Dear NRL HQ & the media...

[Midean]

That was one of the reasons they gave but as those figures show despite making up a very small percentage of tackles the number that resulted in injuries was higher (just under 4%) and 17% involved contact with the head.

This was also very alarming.

- that the average G-force of the shoulder charge (measured from accelerometer data taken from GPS tracking) was 76% greater than a conventional head-on tackle (10.682 compared to 6.056).

The 17% contact with the head is the key element, and you can bet your house that the 4% injury was largely made up of the head shots, which are illegal no matter the style of the tackle.

This is the thing Pete, the NRL banned the tackle based on its potential for injury, nothing more.
I understand their reasoning behind it, but make no mistake, it was not banned because it was causing a slew of injuries as is outline in that article you linked.
It specifically outlines recommendations based on the fact players were on average getting bigger.

 

[Kimlo]

Again, they do not have a very high chance of sever injury, thats just not true.
Any shot to the head by a poorly executed tackle has a high chance of injury.

The link Pete just gave me outlines that the reason they banned the shoulder charge is because players are getting larger.

The Commission has reviewed a detailed report into the shoulder charge and accepted a management recommendation that the increased size of athletes was creating a situation where the shoulder charge could, if maintained, lead to an unacceptable injury risk.

it was a preemptive ban based on the fact that athletes playing nrl were getting bigger and could lead to injury.
It was not banned because of injury setting precedence.

The review demonstrated that:
- shoulder charges made up 0.05% of the 142,355 tackles made in 2012

- less than 4% of these resulted in injury to the attacking player and less than 1% to the defensive player

- 17% resulted in contact with the head of the attacking player

- players in the Telstra Premiership have grown over the decade from 2002 to 2012 to be on average 4kg heavier, 1.2cm taller and by measure of a superior Body Mass Index, stronger and more powerful

“This is about reducing a potential risk of serious injury to our players,” NRL Interim Chief Executive, Mr Shane Mattiske, said today.

So really pete/kimlo the shoulder charge was NOT banned because players were getting injured, as the stats above show, but because the potential for injury was there. Just like this rounds knee jerk over-reaction.

However, this round is more plausible than the shoulder charge ban because head high tackles are dangerous and do lead to concussions.

None of what you said counters my argument.

I said they have a very high chance of severe injury, which they absolutely do when they go wrong.

It's nothing to do with the dumb head highs now, a forearm or stray hand to the head is a different world from a Papalii 120kg shoulder charge with his full body weight behind it.

Shoulder charges add nothing of significant value but can be career ending if they go bad.

Inglis on young was absolutely disgusting. Molo killed a guy with one. There's so many examples of shoulder charges going horribly wrong.

Outside of straight up dogshots back in the 80s where they were purposely trying to main players, can you give me some examples of head high tackles that have caused serious damage?

Surely you're not arguing against this?

 

[Midean]

None of what you said counters my argument.

I said they have a very high chance of severe injury, which they absolutely do when they go wrong.

It's nothing to do with the dumb head highs now, a forearm or stray hand to the head is a different world from a Papalii 120kg shoulder charge with his full body weight behind it.

Shoulder charges add nothing of significant value but can be career ending if they go bad.

Inglis on young was absolutely disgusting. Milo killed a guy with one. There's so many examples of shoulder charges going horribly wrong.

Outside of straight up dogshots back in the 80s where they were purposely trying to main players, can you give me some examples of head high tackles that have caused serious damage?

Surely you're not arguing against this?

No, and i see your point.
But the shoulder charge when performed right, was super effective. Go take a look at Sonny Bill Williams highlight reel before the shoulder charge was banned.
He could completely change momentum on the back of an effective shoulder charge.
And in regards to Papalii, he got sent from the field for a dangerous high shot this round, and with a bloke his size, any tackle that go's wrong will end badly.

The shot Inglis put on Dean Young was why it got banned in my opinion.
That is an example of the tackle being used illegally and like all illegal tackles, should have been heavily penalized.

 

[Donald Garner]

I can’t believe it. RTS taken in the exact same way gamble took the manly player. No sin bin. This game is a fucking disgrace atm

 

[Kimlo]

No, and i see your point.
But the shoulder charge when performed right, was super effective. Go take a look at Sonny Bill Williams highlight reel before the shoulder charge was banned.
He could completely change momentum on the back of an effective shoulder charge.
And in regards to Papalii, he got sent from the field for a dangerous high shot this round, and with a bloke his size, any tackle that go's wrong will end badly.

The shot Inglis put on Dean Young was why it got banned in my opinion.
That is an example of the tackle being used illegally and like all illegal tackles, should have been heavily penalized.

Don't get me wrong I absolutely loved a good shoulder charge but they're so fucking dangerous when they go wrong and can you trust the imbeciles that make up a sizeable portion of NRL players to know their limits?

Where I draw the line is at common sense. Tackles that are not necessary and have potential for serious life changing damage should be outlawed full stop. Head highs that are a natural consequence of the game being banned because we're afraid of litigation in 20 years, lunacy. Make them sign waivers and tough shit.

 

[Manifesto]

I can’t believe it. RTS taken in the exact same way gamble took the manly player. No sin bin. This game is a fucking disgrace atm

Yep, PVJ already changed the rules mid round, so disgraceful. Im listening on radio, so many HIAs but not many penalties. Most HIAs this game are not being penalised. No sin bins. Really whats the difference between this match and our match.

 

[LittleDavey]

Yep, PVJ already changed the rules mid round, so disgraceful. Im listening on radio, so many HIAs but not many penalties. Most HIAs this game are not being penalised. No sin bins. Really whats the difference between this match and our match.

Less than 48 hours.

 

[Kimlo]

Yep, PVJ already changed the rules mid round, so disgraceful. Im listening on radio, so many HIAs but not many penalties. Most HIAs this game are not being penalised. No sin bins. Really whats the difference between this match and our match.

How is it not criminal (I'm being serious) to change rules mid round? You're fucking up clubs, players, betting agencies, clubs revenue even players themselves.

Rules in elite sporting competition should have stability and only be changed after serious robust discussion, not because Vlandys had a thought bubble while he was excreting last night's curry.

 

[Donald Garner]

How is it not criminal (I'm being serious) to change rules mid round? You're fucking up clubs, players, betting agencies, clubs revenue even players themselves.

Rules in elite sporting competition should have stability and only be changed after serious robust discussion, not because Vlandys had a thought bubble while he was excreting last night's curry.

Because they already raped us 12-2 in the penalty count and set restarts and sin bins 0-2 on Friday night. They don’t need the adjudicate the rules the same now that we have played. The NSW NRL got what they wanted. The broncos losing each week and being belted makes them feel good.

Fucking disgraceful. I’m furious

 

[Browny]

And the Broncos are going to come out and highlight this when? Its a split round rules wise

 

[LittleDavey]

FOX is onto it, @McHunt you'll like this quality bit of journalism:




Do Fox know something we don't, or are they just confirming their incompetence?

 

[Midean]

How is it not criminal (I'm being serious) to change rules mid round? You're fucking up clubs, players, betting agencies, clubs revenue even players themselves.

Rules in elite sporting competition should have stability and only be changed after serious robust discussion, not because Vlandys had a thought bubble while he was excreting last night's curry.

You know you might be onto something here.
There has to be a legal issue in regards to betting on Friday nights games, and then betting on the following games based on those rule changes, just to have them changed back again.

Not to mention you have completely fucked 2 teams through unreasonable reffing compared to every other team in the round.

 

[Kimlo]

You know you might be onto something here.
There has to be a legal issue in regards to betting on Friday nights games, and then betting on the following games based on those rule changes, just to have them changed back again.

Not to mention you have completely fucked 2 teams through unreasonable reffing compared to every other team in the round.

Yeah and the games results could affect sponsorship, performance targets for players, etc. Clubs build rosters with a long term view (for example Lodge) then rules are changed on a whim with no salary cap dispensation.

I'd like it to being in business and setting up long term then overnight the government announced significant changes that affect my profitability without warning. I'd be going to court.

Rules should only ever change in the off season unless it's an absolute emergency. How many rule changes have we had just this year, forget rule changes, because I may as well just say interpretation of the rules because that's all it is. They selectively choose what to enforce then change it mid game, and then mid round.

What happened to making a genuine effort to play the ball, that was the big fancy new rule that lasted until the last trial then disappeared.

 

[Sproj]

Vlandys is making a lot of enemies, even his cronies in the media are turning against him because they realise what he is doing has the genuine potential to kill this sport. The damage he has already done might be irreparable, at least it will be if this mess isn't undone asap.

The AFL just keep getting win after win after win after win because they are truly professionally run, meanwhile we continue to give ourselves headshot after headshot after headshot and a lot of can simply be fixed by removing the idiot in charge yesterday.

 

[Midean]

Vlandys is making a lot of enemies, even his cronies in the media are turning against him because they realise what he is doing has the genuine potential to kill this sport. The damage he has already done might be irreparable, at least it will be if this mess isn't undone asap.

The AFL just keep getting win after win after win after win because they are truly professionally run, meanwhile we continue to give ourselves headshot after headshot after headshot and a lot of can simply be fixed by removing the idiot in charge yesterday.

PVL will sing an entirely different tune once the bigwigs at Fox and Nine put the heat on him for the plummeting ratings.

 

[GCBRONCO]

 

[GCBRONCO]

 

[Foordy]

FOX is onto it, @McHunt you'll like this quality bit of journalism:

View attachment 13022


Do Fox know something we don't, or are they just confirming their incompetence?

on Friday they published a tweet from Ben Walker ... as it turns out not the Ben Walker that used to play for us, just some random bloke