The League Media

[Happy]

PS sorry about the formatting on my post above. I can't seem to edit it to fix it.

 

[Wilson]

This is from the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare, which is a Government agency:



This is from the Australian Health and Welfare Agency, a Government department:
Around half of the injury hospitalisations that occurred during sporting and leisure activities occurred while playing team ball sports (9,820 hospitalisations). The proportion was much higher among young males compared with young females (54% and 36%, respectively), and was highest among males aged 12–14 years (37%) and 15–17 years (38%).

The most common team ball sports leading to injury hospitalisations for 12–24
year olds were Australian Rules football, soccer and unspecified football (25%, 18% and 17%, respectively).

I remember reading some years ago that soccer was the leading cause of sports injuries among children in Australia. It seem AFL has overtaken it, but soccer is still second, more than league and union combined.
& Harrison (2006).

I imagine that is in at least in part due to much higher numbers of juniors playing, though I don't actually know how those numbers compare.

 

[Happy]

That is probably true. However, it shows a couple of things:
1. Soccer and AFL are not the safe sports for kids that parents (anecdotally) think they are
2. Of the two, AFL has a lower rate of participation, but a higher rate of injury requiring hospitalisation.

In fact, looking at participation rates and injury rates, I think it could be argued that AFL is the most dangerous sport for kids in Australia.

According to the Australian Bureau of Statistics, there are more than twice as many juniors playing AFL than League, but the injury rate is far higher than the difference in participation.

Sadly, Union doesn't even make the top 10 participation rates for boys or girls, even being beaten by martial arts and hockey.

 

[Lindommer]

I can offer some apocryphal evidence here.

My lovely spare-rib used to work in a physio practice in Sydney's southern suburbs. She kept a rough total of all sports injuries and advised me about 90% were lower limb injuries suffered by soccer players. Although I'm sure the designated physio practice at Concord Hospital for the West Harbour wounded would reveal a different set of figures her practice wasn't tied to any particular sport.

 

[Dctarget]

No matter how many statistics are thrown up about how you're much more likely to injure yourself playing soccer or AFL, it's the terrible 1 in a 1000 case of a poor kid breaking his neck or back in rugby league or union that terrifies the parents. The severity of injury surely has to be much worse for Rugby than others.

 

[Happy]

Modified rules for kids have dramatically reduced the possibility of major injuries. For example, I have read on here that we are at disadvantage against other schoolboy nations, because our junior scrums don't push.

Of course, you see the tragic injuries to senior players like Alex McKinnon, or the publicity given to Pat McCabe's forced retirement, and you can understand the parent's concern for their kids' safety.

Plus, I think the wrecked bodies of retired professional athletes, especially League players, doesn't help when parents are deciding which sports their kids will play.

 

[Strewthcobber]

Found a study of acute spinal cord injuries from 2002 - I know the environment has significantly changed since then, especially for juniors, but these are the sort of things mothers are worried about, and will stop their kids from playing rugby for, not a busted ankle

The average annual incidence of ASCIs per 100 000 players was 3.2 for RU, 1.5 for RL, 0.5 for ARF and 0.2 for soccer.

 

[Inside Shoulder]

Found a study of acute spinal cord injuries from 2002 - I know the environment has significantly changed since then, especially for juniors, but these are the sort of things mothers are worried about, and will stop their kids from playing rugby for, not a busted ankle

Not sure about that - I don't think the fear (which is not only one mothers have) is rational.
I have heard Dr John Yeo say that there is more chance of suffering a severe spinal cord injury driving to a game of rugby union or league then there is playing the game. There is risk in everything.
It would follow that driving to a game of soccer is actually more dangerous than walking to and playing a game of rugby!
The lower limb injuries that Lindommer speaks of the real issues - they are suffered every week.

 

[Happy]

Personally, I think papabear is partially right - AFL is the main threat, but to League, not Union. With the allure of Olympic inclusion, plus the publicity of high profile defections to play in the World Cup, I don't think Union is anywhere near dead in Australia. That doesn't mean it will experience dramatic growth, or doesn't have its problems, but I think it is heading in the right direction generally, and I am cautiously optimistic about the future.

The NRL is the one most at risk. It has no international competition to act as a carrot, and it is seen, rightly or wrongly, as the most "thuggish" of the codes. You don't even get sin-binned for dangerous tackles in League.

Coupled with that, the NRL and Channel 9 have married their fortunes together. If one fails, the other is in major trouble. The NRL keep spouting their "billion dollar TV deal" and being "cashed up", but they are masking the reality of their situation:
1. The so called "billion dollar deal" was only 80% cash, and 20% free advertising on Channel 9
2. Channel 9 had to do some fancy accounting last year to even be able to continue to trade
3. TV ratings and crowds are both on the decline in the NRL. This reduces the advertising value for Channel 9, further pressuring their bottom line.
4. The increased salary cap has only meant bigger salaries for a few star players. Most players have seen no increase.
5. Their bucket loads of cash has not been able to stop star players leaving for rival codes

The AFL is winning the war, because they have concentrated on the kids. A friend of mine signed his 7 or 8 year old son up for AFL this year. He went online, and was shown all the available clubs in his area. He picked one, and a representative of that club CONTACTED HIM. When his son went to training, he didn't just receive a jumper, he was given a full kit, including ball. The only thing he had to give back at the end of the season was the jumper.

Meanwhile, just about every other child of my acquaintances are playing soccer. They will take kids much younger than other codes. My friend coaches under 8s, and he, like every other coach of a kid's team in Australia, was given specific age appropriate training drills from the FFA, with specific skills and playing styles to be taught.

Sorry for the long post, but I sometimes think we see the NRL as an unbeatable enemy, when in fact they have major problems of their own. I can't see us ever competing with AFL or soccer for participation rates, but neither do I think they will be the death of Australian rugby.

 

[p.Tah]

Hopefully one of the additional benefits of the growth of women's 7s is that ex-female players will encourage their kids and their friends kids to take up the game.

 

[Happy]

This from an article in today's Australian by Craig Bellamy, coach of the Melbourne Storm:

AS the season unfortunately finished prematurely for Melbourne Storm, I was recently able to catch up with some of my mates from the bush. Like them, I’m an old bastard too — mid-50s now.
And while talking to them, it concerned me that some of these guys, all of whom come from country NSW, had lost some of their passion for the game.
Deep down they still love league, but they find it easier now to switch the television off.

From the same article:
I’m sure the game as a whole was a little alarmed last weekend to see an AFL game in Sydney draw more fans than the two rugby league semi-finals put together. Both NRL games were in Sydney, the heartland of league.

The crux of his article was, "Can we stop changing the rules every year, and let us get used to the ones we have now". He is of the opinion their dropping ratings and attendances is for 2 reasons - they have outlawed shoulder charges and punching, and constant tinkering with the rules means the refereeing is of poor standard.

 

[I like to watch]

Not sure about that - I don't think the fear (which is not only one mothers have) is rational.
I have heard Dr John Yeo say that there is more chance of suffering a severe spinal cord injury driving to a game of rugby union or league then there is playing the game. There is risk in everything.
It would follow that driving to a game of soccer is actually more dangerous than walking to and playing a game of rugby!
The lower limb injuries that Lindommer speaks of the real issues - they are suffered every week.

Agree with all of its bar the last sentence.
The real issue is perception of the risks,not the actual risks.

 

[Quick Hands]

Agree with all of its bar the last sentence.
The real issue is perception of the risks,not the actual risks.

Perception is reality (unfortunately)

 

[Quick Hands]

Hopefully one of the additional benefits of the growth of women's 7s is that ex-female players will encourage their kids and their friends kids to take up the game.

Most rugby people haven't realised it yet, but the moment 7s became and olympic sport we were given the biggest free kick of all time to increase participation in non-traditional rugby demographics and to woo the worried mothers.

 

[mxyzptlk]

In fact they're finding with sports like grid iron in the USA, the issue is really repeated micro-impacts in terms of brain damage. The big hits that result in Grade 2 concussion etc. aren't really the long-term issue. Therefore, training with head-to-head collisions inside their cavernous armour.

Best thing that game could do is get rid of helmets and hard padding, and make players accountable for their own safety.

I think the problem with that, though, is that they'd also have to get rid of blocking and the forward pass. It was those introduced elements that helped create the need for the pads and the helmets in the first place. If you're chasing a ball-carrier and get slammed by a right tackle when you're not looking, or are constantly running crossing patterns into defensive traffic to snag a pass, you're at a lot more risk than taking a backwards rugby pass with your eyes on the defense in front of you.

That said, it'd be interesting to see how the modern game would change if they ditched the bullet-proof pads and went back to leather helmets. The tackling would certainly adjust -- players would be breaking their own bodies tackling the way they do now without pads.

 

[mxyzptlk]

I remember reading some years ago that soccer was the leading cause of sports injuries among children in Australia. It seem AFL has overtaken it, but soccer is still second, more than league and union combined.
& Harrison (2006).

A U.S. women's goalie, Briana Scurry, recently retired from pro/international soccer because of repeated concussions. She had a headache for years, and surgeons removed "pea-sized balls of damaged tissue from the back of her head." There's some debate now about headers in the game, and if kids should be a certain age before they're allowed to do them.

There's not enough data on this yet, but there's also a question whether MMA fighters suffer the same amount, more, or less brain trauma than boxers. They use smaller gloves, so they feel the strike more acutely and are more likely to go down than a boxer. Plus there's no 8-count, there are different ways a fight can go beyond striking, and the fights only last 15-25 minutes, so MMA fighters won't take the same volume of strikes. But researchers won't really know until enough MMA fighters are old/elderly and if they start displaying the same symptoms as boxers.

 

[Westie]

Hopefully one of the additional benefits of the growth of women's 7s is that ex-female players will encourage their kids and their friends kids to take up the game.

An ex - female,

 

[ChargerWA]

My gut feel is that League will be a shadow if what it is now in 30 years. AFL is hammering them considerably harder than it is hammering us.

I think despite the massive issues with our governance, the international aspect and quality of the product will see us through.

 

[Mortal Wombat]

Does anyone in the forum watch ABC Offsiders on Sunday Mornings?

The way they speak about rugby is just embarrassing. There's no respect all all, and never any acknowledgement that being the 3rd best team in a global game is not a disgrace.

I won't put up a link because I'm not sure of the rules on here about that, but anyone who wants to see what I'm talking about, you can check it out on ABC iView. In today's episode, they start talking about rugby at 24:32.

 

[qwerty51]

I stopped watching shows like that and The Back Page because of the rubbish they trout out re rugby. Pretty frustrating. They act like the Wallabies should be #1 they have no idea abot the global scale of the game. Yet it doesn't apply to soccer.