Concussions and Protecting Our Players

[RebelYell]

Great article here with RUPA Pres Benn Robinson talking about concussion - great for the players to be led by a bloke who cares this much about wellbeing: http://www.foxsports.com.au/rugby/w...t/news-story/35951cce41143ae3df6c4558ee6f8f21

 

[waiopehu oldboy]

Shane Williams still feeling the effects of his multiple head knocks & former Canadian lock Jamie Cudmore taking legal action against his Club (Clermont) for sending him back out after being concussed:

http://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby/...lliams-head-injuries-keep-heat-on-world-rugby

This issue ain't going away & it's only a matter of time before a Club/ franchise/ national body gets nailed for the kind of goings-on Cudmore & others allege are routine.

 

[Highlander35]

I'd back George North to be joining Cudmore in suing Club/Country when he's done.

Been a large number of iffy incidents IMO for him.

Rory Lamont had some serious injury complaints too. Nothing but praise for Dr Robson which is good, but is a bit revealing about mid/late 2000s Scotland and Toulon. Some of the stuff going around is pathetic.

Need World Rugby to see stuff on the levels of: big fines, suspension from all international fixtures, closed stadiums for fixtures, competition points docked in leagues and tournaments etc.

Immediate and long term consequences.

 

[Quick Hands]

It borders on criminal negligence let alone negligence at the civil standard for anyone in authorityto allow potentially concussed players to remain on or return to the field.

I do think tht rugby is doing this better than similar contqact sports at the moment, but there are players being allowed to stay on the field despite the fairly obvious possibility of concussion.

 

[Strewthcobber]

OFFICIALS from World Rugby are discussing the results of a wideranging investigation into head injuries with one probable outcome being an experimental change in the laws surrounding the tackle.
Rugby has been at the forefront of recent research into head injuries and concussion and a detailed study of more than 600 incidents revealed that 72 per cent of the injuries were sustained in a tackle situation.
While that figure might not be hugely surprising, what did raise eyebrows was the discovery that 76 per cent of the injuries were to the player making the tackle, not the ball carrier.
“We looked at about 15 variables in the tackle, what causes the injuries, and one interesting one we found was that if people are bent at the waist, the ball carrier, you get fewer head injuries,” Martin Rafferty, World Rugby’s chief medical officer, told reporters.
“So we asked the experts ‘how can we get players to bend at the waist in the game?’ and they’ve come up with some recommendations.”

http://www.foxsports.com.au/rugby/w...s/news-story/dfefbe4844d79c402127b6cddf038939

 

[Jaghond]

Read the article earlier today.

I am not sufficiently knowledgeable to comment on the specifics from a medical perspective - however, wouldn't a logical first step be for referees ( and A/R's !) to start policing the "tackle / contact below the arm pits" & the "head is totally out of bounds" directives ??

Too many (lazy) tacklers get away with blue murder in this regard (IMHO).

Very simple - make contact with the head - and your off.

There will of course be the nay-sayers who plead "it was an accident Sir, dreadfully sorry" !

Draw an immovable line in the and, and people will learn to tackle / make contact lower very quickly..........

Just a thought...

 

[Strewthcobber]

I am not sufficiently knowledgeable to comment on the specifics from a medical perspective - however, wouldn't a logical first step be for referees ( and A/R's !) to start policing the "tackle / contact below the arm pits" & the "head is totally out of bounds" directives ??

Think the interesting thing to come out of the study is that in the majority of cases it's not foul play, or head high tackles that are causing concussions - it's the tackler getting their head in the wrong spot.

So protecting the ball career is important, and the foul play laws can be used to help there, but there's still a massive issue that the laws of the game won't help with.

And how you address those problems is going to be a real challenge while still maintaining the identity of our game

 

[Strewthcobber]

Just doing the maths -

• 17% of concussions happened to ball carrier in the tackle
• 54% of concussions happened to tackler during a tackle
• 28% of concussions happened elsewhere

 

[Braveheart81]

Surely those stats suggest that the laws of the game are doing a pretty good job of protecting the players.

If the percentage of concussions to the ball carrier were substantially higher then there would be a greater issue to address.

 

[Strewthcobber]

Surely those stats suggest that the laws of the game are doing a pretty good job of protecting the players.

If the percentage of concussions to the ball carrier were substantially higher then there would be a greater issue to address.

Duty of care extends to the tackler too though doesn't it?

If players are getting concusessed while tackling (to an extent beyond some limit?), then the laws may have to change to address that.

I have no idea what those changes may be, but Tuilagi's initial suspension in the world cup might give a clue as to what World Rugby might be thinking

 

[Braveheart81]

Duty of care extends to the tackler too though doesn't it?

If players are getting concussed while tackling (to an extent beyond some limit?), then the laws may have to change to address that.

I have no idea what those changes may be, but Tuilagi's initial suspension in the world cup might give a clue as to what World Rugby might be thinking

Can you get rid of concussions from a contact sport though?

You can certainly crack down on players lifting their knees into contact but that is a rare occurrence as well.

Surely most concussions are due to someone getting their head in the wrong spot and collecting the hip or another hard part of the body.

 

[Gnostic]

Can you get rid of concussions from a contact sport though?



You can certainly crack down on players lifting their knees into contact but that is a rare occurrence as well.



Surely most concussions are due to someone getting their head in the wrong spot and collecting the hip or another hard part of the body.

A very good point and while we live in an age where nobody wants to take responsibility for their own actions I feel people have to be better informed about the risks of concussive incidents. I read an article quite some time ago postulating that successive incidents predispose the sufferer to additional injuries of the same like by lowering their threshold. Whilst I haven't seen other studies to confirm this there is plenty of anecdotal evidence to support the theory and certainly enough to warrant further extensive study.

Surely there comes a point where after multiple concussions a player has to be subjected to some more in-depth testing, especially if there remain these questions about liability and "duty of care".

 

[Braveheart81]

I feel people have to be better informed about the risks of concussive incidents.

I think this is something that rugby and contact sport in general have made great strives with in recent years.

There is clearly a big turnaround in player attitudes towards concussions and players generally realise that treating them seriously and leaving a game and/or missing the next game is important particularly in terms of their long term career.

Normalising concussion as not just being something you shake off and get on with the game has been a big step in improving the treatment of it.

 

[Gnostic]

I think this is something that rugby and contact sport in general have made great strives with in recent years.



There is clearly a big turnaround in player attitudes towards concussions and players generally realise that treating them seriously and leaving a game and/or missing the next game is important particularly in terms of their long term career.



Normalising concussion as not just being something you shake off and get on with the game has been a big step in improving the treatment of it.

Absolutely true. I wasn't clear enough though, I meant informed about risks associated with successive concussive incidents. That is also the point I was making in my last paragraph. I look at a player like To'omua, great player and defender who has suffered a couple of significant incidents purely through poor technique. Perhaps highlighting his technique issues would prevent further concussive incidents for him or at least mitigate his risks somewhat. I also firmly believe if a player has suffered a number (what I have no idea) of incidents they should be referred for further examination beyond the standard Protocols.

 

[waiopehu oldboy]

"World Rugby has announced details of an enhanced and modernised Regulation 17 framework following an extensive review of the sport's disciplinary processes."

http://www.worldrugby.org/news/206986

Key point in terms of this thread is that deliberate or reckless contact with the head now carries a minimum one month suspension. Takes effect 3/01/17.

EDIT: on reading the sanction table, the minimum appears to be six weeks.

 

[waiopehu oldboy]

More on WR (World Rugby)'s "zero tolerance" policy re. making contact with the head:

http://www.worldrugby.org/news/213339

 

[Antony]

A penalty for making accidental contact, including when the attacking player slips, is insane. I understand that it's intended to remove any grey area, but for god's sake it's a contact game.

 

[Twoilms]

Playing devil's avocado for a second:

Any rule/law changes should be aimed at children/non-professional players. Professionals should be well educated as to the risks of their chosen profession. Full disclosure as to the long term affects of a career spent getting repeated concussions is all that is required.

A gripe i have with a lot of western regulation is that it seeks to remove all risk by limiting what actions can be taken. This removes any responsibility or agency from the actual people involved. It's no longer the players responsibility to decide whether they want to risk their wellbeing in a dangerous sport, its the regulatory body's job to remove the risk by changing the game. We aren't robots.

We have boxing, MMA, extreme sports etc. People accept that they play those sports at great personal risk, so why is Rugby different. Education is needed not more laws.

 

[Braveheart81]

A gripe i have with a lot of western regulation is that it seeks to remove all risk by limiting what actions can be taken. This removes any responsibility or agency from the actual people involved. It's no longer the players responsibility to decide whether they want to risk their wellbeing in a dangerous sport, its the regulatory body's job to remove the risk by changing the game. We aren't robots.

It's because they are professionals and hence employees that regulation and care is required.

It's no longer alright to say that it's a dangerous job so they have to bear that risk on their own. This is the reason we have workplace health and safety laws.

 

[Twoilms]

It's because they are professionals and hence employees that regulation and care is required.

It's no longer alright to say that it's a dangerous job so they have to bear that risk on their own. This is the reason we have workplace health and safety laws.

There has to be a limit, though. Absolute liability as in the case of accidental contact with the head is too far.