There is no war on the shoulder charge in the NRL
Columnist By Luke Doherty, 2 Jul 2012 Luke Doherty is a Roar Expert
- Tagged:
- Brisbane Broncos, Cronulla Sharks, NRL, Rugby League, Wade Graham
That shoulder charge on Chris Sandow (Image: AFP)
Related coverage
Contrary to popular belief, the shoulder charge isn’t heading the same way as the dinosaur. You won’t see it in some rugby league hall of fame, gathering dust next to the Winfield Cup.
A tour guide won’t be telling a group of interested on-lookers that the practice was outlawed for good in 2012 because of too many injuries.
Outrage often overshadows reality and the shoulder charge debate is running rampant on the former and in desperate need of the latter.
Cronulla forward Wade Graham produced two shoulder charges against Brisbane on Friday night. It has once again put the argument up in lights.
The first left Broncos fullback Josh Hoffman concussed after his head came into contact with Graham’s shoulder.
Hoffman dropped the ball in the in-goal area and the Sharks pounced on it.
The try was disallowed after the video referee ruled Graham had collected Hoffman high.
The score would have been 20-nil with a kick to come if the four-pointer had been awarded.
The second shot left Broncos winger Gerard Beale dazed, but not confused.
This time, the shoulder connected with Beale’s chest.
The referee blew his whistle, but only after Jeremy Smith had thrown himself on Beale and wrapped his right arm around his head for good measure.
Outrage says the penalty was for the shoulder charge. Reality tells you it was for Smith unnecessarily hitting Beale in the head when the winger was on the ground.
There is no war on aggression.
The war is on head injuries and concussion.
It’s not a good look for the game when players are reduce to a crumpled mess of adrenaline and muscle.
Rugby league players are painted as bullet-proof, but the head of an athlete and the head of a couch potato both have the same frailties.
Graham was penalised because he made contact with Hoffman’s head and not because of some battle to rid the game of big hits.
Yes, it was accidental contact. Graham didn’t intend to leave Hoffman in a world of pain, but he did.
The shoulder charge still has a place in the game.
It’s a spectacular part of a brutal sport that uses its physicality as a key selling point.
Players just have to make sure that the shoulder makes contact below the chin.
You can follow Luke Doherty on Twitter @Luke_Doherty and on Sky News Australia.
Sport, all day long. Does this sound too good to be true? We're searching for a Group Sales Manager to lead our team in Sydney. If you're a sales star who doesn't mind a hit, kick, throw, or cycle, we want to hear from you. Apply now.
- Explore:
- Brisbane Broncos, Cronulla Sharks, NRL, Rugby League, Wade Graham
July 2nd 2012 @ 6:52am
Global said | July 2nd 2012 @ 6:52am | Report comment
Great article.
It really frustrates me when coaches come out like the Sharkes one did and say “It was a good tackle; there was no intent” or when commentators say “Just an old-fashioned hard tackle”. It’s not the coaches or commentators that will get sued in 20-30 years time when NRL players start suing the league like NFL players have for brain injuries sustained during their playing career.
“Intent” is totally irrelevant.
You make contact with the head you need to be punished, why is that such an issue?
July 2nd 2012 @ 8:06am
qlder said | July 2nd 2012 @ 8:06am | Report comment
completely agree with ya, Glob .. These people (commentators and coaches) are dinosaurs and live in the past when League was a thugs game, they have no idea on how to change with time. In my humble opinion shoulder charges are ok and the players should be allow to use it but also must know that if it hits the head region that they the tackler should be be penalised and suspended. simple as that. Players who want to perform the shoulder charge should do so at the own risk.
July 2nd 2012 @ 11:00am
soapit said | July 2nd 2012 @ 11:00am | Report comment
yep agree, intent is irrelevant whether its a penalty. something so dangerous we should be encouraging players to take responsibility to actively avoid doing it rather than “if it happens it happens as long as you didnt try to do it”
July 2nd 2012 @ 7:38am
Silvio said | July 2nd 2012 @ 7:38am | Report comment
You tread a fine line when attempting a shoulder charge ….. A minor miscalculation that makes contact with the head should be and ought to be heavily punished!
–
Comment left via The Roar’s iPhone app. Download The Roar’s iPhone App in the App Store here.
July 2nd 2012 @ 12:03pm
Jimbo Jones said | July 2nd 2012 @ 12:03pm | Report comment
I didnt think he was attempting a shoulder charge at the time – i saw it as he was standing upright with the aim of wrapping up the player in goal, rather than put a big hit on him. I agree that all contact to the head should be punished, but in essence Hoffman ran into his shoulder, more than Graham leading with the shoulder.
July 2nd 2012 @ 1:14pm
JVGO said | July 2nd 2012 @ 1:14pm | Report comment
Agree completely Jimbo. Graham was not even attempting a shoulder charge but was expecting a front on tackle and then with Wright to attempt to drag him back in goal. Hoffman ran straight at him attempting to force his way through him, instead of trying to break through between Wright and Graham. Graham moved forward in order to take the impact. Hoffman was collected on the chin, not the face or the head because he had lowered his stance in order to drive Graham back. If Graham recieves any suspension in this case I would be very surprised. A penalty and loss of a try would seem more than enough penalty. Hoffman has a poor technique and is getting clobbered continually because of it.
July 2nd 2012 @ 7:49am
Mals said | July 2nd 2012 @ 7:49am | Report comment
Poor set up preparation by the defender in not bending the knees sufficiently to get their shoulder hitting the right zone is causing these high hits to the head.
Contact with the head is at a minimum a penalty, coaches & players need to suck it up.
–
Comment left via The Roar’s iPhone app. Download The Roar’s iPhone App in the App Store here.
July 2nd 2012 @ 9:15am
B.A Sports said | July 2nd 2012 @ 9:15am | Report comment
I agree Mals.
Graham put two hits on Hoffman that were almost identical. The first one his shoulder drilled Hoffman in the chest. 5 minutes later he hammered him in goal this time his shoulder hit him in the head. The difference, Graham doesn’t set himself for the second shot so gets him high.
There was no drama with the shot on Beale. Smith should be introuble for the swinging arm on the ground though, to me that was worse than the indiscirminant forearm that he got put on report for.
July 2nd 2012 @ 1:49pm
JVGO said | July 2nd 2012 @ 1:49pm | Report comment
No the difference was that full backs are told to drive low so that they can’t be dragged back in goal.. Hoffman should have driven low between the two defenders rather than ran directly at Graham trying to force him back. Graham I believe was entitled to hold his ground and drive forward to take the impact of the runner at him. In the context of facing two units like Wright and Graham Hoffman had little or no chance of avoiding the drop out anyway. The fumbled ball and consequent try was a fair enough consequence of a dumb decision I thought. Hoffman is courageous but needs to make smarter decisions if he si to survive as an NRl fullback.
July 2nd 2012 @ 1:57pm
JVGO said | July 2nd 2012 @ 1:57pm | Report comment
This is genuine shoulder charge by the way. I think Pritchard got a week.
Of course being an incredibly balanced and fair person and since it happened immediately in front of me I believed Franky should have been sent off for that one. Still do.
July 2nd 2012 @ 2:48pm
JVGO said | July 2nd 2012 @ 2:48pm | Report comment
In fact Frank escaped suspension for this so I imagine Wade will be breathing rather easily in regard to his ‘shot’. He would have every right to feel aggrieved if he was suspended. But of course there is a massive difference between the media profile of the broncos and the Sharks and also in regard to the hysteria surrounding any Broncos loss. The Sharks are simply not used to playing on TV and are used to an anything goes policy in regards to their games. Who cares if a Sharks youngster gets clobbered?
http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-league/league-news/pritchard-poleaxe-a-point-of-contention-20120304-1ub43.html
July 2nd 2012 @ 4:52pm
Rellum said | July 2nd 2012 @ 4:52pm | Report comment
That’s an elbow to the head, not a shoulder charge and yes he should have been suspended if he wasn’t.
July 2nd 2012 @ 7:51am
steve b said | July 2nd 2012 @ 7:51am | Report comment
yeh my thoughts exactly keep em down or cop the holiday…,brain damage is forever!!!
July 2nd 2012 @ 9:20am
Hoy said | July 2nd 2012 @ 9:20am | Report comment
Will be interested to see what penalty Graham gets. I was there, and you could see on the big screen that his shoulder hits Hoffman squarly in the face. Immediatly, I thought it was a mirror image of Pritchards earlier this year.
I also think it is in poor taste for coaches etc to sit there and saythey thought it was a good shot. Clearly it wasn’t a good shot, as the footage shows, and man possibly ended up in hospital under observation because of it. I know they all feel the need to support their players, but I don’t think that is the right way to do it.
I also love nothing more than seeing a good legal shoulder charge. But that one wasn’t, and to me, should get the same penalty as Pritchards. I can’t see the difference between the two, but London to a brick the judiciary finds a difference somewhere.
July 2nd 2012 @ 9:50am
Gareth said | July 2nd 2012 @ 9:50am | Report comment
Have to agree with that. I can’t stand Gus Gould at the best of times, but to hear him prattling about how there was no difference between the sickening shot on Hoffman and a later attempt that landed squarely on the chest of another player was just embarassing. I love a good shoulder charge and there were plenty of them from the Shark’s brutal defense, but any head contact, let alone the sort of content that knocks a bloke into next week should never be condoned.
it’s only a matter of time before we have another Adam Ritson. All it’ll take will be a head injury one week, the coach telling the world that “it was just an ankle injury, and that’s why he can’t walk straight” and then another concussion the week after, and you could have a 20 year old kid spending pretty much his entire adult life in and out of hospital or in full time care.
July 2nd 2012 @ 1:32pm
The Barry said | July 2nd 2012 @ 1:32pm | Report comment
Gareth that’s such a load of hysterical bollocks.
1. “another Adam Ritson” Ritson had to stop playing footy because he had a brain cyst – it had nothing whatsoever to do with head high tackles. The head shot he copped from Lomax effectively ‘saved his live’ because he had to get scans which showed the presence of the cyst.
2. rightly or wrongly these tackles have been part of rugby league for over 100 years. Where are these scores of punch drunk, concussed, care needing footballers that we keep hearing about?
Let me guess…”there’s been research”
July 2nd 2012 @ 4:23pm
Ian said | July 2nd 2012 @ 4:23pm | Report comment
Re #2 – I can think of many who’ve gone on to become TV commentators.
July 2nd 2012 @ 4:41pm
The Barry said | July 2nd 2012 @ 4:41pm | Report comment
hahaha – most of them
July 2nd 2012 @ 9:39am
Roarsome said | July 2nd 2012 @ 9:39am | Report comment
I hope everyone is this cheerful Thursday morning after Teo lands a few.
–
Comment left via The Roar’s iPhone app. Download The Roar’s iPhone App in the App Store here.
July 2nd 2012 @ 10:07am
eagleJack said | July 2nd 2012 @ 10:07am | Report comment
Lot of pressure on the debutant “hitman”. I look forward to us running through the gaps he leaves in the defensive line.
July 2nd 2012 @ 9:51am
Rellum said | July 2nd 2012 @ 9:51am | Report comment
I agree that the debate should be based on whether contact is made with the head.
The tackle he is in trouble for wasn’t a shoulder charge by the way. Both arms where in the motion of grabbing.
July 2nd 2012 @ 10:07am
Matt F said | July 2nd 2012 @ 10:07am | Report comment
I find it a little bit amusing when the media and “experts” come out and say that there’s too much confusion about the shoulder charge. I would have thought that it’s actually quite clear. It’s perfectly fine as long as you don’t hit the head, but if you do hit the high then you’re in big trouble. Rather like the rule for a standard tackle in fact…
July 2nd 2012 @ 11:16am
mike from tari said | July 2nd 2012 @ 11:16am | Report comment
It was a ball & all tackle, it was not a shoulder charge, a shoulder charge is where you turn side on & lead with the shoulder, a ball & all tackle is where you open your arms and take them head on which Graham did unfortunately these types of tackles wher 2 guys run into each other can result in shoulder coming into contact with the chin. Now if Josh had of cocke his forearm it may have been a different story.
July 2nd 2012 @ 11:33am
Ryan O'Connell said | July 2nd 2012 @ 11:33am | Report comment
With everything we are now learning about brain injuries, particularly from ex-NFL players, I think the shoulder charge will be banned at some point in the not too distant future. Otherwise, the NRL may open itself up to legal proceedings in 20-30 years time.
July 2nd 2012 @ 12:58pm
B.A Sports said | July 2nd 2012 @ 12:58pm | Report comment
I think the NRL should have been watching the Brisbane trianers very closely on Friday night. Hoffman had clealry been concussed (he may have even had a light concussion from the earlier hit), and they were trying their hardest to walk him back up into the play. Even though he was clearly wobbly on the legs and his head looked like it was hanging onto his neck by a thread. Hoffman should have been taken straight from the field.
July 2nd 2012 @ 1:37pm
The Barry said | July 2nd 2012 @ 1:37pm | Report comment
I think that’s a fatuous argument Ryan. These tackles have been going on for much longer than 20-30 years, so why isn’t the NRL open to legal proceedings now for tackles that ocurred 30 years ago.
Everyone keeps vaguely referencing this NFL research without ever actually quoting and automatically applying it to League.
If it’s now “proven” that concussion causes all these life long health problems, where are the league players from 20-30 years ago that were concussed ? There must be plenty of them.
July 2nd 2012 @ 2:12pm
qlder said | July 2nd 2012 @ 2:12pm | Report comment
Mate you sound like you are the one that’s concussed. get with the times.
July 2nd 2012 @ 2:18pm
Ryan O'Connell said | July 2nd 2012 @ 2:18pm | Report comment
The Barry, you surely cannot be suggesting that individuals getting knocked out is ‘fine’. If the body’s natural reaction to an incident is to practically shut down, you don’t have to be a doctor to realise it’s probably not a good thing.
There is a reason why player’s aren’t allowed to play for a time period after they’ve been concussed.
In any event, my comment had more to do with how the legal system is developing, rather than any data I’ve researched on ex-player’s injuries.
I love the shoulder charge, and I don’t want it to leave the game. And rugby league is a contact sport, so accidents will happen, including concussions. But I also appreciate that a sense of responsibility and duty of care comes into the discussion. And at this stage, that’s all I’m advocating: discussion.
But really, it would be pretty irresponsible to not put a stop to anything that increases the chances of a player getting knocked out.
(PS: I had to look up what fatuous meant!)
July 2nd 2012 @ 4:24pm
The Barry said | July 2nd 2012 @ 4:24pm | Report comment
I’m not suggesting for a second that it’s “fine” to allow players to be hit in the head or knocked out. I’m saying that the hysteria at the moment about the long term effects of concussion is completely overblown.
I’d love to know how many of the people on the roar and elsewhere that quote and reference this study / research have actually read it.
Rugby League players have been getting knocked out for over 100 years. If the long term effects of concussion are so drastic we should have a legion of former first graders who are suffering these ill effects. The fact that this group does not exist suggests to me that this is all blown out of proportion and the reliance and reference to this NFL study is tenuous at best.
July 2nd 2012 @ 4:30pm
Ryan O'Connell said | July 2nd 2012 @ 4:30pm | Report comment
I think the point is very simple, and I’m not relying on the NFL at all. Concussions are bad, and if there is a way to eliminate them, it would be irresponsible not to discuss it.
July 2nd 2012 @ 4:51pm
The Barry said | July 2nd 2012 @ 4:51pm | Report comment
Ryan – I played footy from the age of 7 until about 27. I never played anywhere near the level of NRL. I got knocked out probably half a dozen times over that period. Look at me I’m fine.
I’m not trying to pick an argument specifically with you – because I agree concussions are bad and if we can get rid of them ok.
I just think this hysteria at the moment is completely over the top. Ok concussions are bad, but it’s this “concussion = long term brain damage = mental health problems” conclusion that everyone leaps to that I just don’t agree with. Where is the evidence for this ?
A study in another country, based on another sport, that no-ones read. I repeat, where is this subset of players from the past 100 years of league ?
July 2nd 2012 @ 5:06pm
A1 said | July 2nd 2012 @ 5:06pm | Report comment
You dont seem fine at all. Those knocks have clearly affected you if you think concussions are nothing to worry about.
July 2nd 2012 @ 5:58pm
mushi said | July 2nd 2012 @ 5:58pm | Report comment
Wow so ignore the relevance of a study (and the plethora of others on contact sport in general and I believe from my cursory look many on the NRL) because the grand sample size of The Barry is unaffected.
July 3rd 2012 @ 7:45am
The Barry said | July 3rd 2012 @ 7:45am | Report comment
Look – let’s get one thing straight. I have NEVER said that concussions are ok, fine, nothing to worry about, etc, etc, etc.
All I have said is let’s get some meaningful, relevant to NRL data before we run off and ban shoulder charges.
You’re hysterical reactions to my comments prove my point.
Can anyone even confirm that shoulder charges are the number one cause of concussion in NRL?
Mushi – your tenuous logic that Peter Jackson and Steve Rogers committed suicide therefore they must have had concussion is laughable. Can I make the same assumption that everyone that has ever committed suicide has done so because of head trauma rather than an unrelated mental illness?
July 4th 2012 @ 12:02pm
mushi said | July 4th 2012 @ 12:02pm | Report comment
Tenuous logic?
You ask a question and then reframe it in your response to continue your crusade of ignorance. You asked why we don’t see people suffering the ill effects.
Having more than three concussion increases the propensity for developing a mental illnesses especially depression. (According to the plethora of research papers I’ve given you the ability to chase down).
Therefore depression is an ill-effect (there are many others ie some doctors believe Lewis’ epilepsy is a side effect of concussion which is a reasonable assessment – it being genetic is also reasonable).
So with depression ruled in as an ill-effect I pointed to tow very high profile ex-players. The reality is I don’t think every former footballer with depression is stepping forward publicly.
So rather than taking that in a reasonable manner you’ve straw manned it in the similar fashion as a tobacco executive with lung cancer.
To an extent you are right without killing every former footballer with depression and then examining their brains there will be no scoreboard for those that seem to have permanent concussion related damage and those in which it occurred through other means.
But even then you won’t believe them anyway right?
July 4th 2012 @ 12:39pm
The Barry said | July 4th 2012 @ 12:39pm | Report comment
Mushi – it’s not a matter of believing or not believing. I know there’s research linking concussion to mental health issues etc. I accept that.
What I don’t accept (because there’s no evidence) that this is an epidemic problem in rugby league that means we need to ban shoulder charges or whatever.
Everyone keeps coming back to the NFL where there are dozens of players (if not more) that have committed suicide, suffered depression, etc. Where is the corresponding group of league players ???????? Your last response was “um…they’re out there” That’s what Mulder said about aliens….
Your logic that Rogers and Jackson committed suicide ergo they must have suffered concussion is the very definition of tenuous.
What % of cases of depression are caused by head trauma and concussion ?
How many concussions did Rogers or Jackson suffer in their career ?
You don’t KNOW any of this – that makes your logic tenuous ! ! !
It’s like me saying everyone that’s died of cancer must have been a smoker. Or everyone that’s had a heart attack must be overweight. Tenuous.
I know people with epilepsy that have never set foot on a footy field. Tenuous.
July 2nd 2012 @ 4:48pm
Ryan O'Connell said | July 2nd 2012 @ 4:48pm | Report comment
High profile cases of concussion-related sports injuries have highlighted the potential consequences of unseen damage and resulted in improved management practices in professional contact sports. The potential for legal action by players in both the US and Australia related to the management of head injuries is a major driver behind improved injury management and heightened awareness of the potential dangers that are expected to flow through from professional to community sport. Some recent high-profile cases include:
Rugby Union
Australian Wallabies player Elton Flatley retired prematurely on medical advice in 2006, aged 28, suffering continued blurred vision attributed to concussion-related injuries. A national and state representative player for a decade, he is reported to have suffered seven concussions in the two years prior to his retirement.
Rugby League
Shaun Valentine (North Queensland Cowboys) was cut from his team in the National Rugby League after the 2002 season, aged 26, on medical grounds after seven severe concussions during a 36-game career. He continues to suffer vomiting, nausea, dizziness and confusion and in 2011 he became the first Australian to commit to donating his brain to the Sports Legacy Institute based at Boston University for study as part of its ongoing research into sports-related concussion.
Australian Rules Football
Daniel Bell (Melbourne Football Club) was delisted from his club in 2010 and retired from the game on medical grounds, aged 26. He was diagnosed with brain damage after suffering eight to 10 concussions during his 66-game career with Melbourne. He reports ongoing memory loss and concentration problems and in 2011 he lodged an application for compensation from the Australian Football League Players’ Association.
Gridiron
In 2010 US high-school football player Nathan Stiles died, aged 17, after suffering a second impact brain injury during the final game of the season with the Spring Hill Broncos in Kansas. He had suffered a concussion during a match several weeks earlier that had not fully healed, although medical advice had cleared him to play. An autopsy revealed him to be the youngest reported case of chronic traumatic encephalopathy (CTE).
Soccer
English soccer player Jeff Astle (West Bromwich Albion) died in 2002, aged 59. He retired from soccer in 1977, aged 35, after an 18-year professional career that included national representative selection five times; his skill as a header of the ball was widely recognised. He was reported to have suffered cognitive issues dating back five years before his death. The coroner ruled his death was the result of a degenerative brain disease caused by heading heavy leather soccer balls.
July 2nd 2012 @ 5:47pm
mushi said | July 2nd 2012 @ 5:47pm | Report comment
The NFL study (I’m assuming we are referring to the one with the donated brains) is still in progress at this point I believe only one of the brains donated have been shown to not have the CTEs at this point. It is being supported as a follow up to another study that showed an increased incidence of depression amongst footballers that self diagnosed concussion during their career.
If you want the research I suggest Google scholar and get ready to pay some cash as there is a lot of research on this. A lot. You know rather than asking to be force fed information to lift your veil of ignorance.
Some however are free and concludes at least a correlation between the two. As to causation it is somewhat more difficult as to 100% prove causation you need to check the brain before they developed depression. Very difficult as this requires you to be dead.
Now I must admit after having perused some of the research and their findings I am choosing to take at face value the conclusions referenced from organisations such as kickoff it is very possible they are just plain outright lying about this, but short of me tracking down the author in person, verifying their identity and then doing likewise to the peer review board there isn’t much anyone can do right?
They recount studies that have attributed a three fold chance of depression for three or more concussions. From many of the research pieces I’ve read three concussions seems to be the magic number where you start playing Russian roulette with a persons’s brain.
There are numerous other studies of repeated concussions and permanent damage to various cognitive functions. Though behavioural and memory affects seem the most pronounced.
So where are the legions of ex footballers? Um well the studies say they exist. Are you really that surprised that every former rugby league player hasn’t come forward gushing about their mental illness?
To be honest I don’t know really what happens to most former footballers than aren’t commentators (and even one of them potentially has a concussion based ailment)
It is increasingly difficult from our public view point to make assessments of their behavioural changes.
But there have still been high profile ones like Jackson and Rogers plus many others (hill, Patterson etc)
July 3rd 2012 @ 12:44pm
The Barry said | July 3rd 2012 @ 12:44pm | Report comment
I’m not asking to be force fed information. I’m asking people that are relying on “research” or “studies” or “what we’ve leart about brain injuries” to validate their opinion with evidence.
I haven’t made one comment about what is safe, healthy, dangerous or in between because I don’t have the expertise.
All I’m asking is that others not make unsupported statements that are outside their payscale.
Unfortunately that somehow keeps getting confused that I want to see more players getting knocked out…
July 3rd 2012 @ 5:20pm
mushi said | July 3rd 2012 @ 5:20pm | Report comment
And I’ve just pointed you to google scholar check it out. Plenty on there with regards to multiple concussions.
The thing is unless you are a neurosurgeon you too ahve formed a view without evidence, as you aren’t really in an undecided positon open to information. you hold a firm view and are asking to be forced off of it.
July 4th 2012 @ 10:47am
micka said | July 4th 2012 @ 10:47am | Report comment
Barry -
Research and studies are what you use as evidence. This is what I am hearing from you…
“Stop throwing empirical data from a range of multi year, multi subject studies by trained professionals on the topic we are discussing. It proves nothing!!! I can’t immediately think of any former players who are outwardly showing obvious signs of significant brain damage so it isn’t happening”
The “research”, “studies” etc are documents that are peer reviewed and by definition need to be backed up by hard data to be published.
July 4th 2012 @ 12:47pm
The Barry said | July 4th 2012 @ 12:47pm | Report comment
Micka – you can’t use inverted commas (quote marks) and then make up your own statement.
What you are supposing is not what I’m saying.
Apart from Mushi who’s provided links via Google not one other person who has “quoted” or referenced any research has actually provided one shred of evidence.
I’m all for empirical data – only Mushi has provided it.
Mushi – can you tell me what my “firm view” is ?
July 4th 2012 @ 1:24pm
micka said | July 4th 2012 @ 1:24pm | Report comment
The Barry said | July 4th 2012 @ 12:47pm
Micka – you can’t use inverted commas (quote marks) and then make up your own statement.
Well… You can because when putting actual or imagined verbal communication into text that is exactly how you are meant to do it. I never stated you said it, I’m sure no one would assume that I was stating you said that. I said (and I quote) “This is what I am hearing from you…”
Probably should have put that it was my interpretation of your comments overall but I figured we’d all get the point.
Maybe I took a few concussions in the past….
July 2nd 2012 @ 2:38pm
Pot Stirrer said | July 2nd 2012 @ 2:38pm | Report comment
Dont you watch the Footy show ?