The collective outcry from NRL players over the banning of the shoulder charge is further evidence that they must be protected from themselves.
The NRL follows developments in the NFL more closely than ever now. It is where former CEO David Gallop took the idea for golden point from, and this move by the ARLC to ban the shoulder charge is bound to be related to what has happened with the NFL and concussions.
The NFL has enforced strict guidelines regarding concussed players being forced to stand down from games for sometimes extended periods in recent years, and it is all to do with litigation from former players over the effects of concussions.
The threat of lawyers assembling class actions from ex-players, alleging that the football brass in the US conspired over a period of decades to hide the effects of multiple impacts to the head from players, stung the NFL into action.
It is only natural that the NRL, and now the ARLC, would have been keeping a close eye on those developments. American football is the closest relation to rugby league when it comes to the power of the collisions between players.
So, as soon as the club doctors here told the commission how dangerous shoulder charges gone wrong potentially were, the tackle was on death row. Now it is dead, and good riddance to it.
I thought leading orthopaedic surgeon Merv Cross summed the situation up perfectly when he said: “The shoulder charge doesn’t aim to tackle – it aims to hurt. If you want to go and watch that, buy a ticket for that stupid cage fighting. The game doesn’t need it.”
Rugby league won’t suffer from the shoulder charge being banned. It won’t reduce the media coverage, the crowd attendances or the television ratings.
What it will do is reduce the potential for unnecessary and serious injuries.
Players have complained that the decision compromises the physical nature of the game and that they may as well as be playing badminton or, apparently, marbles.
Perhaps they should watch a game of marbles more closely.
When one of those big “bodgies” crashes into another at speed, that’s quite a collision.
We don’t really see that many shoulder charges for a number of reasons.
One, it’s hard to actually pull off properly, and if you get it wrong you either make contact with the opposing player’s head, or miss him altogether and leave a hole in the defensive line.
You’ve got to be in a particular position to even think about trying one. The ball-carrier must step straight into your path for you to be able to go for the big hit.
Or you can be like Chris Sandow, the Parramatta halfback, and simply enjoy trying to shoulder charge opponents. He hasn’t had much luck with it to date.
There is an element of macho-ness to it for the players, but when you get a shoulder charge like the one by South Sydney’s Greg Inglis on St George Illawarra’s Dean Young last season, it’s sickening.
It is worth trying to get rid of that from the game.
Young’s father, Craig, was a very hard man in a very tough era of the game, the 1970s and ‘80s. He knows the risks of playing, and he wouldn’t react just because his son was hurt.
He believes the commission has done the right thing.
“The players are the most important part of the game and their safety is paramount,” Young said. “You’ve got to look after them. But I’m sure there will be no shortage of big hits in the future. It’s the greatest game of all and will continue to be that way.”
You simply must listen when someone like Young talks like that.
It has emerged that, while the players are complaining long and loud now, they provided very little input to Brian Canavan’s independent report on the shoulder charge on behalf of the commission despite being invited to email their opinions to him.
That is disappointing, but not unusual. Some coaches are the same.
The commission could have left the shoulder charge alone and simply ramped up the penalties for head contact even more, further dissuading players from trying their luck with the tackle. That wouldn’t have been enough.
What if someone was seriously injured, or, worse still, as Cross suggested could happen – killed – and the league was sued? It could have been argued that they didn’t do enough to prevent something like that from happening.
The game will survive without the shoulder charge, just like it doesn’t miss stiff-arm tackles.
Greg Prichard has worked in the media for 35 years, most recently at The Sydney Morning Herald. In 2011, he won the Australian Sports Commission’s award for best reporting of an issue in sport for his stories on the NRL betting scandal. He joins The Roar as the site’s resident rugby league expert. This is his first column for the site.
Bazzio
Roar Guru
Shoulder-to-shoulder or crash-tackle collision impacts whiplash the neck & brain and contuse organs. That is not a "tackle gone wrong" ~ the sole intent and purpose of such a tackle is to hurt the opponent. To legitimise the intent to harm an opponent is a terrible, terrible thing to do. Like some other's say ~ NRL is NOT cagefighting or MMA. Those who say NRL is a "brutal" game are there to see brutality, and cheer when it happens. Those who are there to see skill and speed and evasion are the one's who cheer when a brilliant move leads to a break or try, or a try saving tackle. This is where the issue is divisive ~ do we want brutes and brutality, or fast skillful players? The brutes can't compete with the skillful, and the skillful can't compete with the brutes. You can't have it both ways.
John
Guest
Sorry, how many people have ended up in a wheelchair for life or have brain damage over a shoulder charge? I don't think banning the shoulder charge is the right way to go. Having tough penalties with any contact with the head is an obvious alternative. The shoulder charge in itself is not wrong. I am sure a lot more players are hurt by head high tackles not originating from a shoulder charge.
Bazzio
Roar Guru
Are you really saying that brain damage is acceptable? Perhaps you should try having to live with it, or being the primary carer for one of your Rugby League brain-damaged kids! Oh No! ~ you wouldn't have that, would you? But it's all OK if it's someone else and you get to see it, right? Also ~ The comparison with NFL is entirely valid, whereby hard impact leads to cumulative brain trauma, helmet, padding, or not. It's the "whiplash" effect of opposing forces that bruise the brain,and not simply direct contact. What will ruin a great game is this type of ignorance that disregards the obvious. Do some research and learn some facts before commenting on that which you are so ignorant of ~ http://www.abc.net.au/4corners/stories/2012/05/10/3499950.htm
Crackers
Guest
Don't speak too soon. I had a friend who had a compound fracture of the forearm after he put his arm out to brace himself after an ankle tap. Just because you have't seen it happen yourself doesn't mean it doesn't occur.
Ra
Guest
a hip and shoulder, now referring to the tackle manual and there's no mention of using the hip, but there's plenty about using the arms,so, did he wrap his arms ?
soapit`
Guest
so will this make it more difficult to do the three on one gang tackle? will they all have to use their arms? they better get started now working through all the specifics of how this is going to work in practice
soapit`
Guest
if you read a bit of background on why it has been banned you might understand that its the long term consequences they're most concerned about, not how many injuries its caused this year.
john
Guest
what do you think a hip and shoulder is
Damn Straight
Roar Rookie
Wow... precious much?Sorry Greg, but I think itsuckstobeyou has raised some pertinent points for respectful discussion. If reading the differing opinions of others "bores you to tears" then you might want to stick within the safe confines of a newspaper columns and sycophants. I think your response here has displayed what a closed mind you have on this particular issue. It also came across as sooky and a little condescending. In my humble opinion. Looking forward to your next article though Greg. You are going to be confronted by opinions that are at loggerheads with yours from time to time though...but that's what I love about the roar. As long as it is respectful, I love a good debate.
Greg Prichard
Guest
Mate, twist whatever you want to twist, believe I said whatever you want to believe I said, but for God's sake go and bother someone else. You've bored me to tears. No doubt you'll reply again, because you obviously can't stand not having the last word, but rest assured I won't bother replying to whatever it is you come back with this time. I won't even read it. Goodbye.
Bob
Guest
Hey Greg Prichard i've got two words, Arrogant much?
Ra
Guest
Did he wrap the arms?
itsuckstobeyou
Roar Pro
"American football is the closest relation to rugby league when it comes to the power of the collisions between players." I took this to mean we should be following their lead. "They are different games played on opposite sides of the world – they don’t have to be taking exactly the same action for the objective to be similar." I took this to mean we shouldn't. I'm not trying to twist your words, it's how I read them. And to be honest, I don't think it's a long bow to draw. Back to the point, it needs to be made clear that people who are in favour of the shoulder charge are not pro-concussion meatheads who the sport can do without. We want to see tough, shoulder contact to the torso. These people are already peeved about this and being told to consider other sports without any regard for their concerns is pigheaded and divides the community.
Matt Moule
Guest
If every one is so worried about the players Saftey then why even play the game? Why not play touch. It's pretty insulting to anyone that has actually played the game ( doesn't sound like many of you have) to keep compering it to the NFL! Rugby league is nothing like gridiron so stop compering it. It's insulting to the great rugby league players. And all you mum and dads that are writing in saying its good to ban for your kids sake. You need to learn that your kids play under different rules. Let them go play soccer I garntee they will come back to the best game on the world. The NRL are going into very dangers territory with trying to police this as the there are lots of forms of shoulder charge not just the side on one that most people think of! Pretty ridiculous to ban it of two seperate insistence and dean young was named the next week anyway.
Minz
Guest
A few issues: 1. The NFL started to penalise contact to the head from a tackler's forearm, shoulder or helmet back in 2010, so they don't exactly allow the full spectrum of contact as you suggest. 2. NFL players have a limited and quite low number of contact training sessions allowed under their collective bargaining agreement, so they're not "spending all week training in collisions". 3. NFL tackling isn't the same as rugby league tackling (players only have to be "downed by contact", they don't have to be held), so the comparison is tenuous at best. NFL really isn't a contact sport in the same way league, union or aussie rules are.
JayBob
Guest
Nicely put, both comments. That's the uneducated argument from people that are for banning the shoulder charge. "If you want to see people get hit in the head..." t's so ridiculously besides the point. There are a lot more swinging arms that make contact with the head than shoulder charges. The law is to ban contact with the body!
JayBob
Guest
Exactly. Some of the comments from so called parents are unbelievably ignorant. It's like they don't even know the rules when their kids play. Kids are already protected, on the other hand, adults should be able to choose what they want to do! Of all the injuries that happen each year, how many are caused by shoulder charges? Of all the shoulder charges each year, how many cause injuries? There are many other things in the game that cause more injuries but we are not focusing on that. It has absolutely nothing to do with protecting the players, because if that's the case then we would be cracking down on all the other dangerous aspects of the game. We would never have allowed concussed players to continue on the field, which was the case all throughout 2012. Increasing the punishment for a shoulder charge gone wrong was the way to go, this would deter players enough. They would only attempt it if they were sure it was going to be safe and effective. And if they are worried about litigation they should have it incorporated into the players contracts. Banning it now is only opening the door for all past players. I can't believe how many actually agree with this crap. Must be Union fans.
john
Guest
so when the fullback comes across and throws a hip and shoulder on the winger in cover defence on the line will it be a penalty try ?
Ra
Guest
i thought players health and well being would be fairly high at the top of the food chain in collision sports safety policies there turbode . If its not, then could you please explain why not to ordinary mum and dad who have seen our titans of the game smash each other stupid, and are transporting little johnny and his mates across town away from rugby league to play mini soccer. Maybe tidying up that little area of the game, might encourage little johnny and his mates to come to little league practice, just over the back fence, and nan and gand pop to come and watch, then still around for the main game food for thought
Ra
Guest
tackling has always been, lead wth the shoulder