Consequences of the shoulder charge must be discussed
By TheGenuineTailender, 9 Sep 2012 TheGenuineTailender is a Roar Guru
- Tagged:
- NRL, Rugby League, shoulder charge
Jarryd Hayne attacks during the round 18 NRL match between the Parramatta Eels and the Wests Tigers. AAP Image/Action Photographics, Grant Trouville
Related coverage
Much has been said about how the new rule changes relating to shoulder charges have gone wrong.
I still hear callers on the radio saying they don’t want to see the end of the big hit and that Greg Inglis on Dean Young was a “good shot”.
Some argue they’re professionals, the players know the risks and what they’re in for.
But do these guys truly understand what they’re exposing themselves to and what the future implications may be?
How many people look at mumbling former players and think, “he’s taken a few too many knocks to the head” along with a laugh?
Our game is brutal, which is half the appeal of it, but the ARLC should make stamping out the shoulder charge a priority before they find themselves facing a severe legal bill.
Repeat concussions are repeat cases of brain damage. It’s irreversible. And we expose players to it over and over again.
Club doctors are told to send players back on by coaches and players who aren’t educated enough about the risks of head injuries, beg to go back on the field.
There are numerous instances, well publicised in the United States, where former athletes have committed violent crimes or committed suicide where brain damage as a result of their chosen sport is suspected to have had an influence.
We hear that a rugby league tackle is like being in a car crash. People die in car crashes! Why are we waiting for a tragedy to happen while we debate that “taking away the shoulder charge will ruin the game”.
The argument it’s not the shoulder charge, but contact with the head, that is the problem is a feeble one.
I can’t say I know the statistics, but at a glance, how much more likely are we to see a player brick fall, lay motionless on the turf or stumble sideways while trying to run forwards, straight after a shoulder charge in comparison to a ball and all tackle with arms?
Four American college footballers have died as a result of in match head-injuries, three NFL players have befallen the same fate, two Australian rules players, 24 boxers (four in title fights), one rugby player, 17 professional wrestlers (eight suicides). And they’re just the examples listed on the wikipedia page.
Is the theatre and excitement of the game really worth seeing one of our hero’s lives cut short, impaired or irreversibly damaged?
How would you feel if we watched Ben Barber take a shot like that of Inglis on Young, but instead of stumbling off the pitch with the help of the trainer, he never got up. This isn’t a far-fetched hypothetical. The potential is a reality.
Over to you Roarers.
![]()
Passionate about your league? Then sign up to The Roar's brand new daily league email, delivering Roaring articles directly to you day-in, day-out. You'll love it!
Click here to join now!
Looking to join The Roar team? We're searching for an experienced Group Sales Manager to lead our team in Sydney. Yes, this does mean you get to work with the site all day long! If you're a digital media sales star, we want to hear from you. Apply now.
Do you have what it takes to become a sports writer? Write for the roar
Rugby League articles
- How to increase crowd numbers in the NRL (181)
- How rugby league should expand (133)
- All I am saying is give Pearce a chance (123)
- Why do NRL fans love empty seats? (115)
- Let me tell you why people don’t like Manly (107)
- Ease up on ASADA: NRL boss (90)
- It’s time for Channel Nine to get serious about the NRL (90)
- Select The Roar’s NSW State of Origin I team (25)
- Stop the clock, NRL is running out of time (32)
- Once were Warriors, now are worriers (31)
- Wests Tigers at sixes and sevens for years (21)
- Listen Blues fans, let’s not kid ourselves (15)
- Pre-season draw sacrifices quality for quantity (26)
- Dave Smith’s crowd plan gaining credibility (51)
- Once were Warriors, now are worriers (31)
- Wests Tigers at sixes and sevens for years (21)
- Listen Blues fans, let’s not kid ourselves (15)
- Pre-season draw sacrifices quality for quantity (26)
- Dave Smith’s crowd plan gaining credibility (51)
- How accurate is the NRL ladder? (5)
- Channel Nine’s Broncos love-in continues to frustrate (27)
Recommend this story.
- Explore:
- NRL, Rugby League, shoulder charge


September 9th 2012 @ 6:41am
Tigranes said | September 9th 2012 @ 6:41am | Report comment
Too many Neanderthals in rugby league – 4 corners did a good expose a while ago on this.
What if was one of these commentators sons who was playing and ended up with CTE? Would they feel the same?
September 9th 2012 @ 7:07am
steve b said | September 9th 2012 @ 7:07am | Report comment
I agree nk but your talking to deaf ears mate ,,their has been so much written and said on this subject and still the only guidline is yes you can put one on but stay away from the head ,Their are many of us who agree with the Doctors and would like to see it banned but because its so spectacular they refuse to listen to commensense and allow this no need tackle to continue..And until we see someone hurt really bad it will be allowed ..Then and only then will you see it gone from the game ..Their are some keyboard warriors who i suggest have never been on the end of one of these tackles who come up with the lame suggestion that it will soften the game,, while ever this tackle exists their is a real chance of someone ending up with a serious injury from it ,,their are just to many variables that can make this tackle go wrong ..But its here to stay for now …
September 9th 2012 @ 8:42am
Badjack (the armchair critic) said | September 9th 2012 @ 8:42am | Report comment
Steve b…….I think it will take an injured player getting a smart lawyer and suing the player who committed the offence and the ARLC before it is banned. Money is the only thing that talks these days.
September 9th 2012 @ 5:05pm
Damn Straight said | September 9th 2012 @ 5:05pm | Report comment
I admit Steve, I used to be one of those keyboard warriors…but now common sense is finally penetrating my thickish skull. Ever since the discourse with yourself, Mushi and Jimbo the other day(Luke Doherty’s article on shoulder charges) I have really looked deeply into this and I concede that the NRL is laying the land mines for a problematic future full of litigation, which will become an expensive public relations nightmare…it’s not too far down the track either.
Having played rugby league as a youngster, I got smashed more times than I care to remember, but I was lucky in that I was never the recipient of a damaging high shot. I don’t think that anyone can argue that a well timed shoulder doesn’t look spectacular, but the variables and associated risks far outweigh any aesthetically pleasing aspects of this defensive manoeuvre.
But that’s what I love about the roar…a well constructed, intelligent comment can change your opinion on an issue that you never thought you could change.
Anyone who isn’t yet convinced about the future of the shoulder charge needs to read the following link:
http://monash.edu/monashmag/features/clear-heads-needed-on-concussion-in-sport.html
I do find it interesting though that a majority of players don’t want to see it gone. I guess amongst the playing ranks, they still value the shoulder charge as a game changer.
September 9th 2012 @ 9:10pm
nk7792 said | September 9th 2012 @ 9:10pm | Report comment
But none of the players have had proper education on the risks and potential future implications. They’re speaking with their hearts and not their heads…
September 9th 2012 @ 10:43pm
Rugby Realist said | September 9th 2012 @ 10:43pm | Report comment
I also think they do not want to say anything against for fear of being pereived as soft. – which would be completely unfair, no player in the nrl is soft, but the first to comment against the charge would run a risk
September 9th 2012 @ 7:23am
Richie said | September 9th 2012 @ 7:23am | Report comment
When is the NRL going to do something about the Manly thugs!!
We just saw Glenn Stewart,twice, and Brett Stewart both elbow tackled Bulldog players in the back of the head.Jason King up to his normal head hunting and the biggest grub of all, Steve Matai trying again to take someones head off. He does this every game and is allowed to get away with it.Matai should be rubbed out of the game for good.
What is the difference between what he done to Sam Perrett and what Travis Burns done and got 12 weeks for? Maybe the answer is – he plays for Manly- and they are obviously a protected species. I hope the NRL throws the rulebook at these thugs!!
September 9th 2012 @ 11:48am
Jimbo said | September 9th 2012 @ 11:48am | Report comment
I’m a Manly fan and quite frankly I’m sick of Matai. For whatever good he does, he ruins it with stupid penalties, and spends a lot of time off the field with suspension. He’s a grubby player and a distraction, and its annoying to watch.
September 9th 2012 @ 11:54am
nk7792 said | September 9th 2012 @ 11:54am | Report comment
To say it’s just a Manly thing is ignorant. The whole game is riddled with thuggery and dog shots. Every club has their “enforcers” who are the worst exponents of contact with the head. The culture of the game breeds these sorts of players because being “tough” is so desirable.
I’d like to see forearms and facials result in immediate sin-bins. You’re deliberately breaking a safety rule, you can go and sit down. Sin-bins and send offs need to become more common-place in order to add to the deterrent and leave your side a player down.
September 9th 2012 @ 5:30pm
Damn Straight said | September 9th 2012 @ 5:30pm | Report comment
The NRL doesn’t help the situation in the way it promotes the game either, as eaglejack states below. It’s part of a culture that needs to change and the NRL and the ARLC needs be proactive and on the front foot. TV shows like NRL on Fox love promoting it too, with their hit of the week segment, as much as I love that show.
September 9th 2012 @ 7:30am
Josh said | September 9th 2012 @ 7:30am | Report comment
I agree with richie on Steve Matai. He get made to look a fool by a opposing player so the next tackle he takes their head off. He has been doing it for yrs. remember the hit on gasnier in the test??? I was thinking the same thing huge suspension and send him overseas. The poms can have him
September 9th 2012 @ 7:52am
eagleJack said | September 9th 2012 @ 7:52am | Report comment
A major issue is that the game loves promoting the shoulder charge. On one hand they speak about ridding it from the game, the dangers it exposes the players to etc. But then on the other hand the shoulder charge features heavily in TV promos.
On Fri night Channel 9 put together a hits of the year package. Showcasing the “toughness” of the sport. From memory I counted 3 hits they showed that earnt the tackler a suspension. There could have been more. Pritchards shoulder on Simmons. Te’os hit on Groat. And of course Inglis’s hit on Young which they showed twice.
Now I realise this was a channel 9 package and they are independent from the ARLC. But surely there must be efforts made from both parties to not to throw out mixed messages.
Right now what they are saying is: “If a shoulder charge goes wrong you will spend 4 weeks on the sideline but the hit will feature heavily in our 2013 ad campaign”.
September 9th 2012 @ 7:59am
yewonk said | September 9th 2012 @ 7:59am | Report comment
thats nine issue i think arlc are moving to impose heavier bans on head injuries. and way to inforce it during play is for play to continue and the tackle count reset. either way the arlc are not going to have a vote on it, they will just take it a way.
September 9th 2012 @ 7:54am
yewonk said | September 9th 2012 @ 7:54am | Report comment
if you hit a players head, ban them. its not just shoulder charges as the manly game showed grubby elbows and high shots are also dangerous, equally in rugby league you will never be able to completely avoid head clashes of an accidental nature like ritchie faoso in the storm game. which looked horrendous.
September 9th 2012 @ 11:49am
nk7792 said | September 9th 2012 @ 11:49am | Report comment
There’s a very interesting documentary coming out called “head games”. please look at the trailer and watch the film if you get the chance.
Former NFL players have filed a large class action against the game for ignoring medical advice about head injuries and how to prevent them. As with everything, it’s only a matter of time before we follow the yanks.
It will only take one wise player with a fancy lawyer and the game will be exposed to a serious lawsuit. From an administration perspective, you would think the last thing the ARLC want is to be sued by it’s own players.
September 9th 2012 @ 11:59am
Johnno said | September 9th 2012 @ 11:59am | Report comment
Maybe rugby league should move to gridiron style helmets or some form of advanced helmet. And some sort of padding for the throat too.
September 9th 2012 @ 12:28pm
nk7792 said | September 9th 2012 @ 12:28pm | Report comment
Helmets don’t do anything. Evidenced by NFL players suing the game over there for head injuries too. In fact, some experts argue that the helmets make players feel invincible and thus lead with their head into the chest when making tackles, further increasing the risk of brain damage. The helmet doesn’t change that your head is going in one direction at X speed and is then changed to the opposite direction at an even faster speed. The brain is still being smashed into the side of the skull regardless of a helmet being worm or not and that’s here the damage is done.
September 9th 2012 @ 5:53pm
Ian Whitchurch said | September 9th 2012 @ 5:53pm | Report comment
Its actually worse than “don’t do anything”. By making it apparently safer, helmets lead to more brain damage.
Ban head shots. Ban helmets. Ban head-butts.
September 9th 2012 @ 3:30pm
oikee said | September 9th 2012 @ 3:30pm | Report comment
Ban swinging arms, these are the tackles that cause most the damage.
The shoulder charge is not the problem, if your shoulder hits a players head, that is the problem.
Tougher penalties, and the callers like Johns and Fittler have to stop saying it is ok to get hit in the head. Its not ok, it can cause brain damage fools.
September 9th 2012 @ 5:33pm
Noel Rigney-Johnson said | September 9th 2012 @ 5:33pm | Report comment
As far as I am concerned the shoulder charge should be banned effective yesterday because of the following;
.1.When and if [God forbid] a shoulder charge goes horribly wrong just who does the tackled player sue via the legal system.
.2.Should and again [God forbid] that any player being on the wrong end of the shoulder gone wrong and suffers consequential physical and physcogical problems again where is there the possibility of legal redress as to the future costs of assisting this player with ever increasing health care costs?
.3.Are we to see a repeat of the State of Origin where a player sued through the legal system, but was criticised via the commentators of the day when they continually harped the message, ‘what happened on the field stays on the field” and I believe that the two protaganists on this occasions were Les Boyd from New South Wales and Daryl Brohman from Queensland.
.4.Just what responsibility will the recently formed ARLC take for any mental and or physical problems encountered by any current and or future rugby league as a direct and or indirect result of a shoulder charge gone wrong?
.5. What if any responsibility will the ARLC take for any player tccept should any player either current or in the future take for such players being so physoligically damaged from this form of tackle that they could be declared not respoinsible for their actions. Which means that they were so intellictually impaired as a result of this tackle gone wrong, just who is deemed responsible, and more importantly there may be an extra victim of this tackle which should be banned yesterday.
September 9th 2012 @ 6:00pm
Ian Whitchurch said | September 9th 2012 @ 6:00pm | Report comment
Noel,
The case law is clear – as the players employer, they have an obligation to provide a safe workplace.
If they dont, and someone is hurt and killed, then if they are reckless and negligent about it by, say, refusing to take action on fixing a known safety problem, then the directors could go to jail.