If you ever needed an example of double standards by the NRL, look no further than the Billy Slater shoulder charge on Sosaia Feki in the Melbourne Storm vs Cronulla Sharks game.
There was never any doubt at all that when Slater was charged that he would get off. After all it’s Billy Slater that we’re talking about here. Once the NRL’s top two prosecutors were unavailable and the Melbourne Storm hired a Legal Eagle who meticulously dissected Slater’s shoulder charge and put doubt in to the minds of the panel, the writing was on the wall.
You only have to go back to the State of Origin series this year when Slater was named Man of the Series even though he missed the first match through injury and Queensland lost the series.
That decision sparked heated debate amongst fans and raised serious doubts about the credibility of the Wally Lewis Medal, with no transparency at all on the votes awarded to players.
Make no mistake about it, Slater is the golden boy of the NRL and can do no wrong in the eyes of many.
The aftermath of the Billy Slater incident
Did Slater at any stage extend either of his arms out and attempt to make a tackle? The jury is still out on that one.
The point that seems to have been missed here is that Slater’s shoulder charge denied Feki a try and the only benefit for the Sharks was a penalty. They did not receive a penalty try or 10 minutes in the bin for Slater.
Whether Feki got injured or not shouldn’t have influenced the panel’s decision, but that doesn’t appear to have been the case. Luckily Feki didn’t get injured, but he could have quite easily suffered a serious injury.
For Slater to describe his shoulder charge as “just an unfortunate collision” was totally predictable. What more would you expect from somebody who was charged and facing the prospect of missing out on playing in an NRL grand final and having his career ended on the spot?
Sure, Slater deserves to end his career by playing on the biggest stage, but should sentiment and emotion come in to the equation? Absolutely not.
Once again the inconsistencies with interpretations of the rules by the Match Review Committee and the Judiciary Panel is a blight on the game. By finding Slater not guilty of a shoulder charge the panel has now set a precedent. Their integrity has been brought in to question.
Good luck to Slater. He now has a golden opportunity to end his career on a high and get that fairytale ending that he so desires. More than likely if he has a half-decent match he’ll win a third Clive Churchill Medal to put in his cabinet.
Bernie Vinson
Roar Rookie
Slater abuses ref Sutton in second half - "use your f%^$ing brain" and nothing...protected species
Cadfael
Roar Guru
Phil, he has to win the Churchill Medal. He missed out on the Dally M, Brfownlow and Norm Smith medals.
Cadfael
Roar Guru
It was an illegal tackle by Slater to stop a try. On this occasion, it was a pernalty only. A few years back when a Dragons player illegally tackled a Storm player to stop a try being scored, a penalty try was awarded. Funny that.
double agent
Guest
Billy Slater did a textbook 100% shoulder charge.
souvalis
Roar Rookie
If you think that the Waqa Blake tackle on Fusitu’a....is there another one ?..is a shoulder charge you a. haven’t watched it,or b. have no concept of what your talking about..ludicrous and clueless..
Albo
Roar Rookie
Rubbish ! Blake made an attempt to wrap his arm around in his tackle . That's exactly why he wasn't cited. There was no similarity with the Slater shoulder charge and that's why he was charged. Just be grateful that Slater got lucky with a nervous judiciary without confecting some dodgy justification for it.
Bernie Vinson
Roar Rookie
My concern is that an employee of Channel Nine (Slater TPA $100K) with a big game coming up for his part-time employer is let off for a shoulder charge (most agree but let off in my belief on sperious reasons) because it suits Channel Nine. Andrew Webster in todays herald (another part of the Channel Nine/Fairfax empire) claims that the NRL wanted a Souths - Sharks Grand Final for higher ratings. Is he a serious journo? The fact with Storm in GF (full of Qld origin players) will attract otherwise non interested Victorians and some extra Qlders to view it means a bigger tv audience than 2 Sydney clubs. It reminds me of the days when News Corp part owner of the comp was deciding on News Ltd owned Storm salary cap penalties (blamed player agents and Waldron despite it probably going on before Waldron got there and let the players off (who signed 2 contracts) who were then warehoused out and later bought back) When Eddie Jones said RL is the simplest game in the world he may have been half right ( didnt factor in the significant vested interests).
Wayne Turner
Guest
Spot on article. Since they can't be taken seriously anymore (If they could to begin with?). The next player charged with a shoulder charge,should front up to fight it wearing a mask of Billy Slater. It's the mocking they deserve. Some are clearly more equal than others.
Dogs Boddy
Roar Rookie
Exactly It's Billy Slater, we all know how this works. Nothing to see here, move along.
Brendan Jones
Roar Rookie
Can we please stop with these slater/ storm hater articles, it getting beyond the joke now. Time to move on
Mitcher
Guest
That’s what they call a smack down.
Matt P
Roar Rookie
I would absolutely love to see you walk up to any of the three judiciary panelists (they were all unanimous in their decision btw) and tell them, to their faces, that their integrity is compromised, because they only let Slater off because of who he is. I would really love to see that.
Blake Standfield
Roar Guru
These types are in heaven wallowing in their own sanctimony all week.
Duncan Smith
Roar Guru
Wow. Reason vs irrational hate. Thanks Brendon.
Taree Raider
Guest
Billy Slater has a right shoulder that is totally stuffed. He can't pass the ball from left to right due to this, if he has to pass to then right he usually lobs it over the top with his left arm (like a basketballer does). This shoulder disability is the reason why Billy tackled Feki the way he did, leading with his left side. He is incapable of making an effective tackle with his right shoulder. This shouldn't excuse him from performing what appear to be illegal tackles. The flip side of this is that if you run to Billys right side & don't have a sideline to restrict you there is a fair chance that he can't effectively tackle you. He also doesn't want to be tackled on his right shoulder, or be grabbed by the right arm. I wonder if the Roosters realise this? Or they could just get Latrell Mitchell to run straight over Billy.
Phil
Guest
It walks like a duck, it quacks like a duck - it's a bloody duck! It was a shoulder charge. Protected species - Koalas, reptiles & William Slater, Melbourne Storm, winner of the Clive Churchill medal on grand final day!
The Barry
Roar Guru
Well said. How long till the first “what about Joe Tapine” comment?
Peter Piper
Guest
I fully endorse what you say except that there was double standards applied in the sense that the tackle earned Cronulla a penalty and cost Billy and the Storm in terms of time and effort wasted compared with the Blake tackle which was just applauded as a good tackle. Maybe this is the double standards that the author is talking about ? Maybe it is the bias against the storm and against Billy in his penultimate game that the author is wishing to highlight ?
Brendon
Roar Rookie
Its amazing what this website will allow to be published, particularly as the very basis of your article, the "Double Standard" indicates to me you actually have no idea what you're talking about and probably need to review the meaning of the term. Please allow me to elaborate. The term double standard, as per dictionary.com (easiest reference to provide, simple google search) indicates "a rule or principle which is unfairly applied in different ways to different people or groups". Now, during the weeks festivities, we all saw the footage of the Waqa Blake incident where he performed a mirror image tackle and didn't receive a penalty, citing, judiciary hearing or suspension. Now, if Slater had been charged and suspended, he would have been the first one, considering Blake didn't get charged. This, my friend, is what you call a double standard. In this case, Slater would have been unfairly punished as, being Billy Slater in his final game, before a grand final, his tackle was being reviewed under a microscope by the entire Rugby League world. However, as both Blake and Slater received the exact same treatment by the NRL, it is not a double standard, it is infact the norm. Now you my friend, are exposing yourself to having double standards. Did you moan and complain the same way when Blake wasn't charged? Did you write articles and complain that he is held to a higher regard to other players? Nope. Heck, most people didn't even know about the tackle. This, would be a double standard. The judiciary have provided the reason that Slater got off. The NRL have indicated the final decision, and whilst some people wont agree, they haven't gone "We let him off, cause, ya know, its Slater and its the grand final". They have indicated the reason, all of which are true and valid. Whether you agree or not is irrelevant, because they have handed down a verdict based in fact and visible evidence, not some clown conspiracy theory that Slater and the Storm get preferential treatment.
The Barry
Roar Guru
If tackles are made illegal solely because they have the potential to cause a serious injury there will be no tackling in rugby league. I’m comfortable with this as a precedent.