Even if they said it wasn’t the case, allowing Billy Slater the privilege to end his illustrious career on his own terms in this weekend’s NRL grand final loomed as a mitigating factor in whether or not the judiciary would find Slater guilty or not of a shoulder charge.
But emotion set aside, the outcome is still the correct one.
Watching it live at the ground, being an avid AFL supporter and Melbourne Storm fanatic, the bump looked fantastic. Slater in all his glory put his body on the line to save a certain Cronulla try, and seeing it live was undoubtedly beautiful.
But then on the way home on the train, I discovered that Slater had been cited for a shoulder charge on the play, and that he would be likely suspended and disallowed from featuring in the big dance.
Now for a code which prides itself on being tougher and more brutal than the AFL, I couldn’t help but have a laugh as the play would have been perfectly legal in the AFL sphere.
I understand the ruling behind a shoulder charge and the many cases before which have seen suspensions for such an action, but can you honestly say the rule was brought to prevent an incident such as this one?
Billy Slater of the Storm (Photo by Kelly Defina/Getty Images)
This incident involved two players, at high speed, with an unavoidable collision the obvious outcome. What Slater did was nothing short of remarkable, and such a try-saving act as this one should be applauded, not condemned.
The bias the rest of the NRL world have against the Melbourne Storm is undeniable. And to have the chance to see Slater, who is such a key contributor to his side, potentially miss out on the grandest stage of all would have satisfied these critics.
For them, it was an opportunity that was too good to be true and hence all the hate came his way. The wanting of his head on a plate followed.
This decision has applied common sense, and the league should be thankful that it has done so because if Slater had been suspended for that act, looking back on this in ten years’ time we will be saying what a terrible judgment it was.
Rugby league is supposed to be a brutally tough sport, and if it wishes to remain as such and ahead of the AFL in this factor, then they have done well in allowing Slater to play this weekend.
john
Guest
Can we just celebrate the fact that Uncle Nick couldn't buy the judiciary? If he could pretty sure Slater wouldn't be playing.
Duncan Smith
Roar Guru
"The bias the rest of the NRL world have against the Melbourne Storm is undeniable. And to have the chance to see Slater, who is such a key contributor to his side, potentially miss out on the grandest stage of all would have satisfied these critics. For them, it was an opportunity that was too good to be true and hence all the hate came his way. The wanting of his head on a plate followed." Yes, that is correct.
Ray Paks
Roar Rookie
yeah you're still missing the point. so what if the game's brutal? I'm not saying it isn't. so what if it was not against the spirit of the game? I didn't say it was. so what if other sports allow it? Just because they allow it, rugby league should adopt their rules? Crazy. Bottom line-There's rules! and according to those rules, that incident has all the hallmarks of a shoulder charge written on it clear as day the only possible result of which is a one match ban. seriously, are not you getting that?! if you can't you're bringing common sense into disrepute! NRL has bent, broken the rules to accommodate a fairy-tale finish
Ben Pascuzzi
Roar Rookie
A bad look is the fact this bump is illegal in the game of rugby league. For a league who prides itself on physicality, how can this clean shoulder bump be deemed an illegal offence. You can give me all the evidence about other players being suspended and whatnot for actual shoulder charges, but you can't tell me with a straight face that what Slater did was against the spirit of the game and was illegal. How this type of bump is illegal in such a proudly brutal sport is laughable, and thank god he got off because you will find the ruling to be adjusted on the shoulder charge from this incident, purely because how silly it is to suspend a bloke for what would be deemed legal in many sports - example being the AFL which is supposedly inferior to the NRL. Of course, you can argue that if it was anyone else they would not have gotten off, but for this particular bump to be scrutinized, it is quite amusing imo. Common sense prevailed in this instance, and for the good of the game.
Rube
Guest
No malice...... good one ????
Ray Paks
Roar Rookie
It's a bad look because it involves Billy and a grand final. You've done your darn best to make it look otherwise but under the present rules, that is the simple truth. That being the case, you're glorifying a dead set shoulder charge. All that East, Kanye West, North Korea, South pole stuff is just a lame attempt to justify a poorly executed tackle which in the end according to the rules is illegal. The absence or presence of desire or intent shouldn't influence rulings. Ask Napa if he intended to knock Andrew McLachlin and Korbin Sims' heads off, bet all your money on him saying he 'meant it' and you'll lose that bet. Clearly, his technique is the problem and intent or malice have nothing to do with it
Dutski
Roar Guru
So Slater’s tackle wasn’t worthy of a suspension because: 1. He saved a try 2. It’s allowed in another sport 3. People hate the Storm Tell me if I missed one. Oh, and 4. it was Billy and it’s the Grand Final I think I’ve covered all your major points. In response I only have one: A. Shoulder charges are illegal. Decision was wrong. There is no was Dylan Napa or Marty Tapau would have got off using the same arguments that Billy’s team rolled out. Wrong decision, wrong precedent.
Zalera
Roar Rookie
Gould was doing his best NRL doomsday speech again so I would not trust that he cared whether Slater was technically guilty or not. If Slater is any other player would he have reacted the same? Probably not, so it is best to just ignore Gould.
Ben Pascuzzi
Roar Rookie
So what you're essentially saying is that the shoulder charge was brought in for actions like Slater's..... Do you honestly believe that is a good look for the game if such a bump, east-west mind you, not the traditional north-south which has been the main charge stamped out, is outlawed? Please, the rule was not brought in for an action like Slater's, completely different to the Ackerman situation, there was no injury or malice.
Ray Paks
Roar Rookie
Another incredibly poor article. "Watching it live at the ground, being an avid AFL supporter and Melbourne Storm fanatic, the bump looked fantastic. Slater in all his glory put his body on the line to save a certain Cronulla try, and seeing it live was undoubtedly beautiful." Try saying that in the face of James Ackerman's family. I mean you really are sick in the head to write garbage like this.
double agent
Guest
Ben you either don't understand the rule or don't agree with it or both. A shoulder charge is illegal.
Rob Murchie
Guest
Clearly the player tackled was not hurt and it was never Billy's intention to do anything other than to prevent the try. Being a follower of AFL Billy's tackle would have been cinsidered an fantastic Hip & Shoulder tackle whille most of the other tackles in League considered a free kick for being dangerous. ( Common sense decision has been made for Billy and the better of the code )
Cadfael
Roar Guru
The troubles will start from next week. The judiciary has for all purposes said the shoulder charge is now legal again. If a player gets cited in the future for a shoulder charge, they will be able to legitimately cite the Slater case as defence. Had this occurred in round 20, would he have got off? No. The other odd spot is accepting that it wasn't his intention to hit him like he did.. It was for his preservation and safety. What about the ball carrier's safety. And intention! Since when has the judiciary been able to read minds to see if an act was intentional or not. He got away with it and good luck to him. Wonder how Smith feels.
Ben Pascuzzi
Roar Rookie
Yeah the fact Gould of all people defended Slater, especially after having listened to him commentate many Storm games in complete bias against them, it should have ended this debacle. Completely agree.
Hard Yards
Roar Rookie
yeah, Billy was always going to have to play, and the precedent was always going to have to be lived with. Classic case of putting off the problem to another day to allow for exactly that which you have articulated. Which I would have done if I was one of the panel members.
Daz
Roar Rookie
Hear hear. Only gallen remaimed bitter.
peeeko
Roar Guru
maybe have a look in the mirror, Rory?
peeeko
Roar Guru
lets make Gus head of the judiciary? end of story? very funny
Zalera
Roar Rookie
That most definitely is a reality, but all NRL fans are split on this, and to assume that everyone who thought he should be found guilty is that petty is a little ridiculous.
Chris
Roar Pro
I normally hate Gus' commentary but I admire him because he calls it like it is. Rubbishing your state as a former player and coach is a massive thing to do, even more so when they need it. Agreed re. his head is stuck in the good ol' days and his attitude seems to change a lot.