not saying there's no risk, but there's risk in almost every tackle. I've broken a clavicle, hand, several fingers, a couple of ribs, an ankle, split my eye, torn my ear and lost teeth playing Rugby League, not to mention the dozens of muscular, ligament and tendon injuries - not one of which resulted from a shoulder charge, and I've been on the end of (and handed out) a few.

Attacks the head are entirely unacceptable, and if for some reason it's felt that risk has somehow suddenly increased after 113 years of RL, increase the penalties proportionately.


Absolutely agree. Players need to learn restraint and control when they see an opportunity for a big shot. Do it right or face the consequences.


If those were the rules, yes.

A broken jaw is a permanent injury. A concussion is a permanent injury. You live with the effects of those injuries for ever.

And nobody is saying the risks have suddenly increased (but improvements in fitness, as well as strength and conditioning coaching have like seen more force in these collisions, and that’s only going one way) its that over time the responsibilities and expectations have changed. The RFL cannot even look like they aren’t clamping down 100% on, not only players making contact with the head, but players being reckless as to whether they do.

So at the moment we are seeing about 2 players a week banned for upwards of 10 games, how long can that last? And if the draconian bans do what we want and stop people attempting them, whats the difference between that and banning them?

I would have preferred it if they kept it. A good shoulder charge is one of the more spectacular plays in the game and I think it diminishes the spectacle of the game a little without them.

Personally I think game is running scared due a class action industrial injury lawsuit being filed in the US from a large group of former NFL players and their families relating to brain injuries sustained due to multiple concussive hits over their careers. The NFL have since introduced rule changes such as banning helmet to helmet hits and shortening kick offs which are seen by many as actions which reduce the risk of these types of injuries.

My personal favourite

They should be legal until they hit the head, that's when current rules should take over.

The debate comes about because of instances like Bailey on Fa'asavlu and Puletua on Mounis.

Sometimes, not just with SCharges, contact with the head can happen and it not be an illegal challenge - ducking into the tackle, for instance.

In challenges similar to the ones named above, the ball carrier has run face first into a wall of shoulder belong to the defender who is reletively static.
There has to be [isome[/i repsonsibilty taken by the ball carrier for his own well being, hasn't there?

Allow shoulder charges, don't allow high tackles.

No, they're not. They're the same as most other injuries in that in most cases they'll heal. A broken jaw will usually heal unless there are complications. Concussion will usually disappear after a few days or weeks. Only the most severe examples of each will have permanent effects. But again, each tackle runs the risk of an injury that could have permanent effects (just ask Kevin Ward). Should we therefore ban all contact?


But why now? Why is it suddenly a critical issue? Yes, ask a doctor and he'll tell you to ban it, or run a risk assessment and it'll come out as unacceptably dangerous. Just as sprinting into two sixteen-stone men who are doing their best to flatten you is in general.


Lengthy bans and hefty fines would soon have players thinking twice. And what we'd see is less of the attacks to the head (which are after all, the problem, not the 'shoulder charge' per se), whilst still permitting the more common shoulder-to-shoulder/body collision which does very little to no actual damage but looks fantastic and lifts both your team and the crowd.

As someone who has had a broken jaw, 3 times, I can tell you that isn’t true. Any break of the jaw will result in that bone being weaker forever. Any additional plating (which would happen in a bad break) leaves a big risk of infection and will generally need to be replaced multiple times if the patient is young and healthy. There is a nerve that runs through the jaw which controls the feeling to the mouth, any degradation in that nerve from either the break or subsequent surgery causes a loss of feeling and control over the mouth which gives difficulty eating and speaking.

The medical term for concussion is mild traumatic brain injury. A concussion is damage to the brain. Most people, from one concussion probably wouldn’t see any further health problems. But that damage is still there, and a particularly bad concussion will cause obvious immediate health issues, but the cumulative effect of multiple, even very minor concussions can have serious and life threatening effects. There are risks which are acceptable and those that arent.

Because Dr’s have given there opinion, and there really is no argument against it. We know that the shoulder charge is a risky play, we know the tackler has less control, and we know it poses an unacceptable risk of serious injury if performed incorrectly. We have had the NRL and RLIF ban it, that changes the context, it changes the argument from why should the game ban it, to how can the RFL justify not banning it when everyone else in the game accepts how unacceptable that risk is.

But the attacks to the head aren’t just attacks to the head. They are the results of your ‘acceptable’ shoulder charge gone wrong. I think we all agree that the shoulder charge, executed correctly and with no contact with the head doesn’t pose a risk. What does pose a risk is someone attempting a shoulder charge, intending to execute correctly with no contact with the head and getting it wrong. So if someone attempted a shoulder charge and got it wrong, as we are seeing fairly often, they would miss a huge amount of matches. In an environment where the reward is a big tackle and momentum change, but the risk is a red card and a 10-15 match ban I cant think of any coach who would do anything other than give any player a kick in the balls for even trying it