Burgess Hit On O'Donnell

[player 1]

I though the rules were that if you launched a shoulder charge and contact is made with the ball player's head it is deemed a foul and action is to be taken by the referees, plus or minus report and suspension.

A lot of damage was done. So the contact was from Burgess' massive head into O'Donnell's face.

So does a flying head butt make it ok, as long as the shoulder doesn't make impact?

I find this interesting. So if a roosters forward launches his head at Gallen tonight and knocks him out, it will be play on, right?

[Guest]

Playa, two things.

1. It was a legit hit that the video ref checked out.

2. I don't believe that Paul Gallen is playing tonight but if he was, and was headbutted (accidentally) by JWH, I wouldn't complain.

[stephenj]

it seemed ok for myles to use his head as a battering ram in origin, same rules arnt they?

[Andrew Walker]

I think you will see this happening more and more till something is done Why if you accidently open hand slap someone ion the face is it a penalty But if you accidently head butt someone its not

Again the rules of the game are under question

[stsae]

I think you will see this happening more and more till something is done Why if you accidently open hand slap someone ion the face is it a penalty But if you accidently head butt someone its not

Again the rules of the game are under question

I was totally against getting suspended for the accidential shoulder to the head shot.

Then I realized while it's still probably an accident, they kept occurring more and more often. Players are taught to go high 1st tackler in, to stop the offload. The margin of error is very tight.

So we start suspending these tackles, shoulder to the head.

Now we have the head to head clash rearing almost weekly. Is it just accidental??? Looking at the shoulder to head scenario one would have to question why does this keep happening on an increased scale.

Until we reward tackles below the waist as dominant or something similar we will have these "accidents" happen. Coaches will use ANY advantage, even Myles and Burgess big heads, in their favor.

With research and litigation in the US ramping up our rule makers have to act quickly before someone gets sued, IMO.

[stephenj]

probably rates with the shoulder charge which is banned in union as a n offencive weapon only, not a form of defence?

[player 1]

And I think of that Takarangi offload to Mortimer in which he raised his arm at the tackler in the 1st Manly game this year. Play on, but "let's look at the replay to see if there's a way off disallowing this roosters try that will level the scores with 20 mins to go". Try disallowed. People seem to forget, now that our team has lost heart and are playing like they believe they're losers, that our side was sodomized by the refs in a lot of games leading up to that first Manly game. Games we were right in, only to be cruelled by arse pirates with whistles and video replays.

But that head shot from Burgess wasn't even worth a penalty.

[Guest]

There was nothing wrong with it.

Don't be a sour carrnt.

[Hawkeye]

Villisanti in the 2002 GF head launch into Fittler's face, was deemed ok back then. Players generally get the benefit of the doubt that it is accidental in the head to head clash ....though Myles looked a little more deliberate in SOO3 !

[Guest]

Nothing wrong with the hit. Doesn't deserve a penalty. Was obviously accidental. The difference between accidental shoulder charges and accidental head clashes is that a head clash would hurt you too. So it's not like your doing it on purpose.

[chook 56]

Nothing wrong with the hit. Doesn't deserve a penalty. Was obviously accidental. The difference between accidental shoulder charges and accidental head clashes is that a head clash would hurt you too. So it's not like your doing it on purpose.

Not if your head is like Mr Potato Head Myles.....now that's a melon!

[player 1]

Nothing wrong with the hit. Doesn't deserve a penalty. Was obviously accidental. The difference between accidental shoulder charges and accidental head clashes is that a head clash would hurt you too. So it's not like your doing it on purpose.

Really? In that case head butts should be legalized. Villisanti didn't seem to come off as bad as Freddy in the 2002 GF.

"Nothing wrong with the hit". LOL.

[Guest]

Really? In that case head butts should be legalized. Villisanti didn't seem to come off as bad as Freddy in the 2002 GF.

"Nothing wrong with the hit". LOL.

Well if it looks intentional then they can penalize it. But if it's just unfortunate then it's fine. You gotta face the reality of it, they're not gonna ban everything or there will be 20 penalties for each team per game.

[Guest]

Nothing wrong with the hit. Doesn't deserve a penalty. Was obviously accidental. The difference between accidental shoulder charges and accidental head clashes is that a head clash would hurt you too. So it's not like your doing it on purpose.

Not if your head is like Mr Potato Head Myles.....now that's a melon!

You could build a nice deck around that bad boy!

[player 1]

Well if it looks intentional then they can penalize it. But if it's just unfortunate then it's fine. You gotta face the reality of it, they're not gonna ban everything or there will be 20 penalties for each team per game.

Well at the risk of being pedantic, honestly, it is easier for a defender launching a hit on a ball carrier to put their head into a posture less vulnerable for them if they intend to use their skull as a weapon (for example leading with the forehead, as in a traditional head-butt or "Liverpool Kiss"), than it is for a ball carrier, with eyes distracted by all the potential defending players, to protect his face from an attack by a defender making reckless high contact using his head as a weapon.

My point is if we are going to place responsibility for a "shoulder charge gone wrong", where dangerous contact is made with a ball carrier's head or face by the defender's shoulder, REGARDLESS of intent, then it is folly to ASSUME contact by the defender's head with the ball carrier's face or head is any less culpable. Firstly because the defender's skull is every bit as dangerous a weapon as a shoulder (ever been head-butted?); second, as explained above, a defender, if he wants to launch a flying head-butt, can adopt a posture (leading forehead or crown first) that, if contact is made with the ball carrier's face, will ensure the ball carrier will end up MUCH the worse for wear from the collision.

My personal view is simple - if you launch a "shoulder", or "head" charge, which is high, and it goes wrong and the ball carrier has his head taken off or face fractured, you are responsible for the damage. It is ridiculous to make exemptions for defenders using their heads as weapons.