News story on concussion

[WirralExile]

Not sure if you've seen this story on the BBC news https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-65397908
Could have implications for player availability should this be implemented.

[GETHIN EXILE]

As the story only refers to "grassroots" sport I think the current protocols will not really be affected

[Hot_Charlie]

Arguably it should be implemented. We're already seeing too many instances of players taking longer and longer to return from head injuries, in particular concussive event in matches (we obviously don't see training). It also needs to have the lottery of "next weekend's" fixture taken out of it too. If you play a fixture on a Friday and have a 7-day stand-down you could be playing the following Saturday there's a temptation to rush a player back that doesn't exist for a club playing (for example) on Sunday with their next match on the Friday or Saturday the following week.

Ultimately there needs to be an element of the pragmatic approach, and taking a little more of it away from those with a vested interest in a player "recovering" as soon as possible. There's a chance to try and defuse a ticking time-bomb of long term brain injuries and degeneration, or at least mitigate its effects to as low a level as possible, be that longer stand-down periods, recorded and limited contact training etc.

I look at players like Underhill and Lawes, with their histories of head injuries, and think why? There's more to life than rugby.

[thunderbirds]

They had a phone in for an hour on radio 5 which was really interesting and horrifying. Main theme was you only have one brain so look after it.

[Tigerbeat]

The problem with the grassroot clubs is that they turn up on Saturday, play and go home. The Premiership Clubs are more prepared in assessing impacts (video footage, matchday doctors, medics) and have HIA protocols in place and players are monitorred in the coming days.
The risk is always going to be their in the game.

[Rugbygramps]

The problem with the grassroot clubs is that they turn up on Saturday, play and go home. The Premiership Clubs are more prepared in assessing impacts (video footage, matchday doctors, medics) and have HIA protocols in place and players are monitorred in the coming days.
The risk is always going to be their in the game.

Very true, unless they see a medic how is concussion confirmed

[Hot_Charlie]

The problem with the grassroot clubs is that they turn up on Saturday, play and go home. The Premiership Clubs are more prepared in assessing impacts (video footage, matchday doctors, medics) and have HIA protocols in place and players are monitorred in the coming days.
The risk is always going to be their in the game.

They do (and yes, the story is relating to the grassroots game) but ultimately, whatever protocols are in place there will be a "duty of care" (awful phrase) and I think at some point the governing bodies are going to have to listen to the scientific advocates who have been calling for longer mandated breaks - whatever symptoms do or do not remain - and adopt the safer approach of a mandatory stand-down in the 12-21 day bracket.

It's bonkers to think a player with a history of head injuries like Underhill can go down like he's been shot by a sniper (like he was against us at MWWR) and still potentially be eligible to play the following weekend. Rugby doesn't need its own Patrice Muamba or Christian Erikson type moment of an on-field catastrophic event. Which is what I think we risk getting.

[mol2]

I don't think Muamba and Eriksen collapsing with rare heart conditions can be compared with concussion. The two footballers could have collapsed on a morning jog. Not really causally linked to playing their sport directly.

Head injuries from concussions are as a direct result of the sport. Too many injuries, particularly without recovery time aren't going to impact too much at the time but later in life the consequences will be felt.

[Hot_Charlie]

I don't think Muamba and Eriksen collapsing with rare heart conditions can be compared with concussion.

That's not the comparison I'm making, and if you read my post, I suspect you know that.

I'm not comparing concussions with heart conditions - I used the words "onfield catastrophic event" - not the specifics of a heart condition v concussion or any other medical condition.

The point is rugby could find itself in the position (as it almost did with Michael Fatialofa's horrendous injury at Saracens) that it has a major/life threatening/death causing medical issue - most likely caused by a head impact - in an elite, televised game. And those are arguably more transferable circumstances to any little Johnny/Joanna playing rugby at the weekend, are less easily dismissed as the bad luck of a "rare heart condition" as they can potentially happen to anyone (for example the tragic events leading to the death of Ben Robinson) and have the potential to have a far more detrimental impact on the game and its reputation.

It's been lucky so far that the rugby incidents have been in amateur matches and the highest profile in the French academy leagues. Rugby has two problems that it needs to solve: de-risking the immediate issues around a catastrophic head injury in a match (or aftermath) and then the financially more onerous issues of supporting players and ex-players (particularly I suspect in the next 10-20 years) with the devastating effects of CTE, possibly MND (which seems to have a very high instance in professionaal rugby players) etc.

[Tigerbeat]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-66700604

[Scott1]

High court ruling due today
https://www.standard.co.uk/sport/rugby/ ... 24151.html

[jgriffin]

Football back in the leather-ball days would probably have even worse brain injury stats (if you're old enough to remember heading a wet case ball), especially when you note how many pro footballers got various types of dementia as they aged. However we don't have the luxury of introducing a light ball as well as a generation of contact-averse players. I have long argued that restricting tackle height is only part of the answer; IMO the ruck laws should be restated as grip first, pushing, using feet. Players launching themselves at the ruck - sometimes to slip over and land yards further on - should be a yellow card.

[Scott1]

Football back in the leather-ball days would probably have even worse brain injury stats (if you're old enough to remember heading a wet case ball), especially when you note how many pro footballers got various types of dementia as they aged. However we don't have the luxury of introducing a light ball as well as a generation of contact-averse players. I have long argued that restricting tackle height is only part of the answer; IMO the ruck laws should be restated as grip first, pushing, using feet. Players launching themselves at the ruck - sometimes to slip over and land yards further on - should be a yellow card.

100% agree,bind first then push at a ruck. Any torpedoing automatic yellow card,at least!

[Tigerbeat]

https://news.sky.com/story/gavin-henson ... svEN0Az9uU

[Rugbygramps]

Incredibly sad and some huge names on that list. 2 that stand out from scanning through Carl Hayman and Tigers Harry Ellis.

This has the potential to kill off rugby union by bankrupting the unions and pushing insurance premiums so high as to make them unaffordable