Manly and Indigenous All-Star prop George Rose produced the first shoulder charge of the season in the 37th minute of the All-Stars match, and in the process was penalised for what many rugby league fans would deem a great shot.
I am one of those 2012 shoulder charge die-hards who wish for its re-inclusion already. It has or was part of the game for such a long time, until deemed inappropriate due to rising concerns for player safety.
While watching George Rose walk back to his mark and Josh Morris get back up from the shot, albeit with a sense of amusement written all over his face, it was apparent our professional players have not adapted to the new rule change.
The shoulder charge encompassed the attributes of aggression, power, strength and a domineering approach used over your opponent.
Both small and big men of rugby league would utilise this tool to benefit the defending team when a lift in intensity was required and that extra bit of oomph provided the confidence boost needed to respond in attack.
It could be a long season ahead and only one match has been played.
Our premier event, State of Origin, which has produced the tightest of contests in the history of rugby league, is yet to be played without the shoulder charge and I can only image how much its absence could affect what has been portrayed for years as the toughest contest in Australian sport.
To top it off, 26 rounds of NRL action, a finals series, and international fixtures are yet to be played, all deprived of the physicality a shoulder charge presents.
So for gurus who love their statistics, keep an eye on how many shoulder charges occur throughout 2013, how many are penalised, how many go to judiciary and how many result in suspensions in excess of three weeks or more.
Although my wish for its re-inclusion may not eventuate, this is not the last we have heard of the shoulder charge. The shot by George Rose on Brett Morris, if witnessed, was your typical shoulder charge – powerful, aggressive and far from dangerous.
With one of the most appealing aspects lost to the game, its absence could produce more concerns. With players clearly not yet adjusted to the rule change, I believe it will create confusion in defence.
Players like Rose, Ben Te’o, Greg Inglis, Jarryd Hayne, Fui Fui Moi Moi will find its transition hard to grasp. I honestly believe when in defence, these players instinctively decide to shoulder charge.
Unfortunately a re-think will now occur, thought will turn to the next logical solution of a tackle, but the position a player is in will aid a swinging arm across the chops.
When the natural instinct of a shoulder charge occurs, a player’s body becomes like a missile aimed at the ball carrier, in the general area situated around the chest region.
Contact will occur at the centre point of both players and g-force created will throw one player flying back and the other stumbling, with one player generally coming out the other side worse for wear.
Ok so it does sound a little bad (just a little), which aids me in understanding the reason for its absence, but when this sort of contact is generally applied throughout the course of a rugby league season, most players come out the other side just sore and bruised, nothing too concerning.
I believe what re-started the discussion as to whether its inclusion or absence is necessary was the incident involving South Sydney fullback Greg Inglis on St George Illawarra utility Dean Young.
At first glance, I thought the contact made was tremendous and filled with such g-force it could knock your socks off.
Upon review it was slightly sickening. The situation was not helped by the difference in height, weight, direction the players were running and lack of awareness Dean Young possessed in Greg Inglis’s imminent arrival.
Opinions were torn as for the shoulder charge’s continuing inclusion, as it has been part of the game for such a long time.
University Professor Peter Milburn has written numerous papers on injury prevention in sport, but made clear some important facts with regards to the shoulder charge.
“The shoulder charge has a number of variables and is legally effective when executed correctly.
“More importantly it is what parts of the body are involved in the contact. If you are hitting a loose head, the impact conditions are quite different from hitting someone on the chest.
“The key thing is the point of contact.
“If you go in with a shoulder and you hit someone’s chest, that’s fine, because they are larger masses and they absorb the force.
“If you have a shoulder hitting the head, that’s when the impact is so much greater on the recipient of the tackle.
“It’s a crucial part of rugby league. People go to see the big hits.”
Milburn’s thoughts were pretty much spot on, especially the part about people attending league matches for the brute physical masculinity on display, which produces these big hits.
One game for 2013 and already one shoulder charge. With roughly 200 games to be played throughout 2013, we could potentially see another 200 to come.
Worse, we could see the confusion created causing more defensive errors, resulting in more serious injuries.
I wish for its re-inclusion, but for a season looking to move forward, I hope players have been able to adjust.
Cameron
Roar Guru
This would be a safer alternative as those in defence can ensure shoulder charges are on target, if not then it will be their own fault.
Cameron
Roar Guru
If you use George Rose's example in the game for the indigenous all stars, he went into tackle, then quickly realised within a split second he won't be able to nab him. Therefore he applied a shoulder charge to perfection. "Tackles deemed shoulder charge" i'm confused. Would you care to explain how a tackle is a shoulder charge? Or vise versa? Shoulder charges I've seen have required a follow up after contact to finish a 'tackle'
Pot Stirrer
Guest
If you can put a shoulder charge on you can make a tackle. Il miss the shoulder charge but did any body do a comparison of Tackles deemed shoulder charges that were penalised as a percentage. I dont think they would have banned it if it was minimal
Cugel
Roar Rookie
Given the fallout after GI's tackle, the crowd crying and wringing their hands is more likely. As the game has softened up, so has the mob on the hill.
Damien
Roar Guru
LOL..Gorgeous George strikes again !!
Damien
Roar Guru
For those who missed that article here's a link to a trailer regarding concussion that was posted on that article. Very interesting. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zzQqEos6LVI&feature=player_embedded#!
eagleJack
Guest
Has anyone read Georgie Rose's solution to the shoulder charge saga? "A tongue-in-cheek Rose suggested officials could introduce an "applause metre" and, if the crowd loved the hit, the refs should call "play on"." He's a thinker!
imc77
Guest
re the RNL looking at this, i think it started after GI's hit on Dean Young. If GI had of stood there and led with his chest going into Young, i think the outcome of Young being hit heavily still would have happened because he was falling.. its not going to matter what part of GI`s body he hit - he still would have got hit. IF GI had of slowed down a tad and Young fell fully to the floor, he could have ended up hitting his knee. NRL have this so wrong. If they had of changed the rule to say shoulder charges are condoned but any contact to the head will result in a minimum 4 week suspension - fair enough.. but to out it completely.. just a real blow to the game.
Matt F
Roar Guru
I always said that the best way to manage the shoulder charge was to keep it legal but dramatically increase the penalties for head high contact. If any shoulder charge that made contact to the head carried a minimum penalty of 4-6 weeks, and even longer periods for more serious ones, then players will have to be a lot more careful about using them as the coaches will drill it home that you will miss a significant part of the season if you get it wrong.
TheGenuineTailender
Roar Guru
Worth having a look over http://www.theroar.com.au/2012/09/09/consequences-of-the-shoulder-charge-must-be-discussed/ I raised many points that supersede the idea that the spectacle is reduced.
The Barry
Roar Guru
Terrible rule and it's taken all of one trial game to highlight how bad it is. There is no way known anyone could argue that Rose's shoulder to shoulder charge should be illegal in a game of rugby league. The alternatives are for Rose to throw out an arm and potentially coathanger Morris or to just let him run past. Do we want to see either option in league ? The high contact rule is in place and sufficient for shoulder charges - the only thing that needed to be changed was to end the defence of intent and to deem severity by initial point of contact. ie a shoulder charge that hits the chest first is say 1-2 weeks out, a shoulder charge that hits someone straight in the head is 4-6 weeks.
Terra Dactel
Guest
1. In NFL the shoulder charge is still legal. 2. The NRL rule change won't rid the game of concussions.
Damien
Roar Guru
Fair point about the male dominance but I don't think you can have levels of shoulder charge. Its abit like being half pregnant. So in terms of policing the shoulder charge it's much easier for players and refs if it's either in or out..
Cameron
Roar Guru
Terra, I think you have asked all the questions I thought of when writing this. I completely agree with you.
Cameron
Roar Guru
Damien, You have raised very valid points I believe you are spot on when you say "Most would say that was years ago, but the precendent has been set legally so that could theoretically open the door for possible challenges down the road." My only problem I have here is the severity in offences. A spear tackle in my opinion is far more dangerous as you lose all control as to what will eventuate. In most shoulder charge cases and I reiterate 'most' you tend to find rugby league players use it as a challenge, like animals in the wilderness, a display of male dominance. You don't really see them going in for more after copping a good shot. I understand footballers do not sign up to get injured but instead only to play. Changing the rules in itself could have already created what they were trying to avoid - suing due to long term physical and mental effects. As addressed by university professor peter Milburn, it's hard to eradicate these instinctive plays, it's an attraction in itself but also can serve as a deterrent. Finding a balance is the issue, one we may not find. George Rose's shot was instinctive and perfect execution in the circumstances. Greg Inglis's shot was amazing/sickening and was not instinctive but not illegal (at the time), though I don't believe to injure was his intention. I hope no future cases of suing eventuate
jamesb
Guest
The Inglis/ Young incident just about spelt the death knell of the shoulder charge for the time been. Two things could happen here. Either the shoulder charge is re-introduced, or the players find a new tackling technique as far as jolting an opponent is concerned.
Damien
Roar Guru
I think this is an unfortunate byproduct of some players now suing because of medical problems later in life. Mostly in America. In the NRL I think there has only been one payout (I could be mistaken) years ago to Jarrod McCraken. He got $150,000 for injuries he got from a spear tackle by Marcua Bai & Steven Kearney. It ended his career. The spear tackle was also illegal but the courts still found the NRL responsible and they had to pay up. The judge would have made the payout higher but at the time McCracken was a really sucessfull developer and rolling in money, so the judge thought $150,000 was fair. Most would say that was years ago, but the precendent has been set legally so that could theoretically open the door for possible challenges down the road. Junior Seau was an NFL player for about 17 years and committed suicide because of depression. His family is now suing the NFL becasue they claim they didn't do enough to analyse concussion so that led him to become depressed and so forth. It sounds silly I know but legally speaking that could happen in Australia. The shoulder charge is a great spectacle but it has a high percentage of concussion. I understand that as a spectacle the shoulder charge is pretty awesome to see but the NRL have weighed up the potential dramas that MAY eventuate and decided that it is not worth the risk..
Terra Dactyl
Guest
A diabolical rule change. What do the powers that be suggest the wrong footed prop forward Rose should have done instead? Flung out an arm and hit Morris in the head? Just stood still & let Morris run past him? Dived to the ground like Johnny Raper? NRL & ARLC has got this one horribly wrong.
Cameron
Roar Guru
Fair points and kindly appreciated.
Rob9
Guest
I do get the point you’re trying to make there kellett. The point I’m trying to make is that in terms of what type of tackle a defender performs, there’s no such thing as being in two minds. You’re not thinking of the rule book when you’re about to try and drill someone. Hence why we still see high tackles and why we’ll still see the odd shoulder charge too. You’re dead right, it is instinctive and because the current crop of players have grown up with the shoulder charge and played with it for their entire careers, players are still going to slip up. But the attempt won’t be any different to what it was before this year. It may just be in that instant after the tackle, it will dawn on the defending player that they made a boo boo. As I said, all of SBW’s (I hate using that acronym now since that ad) shoulder charges in rugby looked the same as they did in league. The only difference was the sheepish look after he performed it.