If you think rugby league’s ‘gone soft’, you’re wrong

By AJ Mithen / Expert

A few things have blown up this week in the wake of Tevita Pangai Junior’s five-match suspension which all but ended his season.

With just seconds left in last Friday’s game against the Panthers, the Broncos forward tackled Penrith five-eighth James Maloney and slung him to the ground.

Pangai Jnr then launched himself on top of Maloney, basically body slamming his 113 kilos across Maloney’s head, neck and right shoulder as the latter was seated on the turf.

Aside from the dangerous aspect of the play, it was completely unnecessary because Brisbane led 24-12 and the game was well and truly decided.

Now Pangai is suspended for the third time this season and Brisbane’s finals chances have taken a big hit. If the Broncos do make the final eight, they’ll need to reach a preliminary final if he is to play again in 2019.

Plenty have tried to wave this off as an accident or argue the suspension was harsh because there was no harmful intent, but the Tongan wrecking ball made the decision to tackle Maloney in that fashion and that put him at risk. It’s simple. Whether Maloney was actually injured or not is completely irrelevant.

Pangai himself said it was an accident but he accepted the judiciary had “made the right call”.

To clarify a few misconceptions floating around the place, Pangai was not suspended for five games for this offence on its own. For the act itself, he was charged with grade two dangerous contact which carried a three-week suspension. Because he’d already had three offences in two years, there were carry-over points which added a week.

With a four-week holiday looming you’d think Brisbane would cut their losses, but for some mind-boggling reason they fronted the judiciary trying to get the original charge downgraded to one rather than two.

Remember, this was a 6’2, 113 kilo forward diving onto the head and neck of an opponent half a foot shorter, 30 kilos lighter and who was sitting on the ground. The potential for injury was huge and Maloney is lucky he didn’t cop something bad.

James Maloney (AAP Image/Michael Chambers)

If you needed a video example of a crusher tackle, this is the one.

Less than five minutes on Tuesday night is all it took for the judiciary to dismiss the appeal and Pangai had an extra-points penalty applied, taking him to the total five-game suspension.

This all happened in the shadow of Phil Gould’s latest rant following the Brisbane-Penrith game.

Referring to the NRL, Gould said, “They don’t want any intimidation in the game, they don’t want any aggression”, and “there seems to be this belief that if we start penalising everything, suspending everything, that suddenly we won’t have aggression, we won’t have anger on the field, we won’t have injuries”.

“I don’t agree with it. I think the game should be about intimidation and the game should be about aggression, and you’re going to sail close to the wind,” Gould said.

Then came the now famous “Doctors and lawyers will end the game in 20 years” line in response to being asked what the NRL would look like going forward.

In Gould’s world, ‘intimidation’ and ‘aggression’ seems to mean dirty and dangerous play – and in this sense, he’d be right.

Cronulla captain Paul Gallen said his piece too, “The people who run the game need to be very careful that they’re not messing with the fabric of the game.”

Sharks captain Paul Gallen. (Photo by Mark Kolbe/Getty Images)

The comments brought out a stack of the usual ‘rugby league’s gone soft’ and ‘let players punch each other’ types who prefer a running brawl to a skilled, fast game.

Rugby league is a pretty straightforward game. You get six tackles to ground the ball over your opponent’s try line, they get six tackles to do it back to you. If you do it more than them, you’ll probably win.

These days the typical NRL player is bigger, much faster, stronger, more trained and more skilled than a lot (not all) of those who came before.

Players are expected to have elite fitness levels and the collisions carry more impact than ever. There’s nothing ‘soft’ about it. The intimidation and aggression Gould laments is evident in every hit. You can dominate your opponent physically without choosing to dive onto his neck – in fact, Pangai had literally just thrown Maloney around like a rag doll. That’s fairly dominant.

If punishing players who attack an opponent’s head means the game’s gone soft, then there are some seriously misguided opinions out there.

If trying to protect players from foul play and stopping the dirty acts that put rugby league’s reputation in the toilet is messing with the fabric of the game, that’s an even stupider take on things.

I grew up in the era of league players punching on, eye-gouging, fihh-hooking, squirrel-gripping, jaw-breaking, kneeing, headhunting, face-raking and head-slamming – just for starters. Before those days it was even worse.

This used to be accepted as part of the game, now it isn’t. And neither should it be. If that’s the way you want your sport played then you’ve got the wrong idea about what sport actually is.

During his Friday night diatribe, Gould posed an interesting question: “I want to know what they think the finished product looks like, I want to know what the NRL thinks is the pure game of rugby league.”

Sports opinion delivered daily 

   

I’m no highly paid sports administrator, but I daresay the NRL wants the game to be the one that was the No.1 rating sport on television in 2018. The one that highlights the action and huge (legal) hits to showcase our elite league to the world.

The NRL is constantly under attack from those who want it to go back to what they were comfortable with, from people terrified of change. The game is evolving physically and tactically each year and these folks can’t keep up. They’re still applying old thinking from when they played or they just can’t disconnect from the ideal stuck in their head of what the game ‘used to be’.

The game’s never been better to watch. It’s bloody hard on the players. And only the dinosaurs pine for the good old days of blokes punching each other.

The Crowd Says:

2019-08-23T04:43:09+00:00

mushi

Roar Guru


Which we belittle but the guys ranked as high in soccer as Maloney in league could probably buy the NRL 10 times over. We talk about expansion, but we're such a myopic game.

2019-08-23T04:40:51+00:00

mushi

Roar Guru


The "overreaction" from my point of view was policing outcomes rather than risks. If you punish outcomes versus actions then you're not about preventing bad outcomes just about vengeance

2019-08-22T05:42:25+00:00

Emcie

Roar Guru


I've never said that Pangai did nothing wrong or that he shouldn't cop anything. I've said is that we can't start labeling that a "crusher" but the main thing I've taken exception to is the grading in comparison to other incidents. We're supposed to believe that this (grade 2 dangerous contact head/neck 480 points) - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_3mxzaaCVZU is somewhat worse then this (grade 3 dangerous throw 375 points) - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HQrld4SLfaQ and much much worse then this (grade 1 dangerous throw 100 points) - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EAHlAWshGkg All within the last month. And given Pangai's tackle occured in a game that featured an inordinate amount of high shots I find it a bit rich to use this charge as an example that the NRL is making massive strides in protecting the head. And I'm saying this as someone who see's Pangai more as a liability for the Broncos then an asset.

2019-08-21T22:39:32+00:00

Ken

Guest


I’ve agreed on lots of your comments on previous discussions but I can’t in this , if Maloney was on this back an got powerdived on by tpj that would have been ok ,but he was sitting upright an Pangai came down directly on the back of his head forcing his neck down , it doesn’t matter if he wasn’t held , or he may have moved this way or that , the onus is on the tackling player not to put the tackled player in a dangerous position , like every spear tackle in Nrl I don’t believe anyone has the intent to lift an drive someone’s head into the ground , most happen because a player loses control of the tackle an the tackled player is moving around in the air , but the blame will An should always fall on the tackling player for putting the opposite in a dangerous position , just like TPJ he may not have meant to do a crusher but a WWE flying cross body flop onto a downed opponent who was sitting upright had the potential to cripple .

2019-08-21T17:01:31+00:00

Tim Gore

Expert


I’ve had it with your rules!

2019-08-21T14:04:27+00:00

Forty Twenty

Roar Rookie


Yes , to play Soccer.

2019-08-21T12:09:46+00:00

farkurnell

Roar Rookie


Yeah Albo I think the Broncs are the most likely - If Milf can find his mojo behind that rampaging pack, then look out.If the Knights do sneak in what does that mean for Brownie.

2019-08-21T11:56:19+00:00

Rellum

Roar Guru


Is little Johnny allowed out of the house?

2019-08-21T11:16:51+00:00

Roar GOAT

Roar Rookie


How a bloke gets 5 weeks for an incidental accident is beyond me, but it highlights the issues with the system. Loading is garbage. Loading should only apply to the same kind of incident - ie history of crusher, spear, head high tackles. The loading is to prevent future issues or to change techniques of blokes. It shouldn’t be a catch all for “he’s a grub” so he needs an extra few weeks on the sideline. Secondly, the game has gone soft. At worst the tackle was a careless accident, at best it was completely an accident. Any more than 1 week on the sidelines is a joke and given he got incorrectly binned, that should’ve been enough to prevent any suspension.

2019-08-21T08:58:17+00:00

The Barry

Roar Guru


It’s a fair cop - I never claimed to be consistent - especially when the Dogs are involved! The Kasiano hit looks pretty ugly. I do think times have changed a little bit since then though.

2019-08-21T08:55:03+00:00

The Barry

Roar Guru


There was a moment like that last weekend. I think it was the Dogs v Rabbits game. The Rabbitohs went to take a tap with a player in an offside position. Gould went on when of his predictable rants “why does it matter if a player is standing in front of the player taking the tap? Why? Why? Why does it matter?” Billy Slater said “it probably doesn’t matter but that’s the rule” Silence.

2019-08-21T08:54:22+00:00

Daz

Roar Rookie


Great article.

2019-08-21T08:12:58+00:00

Emcie

Roar Guru


Ha! In all honesty I was just trying to find any similar incidents to see what reactions were and stumbled on it. This was the closest I could find – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YA7D0lUcbyw

2019-08-21T07:57:53+00:00

The Barry

Roar Guru


How long have you been saving that? :silly: What can I say? Different times. I don’t actually remember the tackle but obviously I called the judiciary outcome correctly...as I did with this one

2019-08-21T07:23:45+00:00

Emcie

Roar Guru


I want this Barry back - https://www.theroar.com.au/2015/09/14/pritchard-and-kasianos-foul-play-could-be-costly-for-the-dogs/comment-page-4/

2019-08-21T06:14:39+00:00

Nick

Roar Guru


Higher stakes - but same principles. Necessarily the same too.

2019-08-21T06:03:56+00:00

Hoy

Roar Guru


I get the concept, but looking at it from the end result, the two are very different aren't they? I mean a mans life, and preparedness to roll the dice and not plea or plea (depending on the person and crime I guess), vs an easy out to get to play footy next week? And I am not excusing players at all. I just don't think the judiciary in League is doing what it is intended to do... Just something that occurs to me anyway...

2019-08-21T05:56:14+00:00

Nick

Roar Guru


Spot. On.

2019-08-21T05:33:20+00:00

The Barry

Roar Guru


I don’t see the disconnect. TPJ has form and there’s a loading for that. He has carry over points - which basically equate to a suspended penalty. He and the broncos knew they could reduce the suspension by taking a guilty plea. They chose not to. The 2.5x loading is completely TPJ’s fault. Not the system.

2019-08-21T05:28:12+00:00

The Barry

Roar Guru


I can’t believe how many people have been blowing up about this tackle. He landed directly on Maloney’s head and neck. It’s the clearest example of a crusher tackle I’ve seen. It doesn’t matter if it was an accident. He got three weeks which is about right. Extra weeks for loading and carry over points and not taking the early plea. Bad luck. The inconsistency comes when you compare this one to tackles that hit someone on the chin, knock them out and the offender gets off with a fine. But that doesn’t mean there was anything wrong with this decision.

More Comments on The Roar

Read more at The Roar