News AIS Concussion Rule

[hayes]

Wtf?
My son got concussion last year
Mandatory 10 days if no symptoms
Thats 1 game
Any longer teams wont declare it i reckon

It rule they made last year in soccer BDAFA otherwise they wouldn't be covered for insurance.

 

[Brendan7]

I'm all for implementing it especially when we have seen what can happen with concussions.

Recommendation as it stands isn't mandatory.

You don’t implement it say bye bye to any funding so whilst it’s not “mandatory” they will make it like it is. It’s time everyone realises just how bad things are with players post career. A lot have dementia for starters do we really want to have more like that? The game needs to be seen to be learning from their past if not the courts when cases happen will cripple the sport.

 

[TwinTurbo]

You don’t implement it say bye bye to any funding so whilst it’s not “mandatory” they will make it like it is. It’s time everyone realises just how bad things are with players post career. A lot have dementia for starters do we really want to have more like that? The game needs to be seen to be learning from their past if not the courts when cases happen will cripple the sport.

No player in the last 20 years can say that they weren't warned about possible repercussions of repeated head knocks. The education of players started in the late 90's and escalated in the mid 2000's. They are all fully aware of the risks and contracts for over 15 years have had clauses that they sign recognising those risks. Of course the NRL can't abdicate their responsibility under common law, but there won't be massive pay outs to players because they played knowing the risks. You want to play NRL, then you accept that it will have consequences sooner or later.

To repeat, this is not the same as the NFL or NHL, firstly we aren't litigation crazy Merica and more importantly we didn't deny that there was an issue like they did, lied to the players and told them everything was OK.



Always a Bulldog

 

[Brendan7]

No player in the last 20 years can say that they weren't warned about possible repercussions of repeated head knocks. The education of players started in the late 90's and escalated in the mid 2000's. They are all fully aware of the risks and contracts for over 15 years have had clauses that they sign recognising those risks. Of course the NRL can't abdicate their responsibility under common law, but there won't be massive pay outs to players because they played knowing the risks. You want to play NRL, then you accept that it will have consequences sooner or later.

To repeat, this is not the same as the NFL or NHL, firstly we aren't litigation crazy Merica and more importantly we didn't deny that there was an issue like they did, lied to the players and told them everything was OK.

Always a Bulldog

Players were aware in 1985 about these risks? You are absolutely kidding that they knew back then all the research was in the last 10 years.

If you aren’t showing that your game is improving to put in measures you are one legal case before being crippled. The game won’t do it. We don’t need more players with dementia I mean James Graham will have it do we want more players like that?

Yes we aren’t the US doesn’t mean measures can’t be in place so parents feel the game is as safe as possible. Penalties on EVERY high tackle would be a start not this “oh he ducked, oh it wasn’t that high”..it’s rubbish if it’s high it’s high lower your target

 

[B-Train]

Players were aware in 1985 about these risks? You are absolutely kidding that they knew back then all the research was in the last 10 years.

If you aren’t showing that your game is improving to put in measures you are one legal case before being crippled. The game won’t do it. We don’t need more players with dementia I mean James Graham will have it do we want more players like that?

Yes we aren’t the US doesn’t mean measures can’t be in place so parents feel the game is as safe as possible. Penalties on EVERY high tackle would be a start not this “oh he ducked, oh it wasn’t that high”..it’s rubbish if it’s high it’s high lower your target

Either way, just like with boxing, players sign contracts and waivers that acknowledge the chance of head injuries and other severe injuries. It's part of the game unfortunately. They've done as much as possible to show extra caution when there are head injuries, but it will never stop them from happening..

Making sure that the RLPA and NRL are getting the best treatment for the players post career that are really struggling with symptoms, memory loss and mental health issues is really important. That's something they do already but can do a lot better with.

 

[TwinTurbo]

Players were aware in 1985 about these risks? You are absolutely kidding that they knew back then all the research was in the last 10 years.

Your maths needs work, it's 2024 and I said 20 years which makes it mid 2000's, that's 20 years AFTER the 1980's.

If you aren’t showing that your game is improving to put in measures you are one legal case before being crippled. The game won’t do it. We don’t need more players with dementia I mean James Graham will have it do we want more players like that?

Have you spoken to Jammer about that? He admits he knew the risks, accepted them and played on regardless, his way. What we learn more about each day is how to detect the concussion, measure it and what actions to take to minimise the effect. The fact is NRL is a contact sport and there is no eliminate, minimise the effects is that best achievable.

The detection of concussion still relies on the players being honest when answering the protocol questions. Many of them don't want to miss a game, let their teammates and club down, lose their contract, forgo the money that supports their family etc.

Yes we aren’t the US doesn’t mean measures can’t be in place so parents feel the game is as safe as possible. Penalties on EVERY high tackle would be a start not this “oh he ducked, oh it wasn’t that high”..it’s rubbish if it’s high it’s high lower your target

FMD most HIA's happen to the defender, not the attacker, high or low tackling is next to irrelevant.


Always a Bulldog

 

[Cook]

Your maths needs work, it's 2024 and I said 20 years which makes it mid 2000's, that's 20 years AFTER the 1980's.

Have you spoken to Jammer about that? He admits he knew the risks, accepted them and played on regardless, his way. What we learn more about each day is how to detect the concussion, measure it and what actions to take to minimise the effect. The fact is NRL is a contact sport and there is no eliminate, minimise the effects is that best achievable.

The detection of concussion still relies on the players being honest when answering the protocol questions. Many of them don't want to miss a game, let their teammates and club down, lose their contract, forgo the money that supports their family etc.


FMD most HIA's happen to the defender, not the attacker, high or low tackling is next to irrelevant.


Always a Bulldog

He’s argument didn’t start off to well there did it. The game does enough on this. Sick of hearing about it tbf.

 

[Gubanaculum]

ok so if it does happen the player who causes it gets 21 + or 3 games automatically???

 

[Motorhead]

Seeing thats its a recommendation thats all the NRL will do with it, would cause issues with rep and finals footy - look they have bent the rules to suit players recently.

100%
The NRL makes/alters rules to suit its own discretion. They will make a mockery of this as well without a doubt.
Anybody remember the "we will let Taylen May serve his suspension the following season, we don't want to rob the fans of seeing the stars of our game" spiel trotted out from NRL HQ?
This will be no different. Dodgy competition will never change it's ways.

 

[John Matrix]

100%
The NRL makes/alters rules to suit its own discretion. They will make a mockery of this as well without a doubt.
Anybody remember the "we will let Taylen May serve his suspension the following season, we don't want to rob the fans of seeing the stars of our game" spiel trotted out from NRL HQ?
This will be no different. Dodgy competition will never change it's ways.

Forgot about that one, prime example of one rule for one not applicable to someone else, would they do it for us… no chance!

They can’t even be consistent with the current HIA and concussion rules imagine 21 days.

 

[Motorhead]

Forgot about that one, prime example of one rule for one not applicable to someone else, would they do it for us… no chance!

They can’t even be consistent with the current HIA and concussion rules imagine 21 days.

It will be a massive train wreck.
Chosen few clubs will get away with the old 10 day stand-down, the shit kicker clubs will have every player ruled medically brain-dead and serve a minimum of 21 days.
Under the 21 day rule Cameron Murray will be lucky to play 4 games a season.

 

[John Matrix]

Under the 21 day rule Cameron Murray will be lucky to play 4 games a season.

Ponga will play less

 

[Brendan7]

Either way, just like with boxing, players sign contracts and waivers that acknowledge the chance of head injuries and other severe injuries. It's part of the game unfortunately. They've done as much as possible to show extra caution when there are head injuries, but it will never stop them from happening..

Making sure that the RLPA and NRL are getting the best treatment for the players post career that are really struggling with symptoms, memory loss and mental health issues is really important. That's something they do already but can do a lot better with.

The game isn’t doing barely enough sorry but it’s not. The fans aren’t helping either most are stuck in the 1980’s and 1990’s where every second tackle was high. It’s not good enough nowadays. Every tackle that’s even remotely high is a penalty not this “oh it hit the ball first”. That’s rubbish it’s high. That comes down to technique and players need to be better at lowering their targets.

If we want to protect players post career how about we as the game and fans don’t chuck tantys when players are penalised for tackles that are high. I actually think the game for what is is does great work post career for lots of players, it’s the high tackles during their career that’s the issue

 

[TwinTurbo]

The game isn’t doing barely enough sorry but it’s not. The fans aren’t helping either most are stuck in the 1980’s and 1990’s where every second tackle was high. It’s not good enough nowadays. Every tackle that’s even remotely high is a penalty not this “oh it hit the ball first”. That’s rubbish it’s high. That comes down to technique and players need to be better at lowering their targets.

If we want to protect players post career how about we as the game and fans don’t chuck tantys when players are penalised for tackles that are high. I actually think the game for what is is does great work post career for lots of players, it’s the high tackles during their career that’s the issue

You do realise that the majority of HIA's occur to the defensive player, not the player with the ball. Not tackling "high" (whatever the fark "high" actually means) will not diminish the HIA's very much at all. In fact there is some discussion that forcing tacklers in "low" tackles may well increase their risk of HIA. Rugby League is a contact sport, the players that compete in it know that, acknowledge that they know that and sign contracts to confirm that.


Always a Bulldog

 

[Alan79]

I wouldn't mind if returning from a concussion required a rigorous medical clearance to be honest. As mentioned, players don't want to sit out and will return ASAP if left to their own choice. We're still seeing relatively young players copping concussions now with fairy taps because it's so frequently happened to them in the past.

Perhaps to begin each season every player gets a brain scan before they've had concussion and have to measure up against it as a return to play protocol. I'm not a doctor and maybe that wouldn't work. But it's just an idea.

The temptation to earn even minimum wage for a top 30 player would look good for most 18yo's. Especially the less academically gifted as would typically wind up in the NRL. So the possibility of immediately earning money they might not earn elsewhere, the allure of fame and the love of the sport outweighs the risk for the ones who stick around. I guess it's barely a consideration if they think they can make it.

But should the sport treat them as disposable? I don't think so. Every avenue should be explored for minimising the long term impacts. And as much as I and many others hate seeing key players out for even a week. I still don't want to see players with head trauma early into retirement for the sake of my entertainment. So I'll get behind whatever measures are in place.

 

[TwinTurbo]

I wouldn't mind if returning from a concussion required a rigorous medical clearance to be honest. As mentioned, players don't want to sit out and will return ASAP if left to their own choice. We're still seeing relatively young players copping concussions now with fairy taps because it's so frequently happened to them in the past.

Perhaps to begin each season every player gets a brain scan before they've had concussion and have to measure up against it as a return to play protocol. I'm not a doctor and maybe that wouldn't work. But it's just an idea.

The temptation to earn even minimum wage for a top 30 player would look good for most 18yo's. Especially the less academically gifted as would typically wind up in the NRL. So the possibility of immediately earning money they might not earn elsewhere, the allure of fame and the love of the sport outweighs the risk for the ones who stick around. I guess it's barely a consideration if they think they can make it.

But should the sport treat them as disposable? I don't think so. Every avenue should be explored for minimising the long term impacts. And as much as I and many others hate seeing key players out for even a week. I still don't want to see players with head trauma early into retirement for the sake of my entertainment. So I'll get behind whatever measures are in place.

The is no definitive physical diagnostic test for concussion, not X-ray, not MRI scan, a CT scan will show up a fractured skull or a serious brain injury, but it won't detect a concussion.

Co-ordination, balance, vision, memory, clarity, etc often return long before full recovery from concussion. In reverse, some people don't show concussion symptoms for days afterwards. Almost all concussion tests rely on the patient's honesty, do you have a headache, trouble sleeping, trouble not sleeping, feel sluggish, do loud noises affect you, bright lights, blurry vision, nausea, vomiting, etc. Players want to play, they live to play, playing is all they know, they play for themselves, for their team mates, for their club, often for their family financially, so they lie, "no symptoms Doc, I'm perfectly fine to play".

That's why the NRL (and others) have compulsory stand down periods, doctors aren't of much use in determining when a player is OK to play.


Always a Bulldog

 

[D0GMATIC]

I heard on the radio this morning that the AIS is recommending a 21 day stand down period for players suffering from a concussion in contact sports. How likely is it that the NRL follows suit? This is something to watch considering how light we are in the forwards and how prone the NRL is to make rash mid season rules and changes. I have no idea what would we do if Knight and King go down with concussion.

It could impact us massively, we can't afford a string of forwards out for 21 days . . .11 days will be hard enough

 

[wendog33]

Teams who have a bad run with concussions will possibly need a squad of 50! A lot of it occurs when their head hits the ground?