Concussion experiment is "irresponsible"

[The Boy Dave]

I don't think contact has to be with the head ourla as I understand it concussion can be caused when the brain is shook up.
You do not even need to be knocked out to suffer the effects, simply falling to ground or being hit by a tackle can cause this, these are risks that players knowingly take but it is the risks that players are unknowingly taking that are the problem and by this I mean when the laws of the game are not officiated correctly to provide a more entertaining flowing spectacle for supporters by limiting the stoppages and infringements are overlooked to achieve this, mostly illegal impacts.
I have already mentioned the breakdown but there are many other instances of rugby going in the wrong direction.
The idiot commentators on the premiership final summed up attitudes these days when one player tackled without using his arms and smashed his opponent to the ground with a huge shoulder hit.
They said he (tackler) could not avoid it as he hit so fast and hard he could not get his arms around his opponent in time before his opponent hit the floor.
It explained the incident perfectly but what a stupid comment that sums up where rugby has gone.
DON'T tackle so fast and hard and time the tackle properly then maybe he will get the technique right, technique should always come before power, that is how it used to be and if a player does it wrong then penalise him, send him off and maybe he will do it right next time.
Enforce the laws and don't make silly excuses for foul play.
Before you know it more space is opened up and we get a free flowing game within the rules.
These are the sort of incidents where players are allowed to continue playing in danger.

[ourla]

The Boy Dave, I agree with your general line of thinking. Well said sir.

[mol2]

Part of the problem is that sides are forced into the big hits to try and dislodge the ball.

Unless a payer is completely isolated the tackled player, if tacked with proper technique - tackled, turned and safely taken to ground and released, can then roll over keeping his hands on the ball almost indefinitely. Presenting the ball is all that should be allowed.
The problem is that immediate release only seems to apply to the tackler.
That element has almost turned into rugby league.
The attacking players seem almost exempt from the ruck laws - defensive players have to come through the gate - attacking players seem able to stand and obstruct with the minimum of binding to the ruck.

Thus the only way to get the ball is too smash the ball carrier or hold up ball carrier.

[jgriffin]

It's not just concussion, although that is the major issue: I have seen several players rotated about their knees or shoulder girdle by flying shoulder hits in rucks.

I suspect a lot of rugby spectators would like a flowing game, even at the expense of the occasionally entertaining mayhem that now occurs.
Once upon a time you had to TACKLE players, and even bosh merchants had to tackle (although very hard), and once you were on the ground you had to RELEASE/PRESENT the ball, and you had to BIND once the contest for the ball ensued.
All the current practices do in fact resemble the argy-bargy and slowing of the ball symptomatic of RL - the only difference is that RL aerobic demands means players tend to be leaner, lighter and actually tackle most of the time (it's just the usual steroid-powered confrontations at every tackle that slow the game down, with all that mano-a-mano posturing ).

[The Boy Dave]

Part of the problem is that sides are forced into the big hits to try and dislodge the ball.

Unless a payer is completely isolated the tackled player, if tacked with proper technique - tackled, turned and safely taken to ground and released, can then roll over keeping his hands on the ball almost indefinitely. Presenting the ball is all that should be allowed.
The problem is that immediate release only seems to apply to the tackler.
That element has almost turned into rugby league.
The attacking players seem almost exempt from the ruck laws - defensive players have to come through the gate - attacking players seem able to stand and obstruct with the minimum of binding to the ruck.

Thus the only way to get the ball is too smash the ball carrier or hold up ball carrier.

It just seems to have become more and more acceptable as time goes on to ignore certain infringements because of the large amount of stoppages elsewhere caused by the increase in the pace required to play the game.
Referees appear reluctant to get stuck into the players and make them play to the rules 100%!
So much poor timing in the tackle due to rush defence tactics to counter the attacking team etc etc, it's a catch 22 situation, the rush defence allows the defending side to have numbers available around the breakdown to steal and attacking sides need to dive in to protect the ball, it's bad after bad.
If officials made tacklers time everything properly and enforced the offside rules strictly then attacking teams will have time and space to be creative.
Defending sides will have a choice, rush up and risk losing players to cards who perform poor technique and break the offside rules or hold back a little.
The offside line for defenders appears to have moved up several metres compared to when I played, it would not have been acceptable in my day and if you did not do as the ref said and pushed your luck then you would be penalised, repeat infringements and you would be off, no messing.
It would not solve everything but the offside line being fully enforced would go a long way to creating a better game, players are allowed to push the line these days, before you were required to be behind the line and hold very strictly.
Years ago we played a lot more of our rugby in front of a defence, good officiating allowed it to happen, we had much more time and space to play, players were often not as big but we were just as fast and it was much more creative.
Nowadays with little time or space because of what players are allowed to get away with too much contact is required, players need to get bigger and bigger, the hits get harder and the need to get in behind a defence before you can be creative is required, it is the main cause of injuries and a major contributor to the concussion debate IMO and mostly down to poor officials who have lost control and forgotten the rules of rugby and why they are needed to be enforced IMO!

[jgriffin]

The technical stuff, from Scientific American 2010:

Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI) commonly damages nerve fibers in the brain called axons. These thin, tube-like structures transmit electrical and chemical signals that are vital for carrying information among different regions of the brain. For unknown reasons, these fragile structures not only disconnect shortly after injury but can continue to disconnect even for decades later in some patients. Once disconnected, the blunt end of an axon seals itself off, swells with fluids, enzymes and proteins and eventually bursts. When axons burst open, they often distribute amyloid proteins through the neighboring brain tissue. These sticky proteins are a hallmark of Alzheimer’s, and in fact many TBI patients exhibit signs of dementia later in life that mimic the deterioration observed in Alzheimer’s patients.
In addition, with axons disappearing or not functioning well after TBI, a person’s ability to process new information may slow down. Surviving axons may compensate for the damage by increasing electrical signaling and thus restoring the normal speed of information processing in the brain. This temporary fix, however, can cause these axons to become even more sensitive to damage if a second concussion occurs.

So now you know.

[The Boy Dave]

So as I come to understand a little more, scrum caps canno't prevent concussion, they are simply to help prevent grazes? Concussion is the brain being damaged against the skull, is that correct or any part of it?
The reason I ask is because loads of kids are getting caps these days with parents thinking they will help guard against concussion!

[Tiger_in_Birmingham]

So as I come to understand a little more, scrum caps canno't prevent concussion, they are simply to help prevent grazes? Concussion is the brain being damaged against the skull, is that correct or any part of it?
The reason I ask is because loads of kids are getting caps these days with parents thinking they will help guard against concussion!

scrum caps are for people in the scrum only to protect ears

[The Boy Dave]

The Boy Dave wrote:

So as I come to understand a little more, scrum caps canno't prevent concussion, they are simply to help prevent grazes? Concussion is the brain being damaged against the skull, is that correct or any part of it?
The reason I ask is because loads of kids are getting caps these days with parents thinking they will help guard against concussion!




scrum caps are for people in the scrum only to protect ears

I thought so but I know lots of parents buy them thinking they will protect against concussion.
There is not much information given out about the causes.
The junior game can get pretty fast and fiercely competitive, most of them have no fear at all.
I have seen a few knocked out or shook up over the past few seasons and return wearing a cap.

[jgriffin]

The brain is cushioned by membranes and intermembranal fluids. If the skull stops moving or starts violently (being hit) the brain carries on in the original direction or stays put, then ricochets off the skull, and hits the other side (contrecoup), causing bilateral damage. So no skull cap can prevent this, nor strengthening of the neck muscles, only the cushioning effect of the membranes.
However the impetus has to be quite violent and repetitive to cause serious damage that won't repair itself, especially when you're younger.

[Noddy555]

I have great sympathy with the medical profession over the issue of concussion, as what's to stop a player sueing a club or an individual Doctor if he is allowed to carry on playing and then has subsequent physical or mental traumas, you only need to look at the number of court cases in American Football to learn about this. I think that if it is a mild case of
concussion, the minimum return delay should be at least 30 mins, with more serious cases leading to a minimum of 2 weeks out even before training can restart. If the concussion was caused by malice from another player, then that
player should receive a minimum 4 weeks ban. The ref can always refer to the TMO to determine this.

[G.K]

But if caused by a punch to the head by a prop and you say sorry then it's only a one week ban.

[GT1]

Nigel Owens just tweeted this terrible news http://m.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article ... d=11288749
I'm sure everyone from the Tigers family sends their best wishes to his family!

[jgriffin]

It makes me angry - some of these incidents cannot be legislated against, same as sudden death syndrome (usually acute myocarditis) in wendyball, several incidents a year - but in rugby it is largely avoidable:
1 IF THE LAWS ARE ENFORCED
2 IF THE IRB BROUGHT BACK THE OLD PROTOCOLS ON RUCKS
3 IF THE DEFENSIVE OFFSIDE LINE WENT BACK 5M
and particularly if the SH sides stopped being allowed to get away with illegal practices like flying belly-flopping and offside guards.
It is IMHO this over-tolerance that leads to dangerous practice becoming the norm.
I also believe it is the import of RL tackle techniques (to stop release)in a context that does not involve RL tackle procedure that causes danger. Any upright tackle begs a hit since we don't stop, play the ball and re-form in RU.
As for juniors, tackles below the waist only until mid-teens seems to be an answer in part that will also speed up the game. I would also penalise the choke tackle as active, illegal, prevention of a ruck forming (it's in the Laws to do so).

[drc_007]

A new concussion protocol.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-union/29638234

The memory test has been strengthened and the balance test altered
Doctors now have twice as long - 10 minutes - to decide if a player can return to the field
All Premiership grounds and Twickenham will have medical teams with access to replays to help that decision
Any player with confirmed or suspected concussion will be permanently removed
An independent review will be held of the on-field management of all cases during Premiership Rugby and England matches

I'd still prefer to see any player who is knocked unconscious on the pitch be removed for the remainder of the game.