Shoulder Charges in the Judiciary

[Viti]

I was just wondering what you're thoughts were on the whole Snowden/Thompson incident, for me there wasnt much in it and the only reason he's got seven weeks is because Thompson broke his jaw and I have a real problem with that. I honestly cannot see how Snowden's "shoulder charge" was any worse than Pritchards who only copped 2 weeks.

 

[Coxy]

I was just wondering what you're thoughts were on the whole Snowden/Thompson incident, for me there wasnt much in it and the only reason he's got seven weeks is because Thompson broke his jaw and I have a real problem with that. I honestly cannot see how Snowden's "shoulder charge" was any worse than Pritchards who only copped 2 weeks.

Agree 1000%. It was an unlucky contact. Had Thompson's face not been turned inside out it probably wouldn't have been a penalty, let alone a send off and 7-9 weeks (4-6 without loading). Thompson passed, was tackled low and Snowden was standing there and Thompson fell into his shoulder. I couldn't believe he got sent off, and the judiciary decision is manifestly unfair.

Compare it with Luke O'Donnell who flipped Tim Simona over, who could've so easily snapped his neck, and O'Donnell having a record that'd stretch the Nullabor Plain...not only did he not get sent off, but he got 2 weeks!

 

[LittleDavey]

Yeah absolutely, rubbish decision - Snowdon and Newcastle are well within their rights to be upset. Fair enough poor Thompson's got a long road to recovery ahead but it's a contact game - sometimes you get hurt, and bad. JYY perfect example, same with Copley. Bad things happen in a contact sport - punishments should fit the crime, NOT the result. Absolute rubbish. The game turns me off more every bloody week...

 

[Foordy]

IMO, Snowdens was exactly the same as SBW's on Mason. similar injuries as well. but SBW didn't even get charged with a shoulder charge and only got 2 weeks ... complete BS IMO

 

[KingWebcke]

i think the consensus is that Snowden is very unlucky. There wasn't half the intent in Snowden's as there was in Pritchard's hit and yet the suspensions say something completely different. Snowden almost looked like he got caught in a position where he couldn't win and short of disappearing into thin air there wasn't much he could do to avoid contact.

I'd be having a big sook if I was Snowden or a Knights fans right now ... actually, never mind the last part, I'm having a sook about it right now

 

[Porthoz]

There is no punishment where the circumstances aren't taken into account. In this case, Snowden's illegal shoulder charge resulted in a serious injury to a player. Granted, it wasn't intentional, but it doesn't change the fact that Thomson has a shattered jaw as a consequence. Keyword here is illegal.

This is not unlike committing a felony. If you rob a servo and no one gets hurt, chances are you'll get away lightly. But if someone has a heart attack and dies as a result of your robbery (attempt), you'll suddenly be going away for a long time under manslaughter charges at the very least, even if you never intended to hurt anyone.

 

[ivanhungryjak]

There is no punishment where the circumstances aren't taken into account. In this case, Snowden's illegal shoulder charge resulted in a serious injury to a player. Granted, it wasn't intentional, but it doesn't change the fact that Thomson has a shattered jaw as a consequence. Keyword here is illegal.

This is not unlike committing a felony. If you rob a servo and no one gets hurt, chances are you'll get away lightly. But if someone has a heart attack and dies as a result of your robbery (attempt), you'll suddenly be going away for a long time under manslaughter charges at the very least, even if you never intended to hurt anyone.

Exactly. My analogy is that you can throw a punch and the coppers might give you a ticket for Disorderly Behaviour ... Or you throw the same punch and hit somebody in the wrong spot, they die and you're chewing corn for manslaughter.

 

[LittleDavey]

There is no punishment where the circumstances aren't taken into account. In this case, Snowden's illegal shoulder charge resulted in a serious injury to a player. Granted, it wasn't intentional, but it doesn't change the fact that Thomson has a shattered jaw as a consequence. Keyword here is illegal.

This is not unlike committing a felony. If you rob a servo and no one gets hurt, chances are you'll get away lightly. But if someone has a heart attack and dies as a result of your robbery (attempt), you'll suddenly be going away for a long time under manslaughter charges at the very least, even if you never intended to hurt anyone.

Yeah I see your point, but this is a contact sport lol... I guess I'm more raging against the inconsistency in general from the officials this year, it's really been repugnant this year.

As my analogy - if Snowdon was Gallen, how many games would he miss? If Snowdon was Gallen immediately before an Origin series - how many games would he miss?

 

[KingWebcke]

those are flawed analogies in my opinion. Consequences will always play a part but the fact is that common law does try to account quite significantly for the intent and the seriousness of the action rather than focussing heavily on the consequences. that is the reason why manslaughter exists in addition to murder and why there are different gradations for most crimes, often based on the level of intent, planning and malice.

your comparisons to common law are also based on the assumption that that system is entirely fair and equitable, which isn't something most people would subscribe to. I don't necessarily want the NRL judiciary following the philosophy and procedures of common law.

 

[KingWebcke]

Ultimately, the aim of a ban on shoulder charges is to improve player safety and the best way to do that is to discourage shoulder charges. I think the best way to discourage shoulder charges is to actually target the players who are still running around looking to drill players.

That means guys like Fritchard and SBW, rather than Snowden. You're just sending an inconsistent message if Snowden gets slapped with a huge ban for a rather unfortunate series of events while Pritchard gets far less because (through sheer dumb luck) he didn't injure his opponent more seriously, despite the fact that he is clearly a player who hasn't heeded the new message.

 

[Broncoman]

7 weeks is a pretty heavy suspension but he did hit Thompson late and high illegaly and deserved to get sent off, his history at the MRC would've also been a factor. If it wasn't for his history it would've been only 2 or 3 weeks.

Love how the courier mail are blowing it up

 

[Coxy]

The send off was a joke. The charge is absurd. The fact he could've got 9 weeks is embarrassing.

He literally stood still as Thompson face planted into his shoulder. Unbelievable.

 

[Porthoz]

The send off was a joke. The charge is absurd. The fact he could've got 9 weeks is embarrassing.

He literally stood still as Thompson face planted into his shoulder. Unbelievable.

They should've charged Thomson instead for face-charging Snowden's shoulder!

 

[Browny]

I agree with Bennett how the system is unfair in regards to getting extra time off for fighting the charge

 

[Big Pete]

Snowden was unlucky in that he broke Thompson's jaw but everything else that followed was purely academic.

 

[Coxy]

Snowden was unlucky in that he broke Thompson's jaw but everything else that followed was purely academic.

I don't quite follow. Are you saying that because Thompson broke his jaw that Snowden HAD to be sent off and suspended? Even though in your own words it was "unlucky", not an act of recklessness?

We go down a really dangerous road if we start looking at injuries as a barometer of severity of a tackle.

 

[Dexter]

The act was careless which is in the definition of what is an illegal hit. It's the same as one punch can kill which we have been talking about in another thread. You can't use ignorance as a defence and say "oh I didn't know that could happen" . Everyone knows the potential damage a shoulder charge can cause.

I still am of the opinion they got this one right and all the others wrong.
What they didn't get right was the charge after they had time to look at it. The grading should have been lower considering the circumstances and grade 4s and higher should be reserved for hits like Pritchards and Faosos which cause similar damage.

If this is the catalyst to get future shoulder charges properly judged then it can only be good for the game.

 

[Big Pete]

Dex nailed it.

Here's footage of it again...

[video=youtube_share;-0sSlHSC4cQ]http://youtu.be/-0sSlHSC4cQ[/video]

That's a shoulder charge, which is an illegal form of tackling and he hit Thompson high and hard enough to break his jaw.

If you take out that last element, would it be worthy of a send off? No. However, when you perform an illegal hit like that you're rolling the dice.

For Snowden, it came up snake eyes.