The reason the NRL and SL are moving to penalise shoulder charges to the head is to avoid future legal action against them. There is a massive amount of medical evidence that hits to the head cause long-term medical problems. If the sport chooses to ignore that, and allow hits to the head to go unpenalised, then its laying itself open to being sued by players in the future. Its all very well a 20-year old being gung ho about head shots, but in 20 years when they start to suffer from Parkinson's or similar, they'll be the first to sue the sport.

My own view is that the shoulder charge is dangerous - often to both players (look at Burgess' record of shoulder injuries) - and a high-risk, low reward tactic which is now even riskier, and I've never understood why head contact from a shoulder charge was treated differently to a swinging arm. It won't need to be banned - coaches will stop their players doing it for that reason.

trouble is you get muppets, eager to get an impressive hit in, too small to shoulder properly and hence jump into the tackle, which can be very dangerous.

Rangi Chase is a prime example, his technique is dire.

Whilst we are talking dangerous techniques - what does Morley have to do to get penalised for a high tackle?, he almost sent that poor lad's head into row z in trying to stop that breakaway try.

Get sent off after 15 seconds maybe?

This post sums it up for me. I don't see a "shoulder charge" that goes anywhere other than the torso as fair. As players get bigger, fast, and stronger, some aspects need to be looked at, or someone is going to get seriously hurt. To be honest, i see it as a bit of a cop out as a tackle, can you call it a tackle?, as it requires no tackling technique.

a bad high shot is a bad high shot and each incident should be judged on its own merit. The point I was originally tryingto make wasnt just about shoulder charges its about all incidents of ' foul play'. We see some bad high shots that deserve red cards, then we have incidents like the TP hit at the weekend that was a great legal hit, yet he was sent off. Incidents like the fight against Saints, three sent off ????? MM sent off for a single punch on Elima after taking an elbow, Sam Moa's hit earlier in the season. I could trawl back through hours of footage and highlight other examples but these are the ones that spring to mind for me. If there is an incident of a shot to the head and its a bad one ala Rangi Chase then without doubt its a red card but at the moment we are in danger of having eradicating things from the game that draws the fans in. Big hits and a bit of biff. This is rugby league, not tiddly winks. There is more danger to joints from twisting players on their backs in three man tackles than taking a big hit. As posted earlier, games should be officiated like state of origin. There is a reason why fans all over the world tune in to it.

Whilst accepting your points re SOO, i wonder just how long careers would be if players performed at that level every week, over a season.

Super League isnt played anyway near the intensity of SOO or even the NRL so players wouldnt be putting their bodies through the rigors of SOO esque matches week in week out. I just think it should be officiated in the same way as origin.

Like you i feel high shots should be punished more harshly than "handbags".

I am perfectly happy with the idea that a punch or any deliberate attack to the head merits a red card. I don't consider this to be "over sanitation" (sic) and I think that the governing body is right to be taking steps to eliminate fighting from the sport while also legislating to reduce the risk of serious injury to players. Quite frankly, I don't watch the sport in the hope of seeing fights or injuries. I watch it to enjoy exciting, fast and free-flowing rugby. "Big hits" and aggressive defence are an important part of the game (and a joy to behold) and always will be. Clamping down on potentially dangerous tackling techniques is not over sanitisation but a necessary attempt to ensure that rugby league remains an exciting spectator sport.

It all comes down to protection of our players. Over recent years, studies have shown [mainly in America due to the link between NFL, Concussions & Brain Damage that concussions can cause severe brain damage, alzheimers and other neurological conditions later in life. in this instance i'm sure TP meant no malice toward the Catalans player, but, if we want to protect our players for vicious shots to the head [weather intentional or not then we need to punish those responsible for said shots.

It's all well and good saying it's 'over sanitising' the game, but, maybe we as a game need that, to make sure we maintain the safety and well being of our players. As i'm sure i'm not alone in thinking that I wouldn't want to know that a RL has suffered in later life with mental issues due to injuries sustained on the field.

We need to protect our players - their wellbeing is more important than whether we find a punch up or big hit where someone gets knocked out 'entertaining'

It all comes down to protection of our players. Over recent years, studies have shown [mainly in America due to the link between NFL, Concussions & Brain Damage that concussions can cause severe brain damage, alzheimers and other neurological conditions later in life. in this instance i'm sure TP meant no malice toward the Catalans player, but, if we want to protect our players for vicious shots to the head [weather intentional or not then we need to punish those responsible for said shots.

It's all well and good saying it's 'over sanitising' the game, but, maybe we as a game need that, to make sure we maintain the safety and well being of our players. As i'm sure i'm not alone in thinking that I wouldn't want to know that a RL has suffered in later life with mental issues due to injuries sustained on the field.

We need to protect our players - their wellbeing is more important than whether we find a punch up or big hit where someone gets knocked out 'entertaining'

Head shots deliberate or otherwise should be rightly punished. What I dont like to see is the punishment of players for carrying out legal big hits or a bit of handbags in the heat of battle. The studies surrounding NFL and concussion etc are based around the helmet being used as a weapon hence the ban on tackling head first with the helmet which was common place. Rugby League players know the risks when they choose to play the sport, just like a soldire joins the forces knowing there is a risk of being shot or blown up, A fireman being burt, a cop being shot or stabbed etc etc. The evidence of boxers who get punched a few hundres times per fight suffering long term problems is the exception rather than the rule so i doubt there is evidence to suggest an bit of handbags on a rugby field would cause this particulalry as boxers are hit with large glove which has a more concussive effect than a bare fisted punch. The punishment should fit the crime. For me the illegal hits if bad enough should red carded but incidents like TP should be applauded as a great defensive hit rather than punished because as fans the hits get you up off your seat as much as what the tries do. One of my fondest memories of a good atmosphere was GB v Aus in the second test ( i forget the year) GB were getting stuffed and Bobby Goulding lost his rag and a set to, Throwinh punches for fun. The whole stadium was on its feet. Penalty was given and the game continued. This is Rugby League, we love love every aspect. Lets not water the game down to satisfy the do-gooders on doctors who have never played the game. Lets et on with it and see teh spectacle we all love to watch, and that includes a bit of the rough stuff as well as the breath taking rugby league

I think what should be taken into account is the damage to victim of the infringement, let the punishment fit the crime, if his head is a yard away from his neck when he hits the ground, then yes, the perpetrator should walk, if he gains his feet with just a shake of the head and few words of chastisement, then a penalty is awarded, then on with joust. To my mind the problem on Friday, as it has been on a few other occasions this season (usually involving Wigan) was Popeye the Thaler-man, and others of his ilk, but heaven forfend we should ever say anything about their performances, and as the Dewsbury dewdrop Stevo says so often “it’s as simple as that!”

Compulsory skull caps, job done, carry on.

have you every tried playing with one if your not used to them? and that still wont stop you from getting knocked out.

never used one, in fact when i played all i did was tape my fingers to stop them getting broke, and tape round the head for my ears.

I imagine they serve some purpose regarding injury though.

they are horrible if your not used to it, i had to play with one for a couple of weeks as i got concussion 2 weeks on the trot. they make you feel like you have no space to move and very clusterphobic.

yeah they do take some sting out of a bang to the side or the back of the head but nothing for a shoulder to the face.

In practice this would be quite nonsensical and intrinsically unfair. It would mean that two people committing the same offence could feasibly be awarded quite different punishments. In order to achieve an objective and workable code of discipline within the game, we have to have the act as the focus rather than the consequence. Bentham has no place in sport, sadly.

isn't it the case in law that this would be described as "consequential" punishment, whereas we operate on the principle of "retributive" punishment where the intent is the primary rationale?

If a player mistimes the tackle such that Sam or that ferret Burrow can get out of the way too fast for the attacker to react, then the resulting high shot may not be deliberate, but could easily floor the attackee. The consequence is far greater than the intent.

Whereas if the midget Burrow somehow manages to make a head-shot on Crabtree (for eg) then I'd say the situation would be the reverse.

Think they're compulsory at junior level. Or at least they are at some clubs.

they was talking about doing it but never did, this was after jonny lomax almost died from a head colision.

8inarow off of here, his son has started playing at Shevvy and they make them wear them.

Yeah, why not play gridiron and have done with it. Get real, sometimes we do have a summer, and it gets a tad warm under that head gear.





Rock 'n' Roll.

My lad had to wear one when he was at Shevy too.