A few months before the start of the 2013 NRL season, I was working on a highlights compilation that I had hoped would become a good piece of NRL promotion online.
It contained what I felt to be the best moments from the 2012 season and would inspire people to watch the NRL this year in great numbers and feed the fires of anticipation.
Just when I was putting the finishing touches on my promotional video however, I was informed by a friend that most of what I had included would be now considered illegal play!
This was the moment I was told the shoulder charge had been rubbed out of the game. I have to be honest, I was shattered.
To me, the physical nature of rugby league is what separates our game from all of its rivals. We know it can be brutal at times, gladiatorial almost, and that’s why we fill the stands at games nervously eating our meat pies and clammer into mate’s living rooms with a slab of beer, our eyes glued to the screen.
There is truly no other game like it. The unique blend of skill, athleticism and bravery required cannot be replicated in any other sport. It has to be said, the ability for players to put on a big hit is a huge part of that.
It’s an opportunity for any player to try and take a game by the scruff of the neck and send out a message. It’s when a player, who is man enough, can stamp their authority and intimidate. It can be a turning point. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn’t.
Either way, as a spectator you are in awe of the warriors hammering it out in the middle and trying whatever they can do to secure victory for their respective clubs.
I miss it already. Where is my ‘big hits’ segment on the Footy Show? Oh we don’t do that anymore, namely because there aren’t any. We have a couple we can show you, but the NRL judiciary currently has those videos in use for a few hearings.
Sometimes it feels like the rule-makers are deliberately picking at the fabric of what makes rugby league great.
Now don’t get me wrong, I understand wholeheartedly the players must have their health and safety protected where possible. I am not here advocating, for example, it is okay to shoulder charge a player in the head. It isn’t. Just as it isn’t permissible to make a conventional tackle across the bridge of the nose either, it’s a high tackle.
Why did we have to apply a blow torch to the whole art form of shoulder charges? Could we not have instead simply stated that a shoulder charge to the head will see players suspended for long periods of time?
Barring a few exceptions, all of the shoulder charges I witnessed last year were NOT to the head, they were genuine bone rattlers to the body.
I also have had people say to me that it is about protecting the safety and wellbeing of the players making the shoulder charge as well! Really? Are we going to start limiting the speed of how fast players can run as well?
Should referees start handing our speeding tickets to Uate and Jennings? When Anthony Minichello throws his body on a rolling ball only to be smashed by three attackers, should we book him for carelessness?
No, it’s a tough man’s game! If a player wants to make his own decision to throw caution to the wind and put his body on the line, so be it. This is rugby league people!
This rule needs to be changed for the good of our game. The only way it can happen as I see it, is if the fans let it be known that changing fundamental rules that make our game great is not acceptable.
If witnessing big tackles, massive hits and high speed collisions isn’t your thing, then I suggest you watch the World Badminton Series in South Korea.
It’s nowhere near as fun to watch but I don’t think the players have been injured in years.
Adam Bishop
Roar Pro
Bazzio, surely you're not suggesting that the 'whiplash' effect cannot be affected in conventional tackles as well? I've seen players go through the old whiplash many times already this year, and let me tell you, they were not the result shoulder charges. What we are talking about is the physics of a tough man's game. You have one 100kg plus man running as fast as he can at another 100kg plus sized man, the physical result of that will inevitably be a jarring and jolting collision. I can guarantee if you went to a sport's scientist and asked him if playing Rugby League will be good for your health, he will tell you categorically, no, no it isn't. The human body is not designed to be running into other bodies at high speed. Boxing is another sanctioned sport in this country, let me spoil the suspense for you, this too is not great for your body. Your head is sustaining multiple collisions a match. I wonder what the uproar of banning punches to the head would be in boxing? Here is what my article's intention was to communicate, it's about understanding the fabric of the game. It was created on a foundation of tough working class guys playing as hard as they could, a truly physical game where skill, speed an agression can co-exist and are needed in equal supply to be successful. If I am to take onboard your suggestion that eliminating any collision which may cause a whiplash motion is a good thing, then i would have to penalise any tackle, shoulder charge or not, that caused the attacker to be stopped in his tracks. The game needs big hits, conventional or otherwise, and i'm sorry, but to play this game, the risk of injury will always be present. The game can take certain measures to protect the health and safety of players, and they have done this rationally and reasonable over the years. But this move has gone a step too far and has lamentably put the game on a slippery slope towards touch football. Players must accept a degree of risk when they play the sport, pure and simple, To finish, I would like to take umbrage to your suggestion that a shoulder charge's success relies on being a cheap shot, Bazzio, most shoulder charges are not enacted this way - now who is being specious?
Bazzio
Roar Guru
Your rationale is self-serving & specious Adam Bishop. I am under no MISAPPREHENSION about shoulder-charge tackles ~ "desire" was not mentioned, but 'aim', as in INTENTION, was. The intent & purpose of the shoulder-charge is to flatten the opposing player with as much force as posssible ~ there is no half-measure of shoulder-charging, & without even viewing your clip, I'm certain that is what it shows. Their is no "art" to the shoulder-charge ~ it either comes off, or it doesn't, & it's 'success' relies upon the shoulder-charging player charging from the blind, defenceless, side, and that's Gutless. Only players whose defense is weak or who cannot tackle correctly use whatever it takes methods such as shoulder-charging. Head "contact" is not necessary for brain damage or concussion ~ it is well known that the whiplash effect on the brain of the shoulder-charged player concusses the brain. The particulars of good tackling are * speed * timing * balance * positioning ~ "conjuring" tackles is for very poor defenders. Why not post your film-clips of players being flattened by shoulder-charges (including after impact consequences), & let the forum-at-large judge your appetite for dangerous, violent, tackling?
Adam Bishop
Roar Pro
Bazzio, you appear to be under the apprehension that I am advocating shoulder charges to the head. Clearly I stated in the article that this is something I think should be dealt with harshly. The point I am making is that the shoulder charge in the vast majority of cases, does not end with a head injury because no contact with the head is made. There is an artform to executing the shoulder charge, just as there is an artform to a convention tackle, some players have poor execution which is why they can at times end up hanging out an arm or bumping up off the ball and making contact with the head. It is a technique issue. I also take issue with your statement that it's sole desire is to injure, couldn't disagree with you more, at times with on the line defence for example, the only way a defender can conjure the requisite force to stop an attacker with momentum is to throw his shoulder into the body. This has happened a few times this year already, Nathan Merritt in the Sharks game comes to mind. His intent was not to injure, rather it was his only chance of actually stopping the try (which he did) alas now conceding a penalty. I completely agree with you that brain injury is a serious issue in the game, but I contend strongly that the shoulder charge is not the bogey man causing all of these. The REAL issue to address when it comes to head injuries, are rules set up to prohibit clubs from playing guys who are concussed the week before - this is where the real damage is done and is a clear case of putting the club before the safety of the player. Why don't we examine that more stringently rather than blame the shoulder charge?
astro
Guest
By saying "in this day and age" I'm referring to what we know about head knocks as a result of modern medicine and science. See Bazzio's post below. Nothing to do with a "nanny state". Indeed, using that phrase to describe removing shoulder charges from league is almost as silly as making a compilation of shoulder charges as a promotion for the game! It's because of people like yourself who chose to ignore scientific proof and common sense, in preference of out-dated thinking and moronic notions of 'manhood' and 'toughness' that such 'nanny state' rules are necessary.
Bazzio
Roar Guru
What an absolute crock-full ~ Wake up to yourself!! The 'shoulder charge' has one aim and one aim only ~ to injure. Common-sense is the immediate send off anyone who even attempts it. Does the following description sound like anyone you know or have head of in Rugby League lately?? ~ In recent years, investigators have demonstrated that even mild traumatic brain injury can result in neurobehavioural changes. * Neurobeavioural changes means that the person concussed will think differently & do different things that they would not have done before * http://www.medlink.com/medlinkcontent.asp " ...during the minutes to few days after concussion injury, brain cells that are not irreversibly destroyed remain alive but exist in a vulnerable state. . . . . . . . . . . Neurologists say once a person suffers a concussion, he is as much as four times more likely to sustain a second one. Moreover, after several concussions, it takes less of a blow to cause the injury and requires more time to recover. http://www.headinjury.com/sports.htm
mushi
Roar Guru
Unless they knock a player to the ground they are actually marked as an ineffective tackle attempt.
B.A Sports
Its not a big change but yes you can say that the banning of the shoulder charge is resulting in fewer stoppages, absolutley. I would say in previous years, on average there was at least one staoppage in every game for an injury from a shoulder charge, or a video review of a shoulder charge, or simply a penalrty from a shoulder charge which connected high. Now we are getting 1 a round. So you are actually enjoying the game less because there is no shoulder charges in the game? IF that is the case, I feel sorry for you because you have been missing a lot of great skill and action for many years if all you watch for is shoulder charges...
oikee
Guest
Discipline and hardwork, Respect (for the ball) and being penalised. Without this, there is no nanny state. Be careful what you wish for, look at the mess soccer has gotton itself into , they dont have a nanny caretaker.. Could you imagine rugby league and our fans without a code of conduct. Mate i would be hiding under a rock. The fans are meaner than the players. All lovely mind you, why, because we have Nanny. :) Mums, Dads, teenagers and whipper snappers along with newborns can all walk and talk without worrying about fence pailings missing or flares being shot into a picnic basket. If that is living in the nanny state, put me down for 2 tickets to the nanny state final thank you.
oikee
Guest
:) I have never seen a shoulder charge on the first hitup in origin ever. I have seen a Tonie Carrol arm-wrapping tackle hit Brett white in the nose and bust it right open on the fouth tackle. That was a ripper, and all legit, and the Tim Grant hit up that rocked Petro, that was a ripper. We dont lose much by getting rid of the shoulder charge that puts players out of the game. Running into a brick wall is just as exciting. 2 defenders holding their ground and bam, down goes the ball carrier like a dead weight. I like to see that as well. Apart from that, the action and speed of the game keeps me well transfixed to the tele, having to bolt for a toilet break. (timeout would be nice,,,,, for me).
planko
Roar Guru
Burgess another protected species. Yeah his "teething" problem cost one week ??
Maroon Blood
Guest
Point is, imo, that a shoulder charge is NOT a tackle. I would go further and say that it is (was) a resort of players who aren't very good tacklers in the first place. The shoulder charge isn't under threat, it is illegal, kaput, goneskis. Time people dealt with that and moved on.
Adam Bishop
Roar Pro
B.A - I don't think you can argue that the banning of the shoulder charge is resulting in fewer stoppages, that is drawing a VERY long bow. Either for it or against it, it was not an action slowing down the game. We see more penalties given for low grade conventional high tackles than anything else. If you haven't noticed it missing from the game, take a closer look, there is definitely a shortage of shoulder charges.
Adam Bishop
Roar Pro
Can't wait for that first hit up in Origin this year oikee, I do hope it's a safety first grassing tackle...
Adam Bishop
Roar Pro
What does this day and age refer to? The nanny state we live in?
Adam Bishop
Roar Pro
Let us not forget Maroon that copy book tackles are now pretty much outlawed as well now. Either because they go 3 degrees beyond the horizontal in a good drive and lift or coaches not wanting players to tackle low because they don't wrap up the ball and slow down the ruck. The shoulder charge is not the ONLY tackle under threat here.
astro
Guest
If you think a compilation of shoulder charges is what rugby league needs to promote itself in this day and age, you're clueless.
Maroon Blood
Guest
The fact that, in the three rounds played so far, there have been only (fortunately) two players knocked unconscious by contact from an opposing player and BOTH were the result of shoulder charges speaks volumes. The fact that one perpetrator if facing the judiciary and the other is a rare species of protected cat is a WHOLE other discussion ;-)
oikee
Guest
You always have to find the negative. Ok, it still has a few teething problems. Like Fa'oaso at the moment. I have still seen some good backbending tackles by 2 players giving it to a attacker. And Sam running hard at a defence knowing some cheapshot merchent wont try to take his head off is worth the admission alone.
Ian Whitchurch
Guest
Pretty much. The problem with a shoulder charge isnt a good shoulder charge - it's how easily they can slide up and hit the head. Therefore, you either make them legal and accept that some are going to be done wrong and result in high shots, or you ban the technique completely.
Maroon Blood
Guest
Can someone, somewhere PLEASE explain to me how the banning of shoulder charges now means there will be no more "big hits" in the NRL? Does the banning of the shoulder charge mean that players have forgotten how to hit hard in a legal tackle? Does everyone really think it is impossible to hit hard with the shoulder whilst still wrapping the arms around the opponent? Jeez Louise, I was at my Under 14's (opposed) training last night and enjoyed, and applauded, one of my lads knocking the wind out of one of his teammates with a copybook, totally legal, Rugby League tackle. His mate (once he had stopped wheezing) patted him on the back for a great hit. The other coaches had no problem with the hit, the other players had no problem with the hit, the parents watching training had no problem with it. WHY? Because it is part of the fibre of Rugby League, the hard, driving tackle into the ribs of the opponent designed to sit him on his backside and reconsider running at that particular tackler again. NOW, if this young fella had put his well-taught tackling skill to one side and put on a cheap shot shoulder charge, there would have been stern words and a promise of a bench warming spot on the weekend. This constant "the game is for sissy's now there is no shoulder charges" dribbling is just that, dribble. NRL players still know how to hit hard in tackles, have done so for an awfully long time and will continue to do so well into the future when the shoulder charge and the drivel written by those that moan about it's banning are long forgotten.