The end of the shoulder charge?

[Brent81]

It's bullshit.

It's not Greenberg's fault that the judiciary members ignored the rules.

If I was running the nrl I'd ensure that the blokes who were on that panel didn't get near the game again.

Finally, I'd give the refs an edict to immediately send off a player who commits a shoulder charge and I'd also change the rules to say if you get sent off you get a week's suspension automatically.

 

[broncos4life]

I'm not sure what the issue with the NRL admins is?
They were pretty clear about what they want, the refs and MRC were on board, but the judiciary decided to make their own statement.
Smith and Greenberg aren't on the judiciary, and can't tell them what do...

No but they can fire them for constantly ignoring their directions

 

[bb_gun]

I find it really suspicious that after everything that's happened over the last few weeks that 3 players, from 3 separate clubs, suddenly decide to contest their shoulder charges and all 3 of them are found not guilty...

...does anyone else believe that perhaps someone was whispering in their ears that they SHOULD contest the charges because they WILL be found not guilty?

 

[Dexter]

I find it really suspicious that after everything that's happened over the last few weeks that 3 players, from 3 separate clubs, suddenly decide to contest their shoulder charges and all 3 of them are found not guilty...

...does anyone else believe that perhaps someone was whispering in their ears that they SHOULD contest the charges because they WILL be found not guilty?

I think it was just a case of there being grey areas, like most things, and the clubs felt they could mount a solid defence. I've thought all along that there is wiggle room with some SC infringements. Some should not have been charged to start with.

They have fucked this so badly now with the Luke and Guerra SCs nobody knows what's going on. IMHO this was where the whole thing was headed since they reacted to fallout from the Kane Evans SC.

Greenberg must be fuming, he has been made look impotent by the judiciary and the 3 members from last night have demonstrated that they are not capable of carrying out the intentions of the NRL.

 

[Morkel]

I think it was just a case of there being grey areas, like most things, and the clubs felt they could mount a solid defence. I've thought all along that there is wiggle room with some SC infringements. Some should not have been charged to start with.

They have fucked this so badly now with the Luke and Guerra SCs nobody knows what's going on. IMHO this was where the whole thing was headed since they reacted to fallout from the Kane Evans SC.

Greenberg must be fuming, he has been made look impotent by the judiciary and the 3 members from last night have demonstrated that they are not capable of carrying out the intentions of the NRL.

Precisely. The MRC **** up, and instead of the NRL admitting that they simply fucked up they try to bullshit. And now we're here. No one learns, because it seems that no one in the NRL is accountable. Greenberg SHOULD be the one accountable, but Banker Dave won't punt him because he's his window in to a game he doesn't understand.

 

[Morkel]

Todd Greenberg must take blame for NRL?s shoulder charge rule change debacle

TODD Greenberg owes Peter Sterling an apology. And Andrew Johns, and Brad Fittler.
And every former player and commentator whose credibility and reputation was questioned in the lead-up to the shoulder charge debacle this week.
If this is the administration in charge of a billion-dollar sport, God help us.
As the NRL’s head of football, the buck must stop with Greenberg. When he came into the job many of us thought he would be something of a saviour for a new NRL administration that lacked “football” experience.
It’s fair to say that debate has been well and truly put to bed. What happened on Wednesday night was an embarrassment to everyone who follows the game.
For that, Greenberg has to take responsibility for the “rules on the run” strategy that created this circus.
What is obvious now is that Issac Luke, Jorge Taufua and Aidan Guerra should never have been charged in the first place.
So why were they?

The fact is it would have never gotten to this had the NRL’s match review panel done its job in the first place.
The initial decision not to charge Kane Evans for his deliberate shoulder charge on Sam Kasiano in early August is what ignited the confusion we see now.
It wasn’t the comments that Sterlo, Joey and Freddy made on Channel 9’s Sunday Footy Show, when they said they would support a *decision to overturn the shoulder charge ban.
The debate was already raging as soon as Kasiano hit the deck, when people from everywhere started applauding. The thing is, the fans and former players react to what they see, and what they say is not always Gospel.
But it is the job of Greenberg and his men to provide calm clarity when these issues arise. On this occasion they failed, miserably.
Remember, it was their decision to allow Evans to escape with only an “official warning”. And don’t forget the match review panel had three days to come up with that verdict.
But when the NRL stuffed it up, it created the perfect political smother. It found Sterlo, Freddy and Joey, who by that stage were under fire from all sections after James Ackerman’s brother came out and spoke about his family’s grief.

In hindsight, most agreed after hearing Andrew Ackerman tell the tragic story about his brother’s death that there was no place in the game for the shoulder charge.
But it was later in the week, as debate went on, and after the NRL’s own match review committee decided not to charge Evans, that Greenberg hit the wrong target.
“I am really disappointed by some of the discussion and debate I’ve listened to and read in the media this week,” Greenberg said, in what almost everyone clearly saw as a shot at Sterling and co.
Then Greenberg went further, without conceding fault, by forewarning of the pending crackdown.
“If we do anything in the coming weeks, it will be to tighten our policy around the shoulder charge, not loosen it,” he said.
NRL boss Dave Smith, with all his knowledge of the game, also weighed in, commenting on Twitter:

No place at all for the shoulder charge in the game @NRL. The rules will tighten such that if you put a hit on you'll be on the sideline
— Dave Smith (@DaveSmithNRL) August 6, 2015

It’s fair to say Sterlo, Joey and Freddy have forgotten more about the game than Smith will ever know, and Greenberg for that matter.
But as personal agendas took over, shoulder charge clarity was lost. All common sense was thrown out the window in a rushed attempt to cover the mistake of not charging Evans.
Instead of sitting down and calmly finding the way forward, the NRL pushed through a policy no one understood. Weeks out from the finals, it was mayhem.
And the match review panel obviously still had no idea what it needed to do.
While almost every rugby league fan with half a clue could clearly see that they were getting it wrong, Greenberg again came out this week and defended the stance.
“There should be no confusion,” he said. “If you use the shoulder charge with force you will be charged and suspended.”
Then Wednesday night’s judiciary hearing exploded in his face. Where does the NRL go from here? What constitutes a shoulder charge, and what doesn’t?
How about this for an idea: How about the NRL starts using common sense.
About the only positive to come out of this week is that at least we know the judiciary panel is independent of the match review committee, which is a small victory.
At least it appears to be on board with the rest of us that sometimes accidental contact is unavoidable.
After the debate of the last few weeks, almost everyone in the game is now of the view that there can be no turning back on the shoulder charge ban.
But it’s time for Greenberg and the match review committee to take responsibility for the part they played throughout this entire debacle. And the first response should be to say sorry to everyone who got caught up in the crossfire.
It was always the NRL’s job to give clarity on the shoulder charge, and it still can’t.

 

[LittleDavey]

So, Napa's hit on Boyd tonight...

Shoulder contacted the head, his arm was cocked but not 'tucked in'. Other arm wrapped around Boyd.

.....who's keen to take a punt on the charges he'll be hit with, if any?


My guess is he'll be let off because he's a Rooster. No case to answer. My guess is also if it were a Bronco they'd be looking at a month on the sidelines.

Thoughts?

 

[ivanhungryjak]

So, Napa's hit on Boyd tonight...

Shoulder contacted the head, his arm was cocked but not 'tucked in'. Other arm wrapped around Boyd.

.....who's keen to take a punt on the charges he'll be hit with, if any?


My guess is he'll be let off because he's a Rooster. No case to answer. My guess is also if it were a Bronco they'd be looking at a month on the sidelines.

Thoughts?

It will be interesting to see if the MRC change their interpretation after the judiciary decisions last week or not.
Probably best if we don't go through the farce of charging him, going to the judiciary and having someone walking free again.

 

[Dexter]

Napa has to go if they are fair dinkum. He clearly made a choice to use his shoulder when he could have made contact another way. He didn't brace but drove through making sure the impact was substantial.

Very nice of Fox to have Maloney on tellie critiquing why he thought Napa would get off. What a joke, and this practice of all the commentators having there say seems a bit off to me.

If the NRL want to run the judiciary similar to a legal system then surely they should restrict or ban comment on incidents that have put on report until after the hearing. There is so much variation from the media as too the outcome and it is clear the judiciary members are paying too much attention.

The hit on Tamou doesn't seem to have raised an eyebrow but his injury was caused by a shoulder charge, make no mistake, though because there was another defenders arm between the player shoulder charging and Tamou it hasn't been charged.

 

[broncos4life]

He'll get the Kane Evans special.

 

[mieko]

I thought there was nothing in it and a penalty sufficient purely for contact with the head. Boyd was dropping into the tackle and Nappa tried to get his arms around though Friend was there on the left side stopping it coming around. I thought more so that Jennings, I think, should get a week for a blatant stiff arm on Boyd in the first part of the game. Anyway, will be a lottery I guess and I'm sure being the roosters that nothing will come of either of them.

 

[Morkel]

I thought both were shoulder charges. Just because there was slight separation of the arm, both players deliberately lead with the point of there shoulder. The one on Hodges was the worst of the two. But because of the stupid "definition", neither will be charged. IMO they both looked deliberate too, what's the bet they've been practicing doing it with their arm limp but not tucked in?

 

[abashii]

I thought both were shoulder charges. Just because there was slight separation of the arm, both players deliberately lead with the point of there shoulder. The one on Hodges was the worst of the two. But because of the stupid "definition", neither will be charged. IMO they both looked deliberate too, what's the bet they've been practicing doing it with their arm limp but not tucked in?

They don't need to practice, being a dick and getting away with it is just innate behaviour for every Roosters player.

 

[LittleDavey]

Well, I called it. A shoulder to the head and not even cited. How is that even defensible? The language as far as I'm aware is "attacking the head". It's a textbook case.

The game is broken. I just don't know what to say anymore. Beyond pathetic.