NSW CAS Rugby 2021

[WTF?]

The much vaunted CAS pack were pushed off the ball numerous times until a few subs came on late in the second half. I think we lost the first 5 scrums on our feed and any ball we got was not clean. Too many pushed and glory passes for such a wet night, Isy had no space and the GPS defense was just too good.

I will admit I thought CAS would win, but after 5 minutes I thought that unlikely. Not sure the selections were right for the conditions, GPS seemed to be able to get it right not sure why we couldn't.

Hats off to GPS, they played very well, kept it in tight and went wide on occasions making plenty of meters.

Not much fun standing in 8 degrees and being rained on, F%#K it was cold....

 

[Number 7]

He was given a blue card. Rugby Aus stepped in and said he couldn’t play because you have to wait 19 days.

A Blue card does not mean you are concussed. It means (From RA's site): when "a player leaves the field due to signs and symptoms of concussion or suspected concussion, the referee will show the player a Blue Card".

The player is then compulsorily referred to a medical doctor within 72 hours. The doctor then assesses the player to confirm if there was a concussion OR provide clearance per section 3 of the form (all on RA's website).

So if a doctor deems a player to be ok, a player can return to play within the 19 day period.

Schools and club are being super cautious with this issue at present and there are examples of players being removed from games with no symptoms of concussion after a head knock but having to go to a doctor simply because they were removed from play because of how the Blue Card is defined above. Happened to my daughter.

 

[Snort]

A Blue card does not mean you are concussed. It means (From RA's site): when "a player leaves the field due to signs and symptoms of concussion or suspected concussion, the referee will show the player a Blue Card".

The player is then compulsorily referred to a medical doctor within 72 hours. The doctor then assesses the player to confirm if there was a concussion OR provide clearance per section 3 of the form (all on RA's website).

So if a doctor deems a player to be ok, a player can return to play within the 19 day period.

Schools and club are being super cautious with this issue at present and there are examples of players being removed from games with no symptoms of concussion after a head knock but having to go to a doctor simply because they were removed from play because of how the Blue Card is defined above. Happened to my daughter.

Yes, that's correct. A blue card does not mean an automatic 19 day break. Which means I'm still wondering why, having been cleared by a doctor, the Barker 8 wasn't able to play last night.

 

[rod skellet]

Yes, that's correct. A blue card does not mean an automatic 19 day break. Which means I'm still wondering why, having been cleared by a doctor, the Barker 8 wasn't able to play last night.

That is a question that RA really needs to answer and do so publicly.

 

[Snort]

Well, if RA did intervene it should explain why - otherwise there’s too much scope for (probably unwarranted) criticism of the school and doctor involved.

 

[rod skellet]

Well, if RA did intervene it should explain why - otherwise there’s too much scope for (probably unwarranted) criticism of the school and doctor involved.

Could not agree with you more.

 

[Chilli Rugby]

Well, if RA did intervene it should explain why - otherwise there’s too much scope for (probably unwarranted) criticism of the school and doctor involved.

RA saw footage of the incident.

 

[rod skellet]

RA saw footage of the incident.

Footage should not override a Dr’s report.2 of them in fact

 

[shanky]

Without wanting to comment on this specific case, I’d say we all agree that precautionary approach is warranted with young people and head knocks.

‘Second impact syndrome’ is a real thing in youth head injuries. If we end up being over-cautious then it’s probably a good thing

 

[Hasbeen]

Wise words. The reported incident leaves one feeling a bit uneasy. If there is any doubt don’t play the young feller.

 

[Snort]

If RA intervened because they felt it was in the best interests of the player, then I'm 100% behind that. Concussion must be taken seriously and player welfare is the first concern.

Yet it appears in this case that the intervention leaves the player, school and doctor open to criticism when they all appear to have followed RA's own guidelines to the letter. This is why I think that either the intervention should be explained or the guidelines should be altered. If RA wants a blue card to amount to an automatic 19 day rest it should say so.

I keep coming back to this because the wider issue is so important. If it isn't good enough to follow RA's guidelines, then maybe the guidelines need to be changed.

And, for clarity, I don't believe for a moment that the school or player did anything wrong: I don't think Barker thought it needed its captain on deck to beat St Aloysius.

 

[rod skellet]

If RA intervened because they felt it was in the best interests of the player, then I'm 100% behind that. Concussion must be taken seriously and player welfare is the first concern.

Yet it appears in this case that the intervention leaves the player, school and doctor open to criticism when they all appear to have followed RA's own guidelines to the letter. This is why I think that either the intervention should be explained or the guidelines should be altered. If RA wants a blue card to amount to an automatic 19 day rest it should say so.

I keep coming back to this because the wider issue is so important. If it isn't good enough to follow RA's guidelines, then maybe the guidelines need to be changed.

And, for clarity, I don't believe for a moment that the school or player did anything wrong: I don't think Barker thought it needed its captain on deck to beat St Aloysius.

Your comments are so to the point Snort. I could not agree with you more.

 

[Snort]

Hey, random idea. This is the 92nd season of CAS Rugby, which means a centenary is coming up not too far away. I'm toying with the idea of compiling a centenary history of the competition. Is this a dumb idea, or worth pursuing?

 

[rod skellet]

Hey, random idea. This is the 92nd season of CAS Rugby, which means a centenary is coming up not too far away. I'm toying with the idea of compiling a centenary history of the competition. Is this a dumb idea, or worth pursuing?

Very worthwhile Snort. Let me know if I can help

 

[formerflanker]

Hey, random idea. This is the 92nd season of CAS Rugby, which means a centenary is coming up not too far away. I'm toying with the idea of compiling a centenary history of the competition. Is this a dumb idea, or worth pursuing?

Great idea.
get in first with your concept to the CAS who could offer enormous support and also prevent copy-cats from trying to gazump you.

 

[William88]

Some uncertainty about blue cards.

Suspected concussions are treated the same as concussions. In this instance, the player was concussed and the inappropriate actions of the CAS Convenor and Barker have let a lot of people down, particularly the CAS rep rugby teams. Players who present with concussion symptoms must be provided with a different diagnosis to overturn a blue card after they present with concussion symptoms, in this instance, it is clear, there can be no other diagnosis based on the footage.

Barker and CAS got this terribly wrong.

Whatever the outcome, there will have to be some sort of review of CAS concussion protocols moving forward as this needs to be taken out of the hands of schools who have a vested interest.

 

[rugby101]

Some uncertainty about blue cards.

Suspected concussions are treated the same as concussions. In this instance, the player was concussed and the inappropriate actions of the CAS Convenor and Barker have let a lot of people down, particularly the CAS rep rugby teams. Players who present with concussion symptoms must be provided with a different diagnosis to overturn a blue card after they present with concussion symptoms, in this instance, it is clear, there can be no other diagnosis based on the footage.

Barker and CAS got this terribly wrong.

Whatever the outcome, there will have to be some sort of review of CAS concussion protocols moving forward as this needs to be taken out of the hands of schools who have a vested interest.

I get your point William88, but I think what Rod is saying is that the player was provided with a different diagnosis both on the day and on the following Monday and as such was cleared to play. It's not for us, as people watching the video to diagnose, no matter how bad it looks (even if some parents on this forum may be doctors), it is for the physician who assessed the player to decide.

I agree though that the way this was handled certainly did affect the way the CAS 1st xv team was able to prepare, and there definitely needs to be some review done. With that in mind, though I think that to truly believe that the school had anything other that the wellbeing of the player as their top priority, is ridiculous.

 

[Lovetap]

I know in the past there has been re-selection leading into CAS 1st XV game 2 be interested to hear possible changes to the original team from game 1. I have heard many say that version 1 had a tough night due to conditions and it was hard to get any go forward especially at set piece , but let’s not forget the conditions were also the same for the GPS outfit.

 

[bring back rucking]

http://www.cas.nsw.edu.au/cas-opens-rugby-teams-to-play-ccc-and-chs-friday-18th-june/

 

[Baxter]

http://www.cas.nsw.edu.au/cas-opens-rugby-teams-to-play-ccc-and-chs-friday-18th-june/

Where is Bruton?