Wait wait wait. 0.05% of 142k tackles, is like 71 tackles. 5% led to injures, that's like 3.5 injuries for the year. I mean I'm pretty sure those stats are wrong because i think there was more than 2-3 should've charges per round, but still. Going by those stats, they're banning a big draw card for the game to save 3.5 injuries a year? GMAFB.
lol @ all the players blowing up on twitter & all the fans on the internet. If the IC go through with this they've already made themselves pretty unpopular.
This. Banning shoulder charges because a small portion of them (which are already illegal), are high and might cause damage is completely absurd.
There's going to be some ridiculously stupid & mind boggling penalties this year. I can already see it happening.. Can you image the first hit up in origin? Penalty!
I don't even know what constitutes a shoulder charge... if a player is running through a gap and the defender clips him with his shoulder, is that a penalty? If a forward is making a hitup and changes his course at the last second and the defender instinctively pushes his shoulder into the tackle first, is that a penalty?
If it is the same as Union rules the refs have to believe that you were making an effort to get your hand/arms there as well.
In the NFL if you get a concussion injury more then a certain amount of times in your career you are no longer allowed to play, because they recognise the long term health risks that are associated with concussion injuries, which are definitely a higher risk factor with shoulder charge tackles then with wrapping tackles. Not all hits to the head are equal tbh.
Because they're worried about head injuries or because they're worried about getting sued due to their weak legal system? Either way I agree with the sentiments, I think league has been left behind in this regard. This year club doctors agreed to withdraw players from the game if they suffered concussion but it barely even lasted a round after a few of them inevitably broke the agreement. In the NFL there's an independent doctor who asses players for concussion, these are the types of measures I think that need to be brought in, not the banning of a tackling technique when done correctly is perfectly fine.
afaic only two kinds of people support something like this: 1. Wowsers who don't actually like footy and are only concerned about Little Johnny not getting hurt. 2. Old bastards who grew up watching a less physical style of game. So yeah.
Bull twat! People who recognise that despite what be most entertaining for them the welfare of other people should be utmost in our minds. I resent that idea that a genuine concern for the quality and longevity of life for people other then myself makes me a wowzer or diminishes my love of the sport.
The players know what the risks are. Other injuries are a lot more likely to happen. Maybe just ban tackling and running together.
People are acting far too precious over this. Dorn showed the stat, shoulder charges made up .05% of all tackles over the course of the season. It's hardly a big part of the game. All players need to do is make the effort to have their arm wrap around a bloke while launching themselves and you have the same effect.
Concussion injuries are far far more serious in terms of long term health effects and quality of life issues then muscle tearing, or even severe joint damage. The only other major injuries that have the same sort of long term quality of life effects are all neck or back related which we have already changed the nature of the game to avoid, see lifting tackles and contested scrums.
Concussions happen in other ways too. Dallas Johnson knocked himself out by making a tackle in Origin one time. Some players were knocked out by the ball to the head. Everyone knows the risks, but like 99 said, the statistics show that it's very unlikely to happen.
Yeh tackling low is the most likely way you're going to get a concussion.. ban that too? Nate Myles knocks himself out at least once a match, luckily he's got the head for it