Rugby League 2017

 
Talk about NRL, State of Origin, Tests, Four Nations, World Cup, everything rugby league

Moderator: GH Moderators

User avatar
Don Furner
Posts: 109021
Joined: January 7, 2005, 4:21 pm
PostPosted: March 16, 2017, 7:28 pm
Three Sydney clubs and Brisbane... no regional clubs or any club outside Sydney/Brisbane.
Image
Quote
User avatar
David Grant
Posts: 773
Joined: January 26, 2014, 11:54 pm

Favourite Player:
Jarrod Croker
PostPosted: March 16, 2017, 10:05 pm
This can only be good for the game....said nobody ever


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Quote
User avatar
Laurie Daley
Posts: 12264
Joined: January 13, 2005, 5:22 pm
PostPosted: March 17, 2017, 7:00 am
Two of those clubs are a hot mess.
Quote
User avatar
Don Furner
Posts: 109021
Joined: January 7, 2005, 4:21 pm
PostPosted: March 20, 2017, 12:58 pm
Concussion breach notices

Three NRL clubs are facing fines totalling $350,000 after being issued with Breach Notices relating to head injuries in Round 3 of the Telstra Premiership.

CEO Todd Greenberg said there is no more important issue in the game than player safety and he was satisfied that the three clubs had failed to follow the concussion rules during weekend matches.

The Breach Notices have been issued to:

• The Gold Coast Titans ($150,000) for incidents involving Kane Elgey, Joe Greenwood and Ryan Simpkins

• St George Illawarra Dragons ($100,000) for an incident involving Josh Dugan

• Newcastle Knights ($100,000) for an incident involving Brendan Elliot

"These are, by far, the heaviest fines ever proposed by the game for concussion breaches," Mr Greenberg said.

"That is how seriously we take it.

"The clubs involved have the opportunity to respond to the Breach Notices, and we will consider those responses, but our message is clear… we are not going to allow player safety to be put at risk through breaches of the concussion rules."

Mr Greenberg said the NRL has put significant resources into concussion training and education.

"In the majority of cases we see strong compliance with the League's concussion rules but it appears that this did not happen at the weekend in some matches and we cannot stand by and allow player safety to be put at risk," he said.

"Where we believe the rules have been breached we will take action – and we would hope that these Breach Notices will serve as a warning to all clubs."

Mr Greenberg said the clubs would have five business days to respond to the Breach Notices.

NRL media release
Image
Quote
User avatar
Ricky Stuart
Posts: 9718
Joined: October 20, 2005, 3:35 pm
PostPosted: March 20, 2017, 1:17 pm
They need to implement 18th/19th man for HIA's immediately.
well, I guess you could say that I'm buy curious.
Quote
User avatar
Laurie Daley
Posts: 10689
Joined: February 26, 2010, 6:01 pm
Location: Canberra :(
Favourite Player:
Brett Mullins
PostPosted: March 20, 2017, 4:35 pm
I think an 18th man is a good idea. I also think the NRL needs to bring back the 5 minute sin bin. Putting players on report does nothing to address the disadvantage of losing a player to foul play.
Quote
User avatar
Jason Croker
Posts: 4257
Joined: November 18, 2007, 2:04 pm
Location: Callala Bay
PostPosted: March 20, 2017, 5:41 pm
Notably all the players involved in these incidents were backs. I said this in another thread but coaches are happy to pull a forward off for a HIA but most teams don't carry a utility back on the bench.

I haven't seen all the incidents but Dugan was unconscious before he hit the ground and there is no way it was safe to leave him on.

It can't be left in he hands of coaches and trainers as they aren't motivated to put player safety first. If Mary can openly say to the media that Dugan copped a knock to the jaw and not the head and think it's ok.... Well it's quite incredible.

A 5 man bench would allow a utility back to be on the bench if required. Maybe as a sub where the player they come on for cannot interchange. Tough to change in the middle of the season though.
Quote
User avatar
Don Furner
Posts: 109021
Joined: January 7, 2005, 4:21 pm
PostPosted: March 20, 2017, 6:23 pm
The coaches will take advantage of it as soon as you give an extra bench player in case of a head impact injury. You have to have five benchies regardless if you're going that direction. Then it's equal. I'd go for fewer interchanges as well then.


Sent from my iPad using The Greenhouse mobile app powered by Tapatalk
Image
Quote
User avatar
Mal Meninga
Posts: 25475
Joined: July 2, 2007, 11:41 am
Location: Somewhere around Canberra Stadium
Favourite Player:
Joey Leilua
PostPosted: March 20, 2017, 6:25 pm
Have independent doctors do the assessments, pretty hard to rig the system other than the player tanking the test on purpose
Quote
User avatar
David Furner
Posts: 3578
Joined: March 16, 2013, 4:39 pm

Favourite Player:
George Clooney
PostPosted: March 20, 2017, 6:27 pm
^^^
Can they do a urine test .. sample A and B
Quote
User avatar
Jason Croker
Posts: 4257
Joined: November 18, 2007, 2:04 pm
Location: Callala Bay
PostPosted: March 20, 2017, 7:24 pm
greeneyed wrote:The coaches will take advantage of it as soon as you give an extra bench player in case of a head impact injury. You have to have five benchies regardless if you're going that direction. Then it's equal. I'd go for fewer interchanges as well then.


Sent from my iPad using The Greenhouse mobile app powered by Tapatalk


Whatever system you put in place will be taken advantage of by the coaches but ultimately it isn't the coach who will be liable if players start suing for head injuries. Well they might be but ultimately the NRL has the responsibility to provide a safe workplace for their staff.

I think it is better to have an extended bench that allows coaches to cover, to a degree, the possibility of injuries across the park than to have coaches leaving players out there when they clearly should be coming off.

That and all assessments should be done by an independent doctor at the ground. You can't trust anyone on a club payroll to make the right decision under any circumstances.
Quote
User avatar
John Ferguson
Posts: 2425
Joined: July 29, 2008, 7:05 pm
Location: Brisbane
Favourite Player:
Laurie Daley
PostPosted: March 20, 2017, 7:36 pm
I didn't watch the Dragons game but I would expect any team would be at a serious disadvantage when having their fullback off for a HIA test.
Would we have had a different result if Dugan was off the field?

Who knows but as long as the decision is in the clubs hands they will push the issue as much as possible.


Sent from my iPhone using The Greenhouse mobile app powered by Tapatalk
Quote
User avatar
David Grant
Posts: 738
Joined: April 6, 2008, 5:50 pm
Location: London, UK
Favourite Player:
Mal Meninga
PostPosted: March 21, 2017, 12:41 am
pickles wrote:That and all assessments should be done by an independent doctor at the ground. You can't trust anyone on a club payroll to make the right decision under any circumstances.


I'm not sure which game it was I was watching, but the commentators discussed the HIA testing and apparently part of it at least involves an app on a tablet, and that the app was created directly by the NRL. So presumably the outcome of that test would (hopefully) not leave much wriggle room.
Quote
User avatar
Jason Croker
Posts: 4257
Joined: November 18, 2007, 2:04 pm
Location: Callala Bay
PostPosted: March 21, 2017, 5:58 am
That's good if that is how they did that. I also thought they did have someone there reviewing situations where people might need to come off for a HIA based on replays. How anyone could look at Dugan and think he was ok is beyond me. I thought being knocked out was indicator for a HIA.

Obviously coaches aren't going to want to pull their star players in close games so it has to be out of their hands and sphere of influence.
Quote
User avatar
Laurie Daley
Posts: 17244
Joined: June 19, 2007, 8:17 am
Location: Greener pastures
Favourite Player:
Luke Turner
PostPosted: March 21, 2017, 8:57 am
Greedysmurf wrote:
pickles wrote:That and all assessments should be done by an independent doctor at the ground. You can't trust anyone on a club payroll to make the right decision under any circumstances.


I'm not sure which game it was I was watching, but the commentators discussed the HIA testing and apparently part of it at least involves an app on a tablet, and that the app was created directly by the NRL. So presumably the outcome of that test would (hopefully) not leave much wriggle room.

Image
Head to Head
Luke Turner - 1
Blake Ferguson - 0
Quote
User avatar
Jason Croker
Posts: 4257
Joined: November 18, 2007, 2:04 pm
Location: Callala Bay
PostPosted: March 23, 2017, 6:45 am
There's some pretty basic markers though. If you have been unconscious, even for a second then you shouldn't need a HIA because you have already experienced concussion and should be pulled immediately.

The tricky balance for the nrl is that at the moment it is also easy to use the HIA for a free sub for a forward which as they are trying to reduce interchanges is a decent advantage.

One possibility would be to have a bigger bench but no interchanges, just substitutions and a doctor who determines who needs an assessment. At the moment too much onus is on trainers and coaches who have a vested interest in bending the rules.
Quote
Previous

Return to Rugby League


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Coastalraider and 4 guests