George North stood down from playing
Moderators: Tigerbeat, Rizzo, Tigers Press Office, Tigers Webmaster
Re: George North stood down from playing
If someone is knocked out on the pitch they should not be allowed to continue to play in the match.
If they pass the head injury assessment they can play in the next match, if they fail then they should not play in the next match and their return should be decided by a doctor.
If they pass the head injury assessment they can play in the next match, if they fail then they should not play in the next match and their return should be decided by a doctor.
Re: George North stood down from playing
Because the TMO was brought into the situation and the screens showed exactly what could be seen on TV, why do the Saints medics claim not to have the same footage available to them?
-
- Super User
- Posts: 4041
- Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2005 9:30 pm
- Location: Lincoln
Re: George North stood down from playing
Yep, but no one in the mainstream media will say that a single no one in the game would ever resort to "simulation". Never, Ever.tigerburnie wrote:I tend to agree from I've seen. Now it could come back and bite the Sinners on the backside.jgriffin wrote:Scotty Hamilton seems to think it was a con to get Thommo red-carded!
Yeah right....
As for HIA, there is a relatively simple solution. The is an independent RFU appointed HIA assessor (i.e. Doctor) at each game. It becomes his/her decision, not an employee of either club.
Re: George North stood down from playing
The whole 'neck injury' angle smacks of bottom covering from Saints. Someone has really dropped the ball here.
Either one of the following happened:
1. North was faking unconsciousness. A ridiculous suggestion given that North knows his career is on the line from head injuries. No chance this was the case. But in some kind of parallel universe where this is true, North will be in a heap of trouble.
2. Saints knowingly sent him back on with scant regard for his well-being because they needed him to play on. Also ridiculous - I'm no Saints fan but I respect them enough to assume that no club would do this. But again, in that some parallel universe, Saints will be in a heap of trouble.
3. They genuinely didn't spot he may have been KO'd. In which case someone hasn't done their job properly and Saints are in a heap of trouble.
4. Their initial tale of the neck injury was true - In which case they let him get up very quickly and without much of a check for neck injury. In which case someone hasn't done their job properly, perhaps, and in which case someone might have to explain their actions.
5. North knew he was KO'd but felt okay and persuaded staff to say he wasn't KO'd - knowing the concern it would cause and the implications for his career. In which case someone hasn't done their job properly in telling North 'no'. In which case, Saints are in a heap of trouble.
I can't see a positive outcome of this for Saints. This is why they went with option 4.
Either one of the following happened:
1. North was faking unconsciousness. A ridiculous suggestion given that North knows his career is on the line from head injuries. No chance this was the case. But in some kind of parallel universe where this is true, North will be in a heap of trouble.
2. Saints knowingly sent him back on with scant regard for his well-being because they needed him to play on. Also ridiculous - I'm no Saints fan but I respect them enough to assume that no club would do this. But again, in that some parallel universe, Saints will be in a heap of trouble.
3. They genuinely didn't spot he may have been KO'd. In which case someone hasn't done their job properly and Saints are in a heap of trouble.
4. Their initial tale of the neck injury was true - In which case they let him get up very quickly and without much of a check for neck injury. In which case someone hasn't done their job properly, perhaps, and in which case someone might have to explain their actions.
5. North knew he was KO'd but felt okay and persuaded staff to say he wasn't KO'd - knowing the concern it would cause and the implications for his career. In which case someone hasn't done their job properly in telling North 'no'. In which case, Saints are in a heap of trouble.
I can't see a positive outcome of this for Saints. This is why they went with option 4.
Re: George North stood down from playing
No word of a lie, I sit in the opposite corner of the ground, in the H&B stand, probably the furthest point from the big screens and where the incident happened. The person next to me said "hey, he looked like he was knocked out there" upon seeing the replay.Ads677 wrote:Because the TMO was brought into the situation and the screens showed exactly what could be seen on TV, why do the Saints medics claim not to have the same footage available to them?
I'm not buying that nobody from Saints spotted this.
Re: George North stood down from playing
That's a despicable accusation, and given North's KO record it seems considerably more likely that he was knocked out. It's likely that he didn't even realize it (thing about being unconscious is that you aren't conscious of it). It also appeared that Thompstone accidentally trod on North's hand immediately after the impact, and North didn't even flinch.tigerburnie wrote:I tend to agree from I've seen. Now it could come back and bite the Sinners on the backside.jgriffin wrote:Scotty Hamilton seems to think it was a con to get Thommo red-carded!
Anyone recall North being KOed by a body-check against England? Shontayne Hape told of his concussion issues following his retirement and said that he could be knocked out by any kind of impact, whether to the head or not.
Occam's razor would suggest a KO that North wasn't aware of. And I think that accusing a player who has no history of play-acting and a long history of concussions of faking in order to get Thomstone sent off is pretty low.
Re: George North stood down from playing
Iain wrote:The whole 'neck injury' angle smacks of bottom covering from Saints. Someone has really dropped the ball here.
Either one of the following happened:
1. North was faking unconsciousness. A ridiculous suggestion given that North knows his career is on the line from head injuries. No chance this was the case. But in some kind of parallel universe where this is true, North will be in a heap of trouble.
2. Saints knowingly sent him back on with scant regard for his well-being because they needed him to play on. Also ridiculous - I'm no Saints fan but I respect them enough to assume that no club would do this. But again, in that some parallel universe, Saints will be in a heap of trouble.
3. They genuinely didn't spot he may have been KO'd. In which case someone hasn't done their job properly and Saints are in a heap of trouble.
4. Their initial tale of the neck injury was true - In which case they let him get up very quickly and without much of a check for neck injury. In which case someone hasn't done their job properly, perhaps, and in which case someone might have to explain their actions.
5. North knew he was KO'd but felt okay and persuaded staff to say he wasn't KO'd - knowing the concern it would cause and the implications for his career. In which case someone hasn't done their job properly in telling North 'no'. In which case, Saints are in a heap of trouble.
I can't see a positive outcome of this for Saints. This is why they went with option 4.
6. North landed heavily and was briefly sparked out. He came round - unaware that he had been briefly unconscious - face down on the floor with a pain his neck and finding it momentarily difficult to move. As medics reached him, he communicated his concerns over the neck pain. He was treated based on that, but was also taken off for a HIA because that's the sensible thing to do. The medics treating him were obviously not watching the big screens at the time - the were doing their job. The medic who does HIAs was not sitting out in the stadium, he was in the changing rooms (that's speculation - I have no idea where the doctor who does these HIAs sits). As part of the assessment, he looks at whatever footage was available to him (evidently not what was shown on the big screens) and doesn't find any evidence of a KO. North is probably still unaware of being KOed, as it's very unlikely he would risk returning if he thought he had been sparked out.
I would be very surprised if there weren't Saints staff who saw the big screen footage and thought North had been knocked out. I would not want to speculate on why they would not communicate that to the medical team, as the footage looked pretty clear to everyone in the stadium and at home. And even a strong suspicion of a KO should be enough to err on the side of caution.
He definitely should not have come back on.
And it's the second time this has happened to him, after he was clearly KOed against England once and the medical assessors managed to miss what seemed obvious to everyone watching.
Re: George North stood down from playing
If it is found true that they didn't have full access to all replays, who will be in trouble? Are Tigers as the home team responsible or is this sorted by a 3rd party?
-
- Bronze Member
- Posts: 383
- Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 10:12 pm
- Location: Little Bowden, South Leicestershire
Re: George North stood down from playing
Ellis9, I'm not certain who is responsible, but Mallinder and West could have looked at the two big screens, whilst JP was asking for replays, and I am sure than they would have seen it. I also think that they are provided with a live TV feed which definitely showed him to be still with his eyes closed.
They also allowed Picamoles to continue through the second half with a hand/ wrist injury.
They also allowed Picamoles to continue through the second half with a hand/ wrist injury.
Re: George North stood down from playing
I would imagine although there are 2 big screens, if the proper screen that is used for medics wasn't showing things correctly, this still could be questioned by authorities as Saints would use that to help their defence.
Allowing Picamoles to carry on with a hand/wrist injury is entirely different to playing with a head injury. If every player who got injured during a match was taken off, the matches would go down to 10 a side.
Allowing Picamoles to carry on with a hand/wrist injury is entirely different to playing with a head injury. If every player who got injured during a match was taken off, the matches would go down to 10 a side.
Re: George North stood down from playing
I will offer another explanation as to why he was allowed to return and not kept off by the ref or the medics - was JP too busy looking at the incident from the point of view as to whether he should be red or yellow carding AT and not really looking at GN. I must admit that when the replays were on the screen, that was what was going through my mind. The TMO was busy giving JP the replays he was asking for and was perhaps doing the same as he knew he would be asked for his opinion on what was on the screen re red or yellow. The club medics were on the field, heads down looking after GN and they certainly didn't look at the replays. With all of the money in the game isn't it time that there were 2 TMOs - one to look for offences and the other to look for injuries and before any player can return the medics must consult the replays provided by that TMO before making their medical decision. I also feel that the touchline official should be informed that the consultation has taken place before allowing the player to return. Medical people must make the final decision but they must be aware of everything before they make their decision not later.
Tigers could play around 35 games this season where TV are present (excluding friendlies and 7's) x £200 approx for an extra TMO per game = a cost of about £7000 - cheap at the price
Tigers could play around 35 games this season where TV are present (excluding friendlies and 7's) x £200 approx for an extra TMO per game = a cost of about £7000 - cheap at the price
Hehehehehehehehe
Re: George North stood down from playing
Fair point, should have been in my list.4071 wrote:Iain wrote:The whole 'neck injury' angle smacks of bottom covering from Saints. Someone has really dropped the ball here.
Either one of the following happened:
1. North was faking unconsciousness. A ridiculous suggestion given that North knows his career is on the line from head injuries. No chance this was the case. But in some kind of parallel universe where this is true, North will be in a heap of trouble.
2. Saints knowingly sent him back on with scant regard for his well-being because they needed him to play on. Also ridiculous - I'm no Saints fan but I respect them enough to assume that no club would do this. But again, in that some parallel universe, Saints will be in a heap of trouble.
3. They genuinely didn't spot he may have been KO'd. In which case someone hasn't done their job properly and Saints are in a heap of trouble.
4. Their initial tale of the neck injury was true - In which case they let him get up very quickly and without much of a check for neck injury. In which case someone hasn't done their job properly, perhaps, and in which case someone might have to explain their actions.
5. North knew he was KO'd but felt okay and persuaded staff to say he wasn't KO'd - knowing the concern it would cause and the implications for his career. In which case someone hasn't done their job properly in telling North 'no'. In which case, Saints are in a heap of trouble.
I can't see a positive outcome of this for Saints. This is why they went with option 4.
6. North landed heavily and was briefly sparked out. He came round - unaware that he had been briefly unconscious - face down on the floor with a pain his neck and finding it momentarily difficult to move. As medics reached him, he communicated his concerns over the neck pain. He was treated based on that, but was also taken off for a HIA because that's the sensible thing to do. The medics treating him were obviously not watching the big screens at the time - the were doing their job. The medic who does HIAs was not sitting out in the stadium, he was in the changing rooms (that's speculation - I have no idea where the doctor who does these HIAs sits). As part of the assessment, he looks at whatever footage was available to him (evidently not what was shown on the big screens) and doesn't find any evidence of a KO. North is probably still unaware of being KOed, as it's very unlikely he would risk returning if he thought he had been sparked out.
I would be very surprised if there weren't Saints staff who saw the big screen footage and thought North had been knocked out. I would not want to speculate on why they would not communicate that to the medical team, as the footage looked pretty clear to everyone in the stadium and at home. And even a strong suspicion of a KO should be enough to err on the side of caution.
He definitely should not have come back on.
And it's the second time this has happened to him, after he was clearly KOed against England once and the medical assessors managed to miss what seemed obvious to everyone watching.
So again, in which case someone hasn't done their job properly.
Re: George North stood down from playing
It isn't the referee's call at any point - they are completely removed from responsibility of making a decision on a player's fitness.trendylfj wrote:I will offer another explanation as to why he was allowed to return and not kept off by the ref or the medics - was JP too busy looking at the incident from the point of view as to whether he should be red or yellow carding AT and not really looking at GN. I must admit that when the replays were on the screen, that was what was going through my mind. The TMO was busy giving JP the replays he was asking for and was perhaps doing the same as he knew he would be asked for his opinion on what was on the screen re red or yellow. The club medics were on the field, heads down looking after GN and they certainly didn't look at the replays. With all of the money in the game isn't it time that there were 2 TMOs - one to look for offences and the other to look for injuries and before any player can return the medics must consult the replays provided by that TMO before making their medical decision. I also feel that the touchline official should be informed that the consultation has taken place before allowing the player to return. Medical people must make the final decision but they must be aware of everything before they make their decision not later.
Tigers could play around 35 games this season where TV are present (excluding friendlies and 7's) x £200 approx for an extra TMO per game = a cost of about £7000 - cheap at the price
Re: George North stood down from playing
"It isn't the referee's call at any point - they are completely removed from responsibility of making a decision on a player's fitness"
If that is true Iain, I am gobsmacked. I just don't believe that they do not have any responsibility. Do they not insist a player goes off for blood? Who decides that the HIA procedure needs to be done? Do they not check that the blood is sorted before allowing a player to return to the fray? As I said, JP MAY have been more interested in which card but I am certain that if he had seen GN knocked out he would have raised the issue with the Saints staff and then it is over to the medics. It is the issue of the medics not looking the the replays I am trying to address.
If that is true Iain, I am gobsmacked. I just don't believe that they do not have any responsibility. Do they not insist a player goes off for blood? Who decides that the HIA procedure needs to be done? Do they not check that the blood is sorted before allowing a player to return to the fray? As I said, JP MAY have been more interested in which card but I am certain that if he had seen GN knocked out he would have raised the issue with the Saints staff and then it is over to the medics. It is the issue of the medics not looking the the replays I am trying to address.
Hehehehehehehehe
-
- Silver Member
- Posts: 508
- Joined: Thu Nov 26, 2009 10:07 am
Re: George North stood down from playing
Incorrect, the referee can exclude any player he deems unfit to play, even if the Doctor, Medic, Physio, Coach and Player says he's fine!Iain wrote:It isn't the referee's call at any point - they are completely removed from responsibility of making a decision on a player's fitness.