Sonny Bill must be scratching his head thinking WTF I'm glad I only signed the 1 year deal.

I think that the shoulder charge will continue, I think the way RL is played it will be impossible to legislate so it can be policed consistently without it making a huge impact on the way the game is played.

I think that the shoulder charge will continue, I think the way RL is played it will be impossible to legislate so it can be policed consistently without it making a huge impact on the way the game is played.

Sledgehammer to crack a nut.



Just remove the 'on report' cop-out and force officials to consistently penalise 'big hits' that end up making contact with the head, either through recklesness, intent or poor execution, and let them get on with it; coaches and players would soon get the message and use their own prudence to judge when a shot like this is appropriate or not - and they'd get better at it so as to avoid being penalised.



It seems a huge knee-jerk reaction to something that actually only happens in a tiny percentage of the total tackles made and has caused injury in only a tiny percentage of that tiny percentage.

Does this mean that you can no longer run the ball in leading with your shoulder.



I can think of two high profile incidents when Ruben Wiki smacked Soliola and Mark O'meley flattened Bryce Gibbs.



These are exact same types of contact they have just outlawed, the only difference is if you are carrying the ball under your arm when you commit it.



Should the attacking player have a duty of care over the defender who is trying to flatten them?



What an absolute pump of a decision.

Softcock criminals.

A truly ridiculous decision. If you asked the people in the stands what they wanted to see, the big hit would be very high up that list.



It's also very, very unpopular with the NRL players, I've seen a few questioning their place in the sport if it is brought in.



A better compromise would have been to clarify that a shoulder to the head is not acceptable and would mean a 12 game ban, or whatever. Banning it altogether is just very silly.

I play both League and Union for local teams. I favour league greatly and i have got peaple from union to league. The main thing that draws them is the shoulder charge (shot).

Banning shoulder chargers will not change anything long term injury wise. Since brain damage is more likely to occur from high shots than shoulder chargers. So lets follow on with the ARLC’s logic. Ban tackling! A sure-fire way to avoid injury there.



Its always sad when stupidity win over sense and reason, even sadder when its something I hold so dear.



P.s. How boring is the NRL going to be next year, lets face it, its more defence than attack and now they have taken the most interesting point of defence out of it.

This is LEAGUE not UNION.



Banning shoulder charging, why not make it tag rugby too?





A big shoulder charge is one of the best things to see in the game, get rid of that and you get rid of one of the best things in the sport.

Just looking at a certain social networking site and it seems that asking the players to take a pay cut would be the only way the authorities could become more unpopular. Every player on there can't believe the decision.



I've not seen a single player say banning the shoulder charge is good for the game. Every single one is in complete disbelief and disgust and absolutely blasting the decision. So the the authorities have banned the shoulder charge, to protect the players, yet not a single player wants the should charge to be banned. Brilliant.



It's a bit like F1 having a 30mph speed limit for the safety of the drivers. I really hope the RFL grow some nuts and listen to the PLAYERS and FANS and keep the shoulder charge.

Some players base their game on shoulder charges e.g chris sandow