Rugby Brain Injuries
-
@nzzp I think this has a reasonably high chance of happening. 10pm BBC news report saying legal process kicks off next week in the UK.
Also wonder how much this will subconsciously affect someone like Cane who has a history of concussion. Alix Popham is a v fit 41. He will likely be in a care home by 50.
-
If there is culpability it may lay at the door of whomever got rid of the mandatory 3-week stand down.
HIA are effective for during the match decisions but there’s no healer like time.
-
@MiketheSnow was it North who had a couple several years back and appeared he went back on after being knocked out?
-
@taniwharugby said in Rugby Brain Injuries:
@MiketheSnow was it North who had a couple several years back and appeared he went back on after being knocked out?
yep, pretty sure it was Wales he was playing for.
No consequence either at the time - that's the kind of thing that can get seriously expensive.
-
@taniwharugby said in Rugby Brain Injuries:
@MiketheSnow was it North who had a couple several years back and appeared he went back on after being knocked out?
2015 by the look
https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby/international/66028990/george-north-should-not-have-stayed-on-the-pitch---world-rugby -
-
@Siam said in Rugby Brain Injuries:
At one of the semis in Paris in 2007, I somehow spent a lot of time on the concourse drinking and yarning with Steve. Nice bloke and very friendly.
I bet he doesn't remember me though.😒
Too soon...?
i LOLed
-
Still very early in the process but will be very interesting to see how the case develops.
I'm obviously not an expert in English law, but two things are going to be very interesting to keep an eye on.
The first is who the defendants are going to be in the suit and in what capacity. In this case the RFU is an employer (in the case of the international players) but also has an oversight function over the clubs. So it will be interesting to see the basis of their culpability. If it is based on their failure to conduct oversight then their liability would effectively be limitless (every player in England would effectively have claim against them).
The second issue would be fault/unlawfulness of their actions (or inaction). What did they reasonably know and when. The basic test for negligence is 1 - would the reasonable man have foreseen the risk 2 would the reasonable man have taken steps to mitigate the risk and 3 did the defendant take these steps to mitigate the risks? So saying "we didn't know because we didnt care to find out" wouldnt work, but we had reason to foresee the risk would.
All of the above are of course complicated OHS legislation, but it might be very difficult to prove when the damage occurred so it is not clear if OHS legislation would even apply.
Mike's point above basically comes down to consent. Here there are questions to consider. On policy grounds is this a risk we want people (especially minors) to be able to consent to? And secondly, was the consent given fairly ie what information was available when the consent was given.
-
@taniwharugby said in Rugby Brain Injuries:
@MiketheSnow was it North who had a couple several years back and appeared he went back on after being knocked out?
The best back from the ‘Tyson Fury’ dead must be George Smith.
The authorities knew better by this point.
-
@MiketheSnow said in Rugby Brain Injuries:
@taniwharugby said in Rugby Brain Injuries:
@MiketheSnow was it North who had a couple several years back and appeared he went back on after being knocked out?
The best back from the ‘Tyson Fury’ dead must be George Smith.
Different code i know, but Dean Lonergan wins all contests about getting knocked out and playing on
-
@canefan said in Rugby Brain Injuries:
@MiketheSnow said in Rugby Brain Injuries:
@taniwharugby said in Rugby Brain Injuries:
@MiketheSnow was it North who had a couple several years back and appeared he went back on after being knocked out?
The best back from the ‘Tyson Fury’ dead must be George Smith.
Different code i know, but Dean Lonergan wins all contests about getting knocked out and playing on
Jesus
Both arms in the air like a rear gunner in a Lancastar bomber and then legs like Shakin' Stevens.
Letting him back on the park is criminal in retrospect.
-
@canefan surely only a matter of time before league has a similar issue?
-
@MiketheSnow said in Rugby Brain Injuries:
@taniwharugby said in Rugby Brain Injuries:
@MiketheSnow was it North who had a couple several years back and appeared he went back on after being knocked out?
The best back from the ‘Tyson Fury’ dead must be George Smith.
The authorities knew better by this point.
First off, what a tough nugget Smith was. Second off fuck you, whoever it was sanctioned him going back on.
-
@MiketheSnow said in Rugby Brain Injuries:
@canefan said in Rugby Brain Injuries:
@MiketheSnow said in Rugby Brain Injuries:
@taniwharugby said in Rugby Brain Injuries:
@MiketheSnow was it North who had a couple several years back and appeared he went back on after being knocked out?
The best back from the ‘Tyson Fury’ dead must be George Smith.
Different code i know, but Dean Lonergan wins all contests about getting knocked out and playing on
Jesus
Both arms in the air like a rear gunner in a Lancastar bomber and then legs like Shakin' Stevens.
Letting him back on the park is criminal in retrospect.
He apparently never remembered a minute of the game after that, in what was a famous victory for the Kiwis. I met the man in a bar years ago, he was very gracious when I asked to shake his hand....
-
@taniwharugby said in Rugby Brain Injuries:
@canefan surely only a matter of time before league has a similar issue?
Absolutely. Their historic penchant for shoulder charges must see them as a higher risk code for brain injuries
-
What I think has been missed here is the suit is as much about the continual micro injuries from pretty much every hit/ruck/tackle etc. So the big bash concussion management is maybe not as important as the continual damage that pro players do to each other. You see all the articles which compare a full on high speed tackle to a car crash at XYZ kph, that is the real problem rugby has. In fact every contact sport.
-
@Machpants said in Rugby Brain Injuries:
What I think has been missed here is the suit is as much about the continual micro injuries from pretty much every hit/ruck/tackle etc. So the big bash concussion management is maybe not as important as the continual damage that pro players do to each other.
I saw something similar in a story about NFL players - they found it wasn't the big ones that were getting guys: the continual smashing together on the scrimmage line over time was where the "floor" for CTE developed.
To me it made the argument for removing helmets and shoulder pads from NFL - remove the false sense of security.
Similarly in boxing, waaaaay back in the days when it was bareknuckle, hitting the head was often counter-productive as you'd like break a small bone in your hand. Not that having your ribs and organs smashed up was any better I guess...
-
@NTA said in Rugby Brain Injuries:
@Machpants said in Rugby Brain Injuries:
What I think has been missed here is the suit is as much about the continual micro injuries from pretty much every hit/ruck/tackle etc. So the big bash concussion management is maybe not as important as the continual damage that pro players do to each other.
I saw something similar in a story about NFL players - they found it wasn't the big ones that were getting guys: the continual smashing together on the scrimmage line over time was where the "floor" for CTE developed.
To me it made the argument for removing helmets and shoulder pads from NFL - remove the false sense of security.
Pads and helmets for safety is such an American solution. Especially when you see what they do with them on the field
VIDEO: Throwback to a shocking moment on the Rugby field in 1991 | Rugby Onslaught
