Guerra facing 2 weeks

[BUDDY]

Guerra and Fergo are both contesting their charges. Good on the team for making that decision, I think. The Match Review Committee cannot be allowed to just sit there and lay charges knowing that they would seldom be challenged.

They lose nothing contesting either. Two matches with early plea or pleading not guilty and losing with Guerra and Fergo will miss no games either way.
Only risking the carry over points.

[Waerea-Beast!]

Don't think the club would fight either if they didn't think they had a good case. Even with no extra weeks at stake.

[Newcroosters]

Really don't know how Guerra's could be classed as a shoulder charge, looks like he uses arms to me. If the vision on Fox sports is what they are using, he will have no issue

[BUDDY]

Don't think the club would fight either if they didn't think they had a good case. Even with no extra weeks at stake.

After Mini got away with a round house karate kick I think they will try their luck with no extra weeks to lose.

It's like a chook raffle and depends what mood the panel is in most of the time.

[milanja]

Parker explained the rule pretty simply, he said if you can't fit a piece of paper between your arm when making a tackle, it is then classed as a shoulder charge. Says he has no issue with the rule and should be very easy for players to adapt.

[BUDDY]

Parker explained the rule pretty simply, he said if you can't fit a piece of paper between your arm when making a tackle, it is then classed as a shoulder charge. Says he has no issue with the rule and should be very easy for players to adapt.

That doesn't explain the grey area that is causing the confusion of "anyone found guilty of using a shoulder charge with force will be suspended for at least one match".
If they remove the "with force" clause then sweet as long as they are consistent. But with that clause in there nearly half the charges to date should have been let off.
They are basically charging anything resembling a shoulder charge and then the club has to try their luck at the judiciary.

[milanja]

That doesn't explain the grey area that is causing the confusion of "anyone found guilty of using a shoulder charge with force will be suspended for at least one match".
If they remove the "with force" clause then sweet as long as they are consistent. But with that clause in there nearly half the charges to date should have been let off.
They are basically charging anything resembling a shoulder charge and then the club has to try their luck at the judiciary.

My only question is, why can a ball carrier use his shoulder when hitting the line of defence? Is it not the same thing just switched around? Can a defender not get knocked out by the ball carriers shoulder, or do the say that the tackler should be tackling below the waist to ensure their safety? But then you can get a hip or knee to the head and also get knocked out. The game should change it's name from rugby league from next year, because every that name encompassed, has disappeared.