AFL and Concussion - Angus Brayshaw retirement | PUNT ROAD END | Richmond Tigers Forum
  • IMPORTANT // Please look after your loved ones, yourself and be kind to others. If you are feeling that the world is too hard to handle there is always help - I implore you not to hesitate in contacting one of these wonderful organisations Lifeline and Beyond Blue ... and I'm sure reaching out to our PRE community we will find a way to help. T.

AFL and Concussion - Angus Brayshaw retirement

Jason King said:
He should be suspended. Just like drunk drivers, it's reasonably foreseeable that if you have a poor technique you might come off second best.
Click to expand...
Perhaps not suspended, maybe not even a free kick, but if umpires called "play-on, lead with his head!" as they do when it's obvious a player ducked into a tackle "play-on ducked his head!" everyone hears it and sees it and it's clear that you don't get rewarded that way. Eventually it becomes second nature to turn your body to protect yourself when you're contesting the ball.

Anyone leading with their head (the same as ducking their head) becomes obvious because the action stands out and it's NOT a free kick to them.

This has been going on too long and the umpires (many of whom have never been taught to play the game, which isn't necessarily their fault) have the wrong understanding. They just see a head high bump and blow their whistle and now, here we are. Confused, annoyed and concussed.
 
YeOldeTiger said:
Couldn't agree more. Hayward in danger of hurting himself. Wilmot did the right thing.

This is basically the Cotchin - Shiel incident all over again. Cotch turns to the side as you should and Shiel goes in head first. Cotch's shoulder collects Shiel's head. It's seems the AFL have learned nothing.

If both players turn to the side they bump shoulders and play on. If they're both turned side on and one player gets the other player high then fair enough, that's a free.

Bear in mind Duckwood would have cost himself about 500 free kicks if he turned side on instead of leading with his head.
Click to expand...
Different collision. Shiel/Cotchin were side by side, not approaching the ball in different directions like Wilmott/Hayward. Silly comparison. Cotchin initiated contact, Shiel was almost ignorant to it. Either way it was Cotchin's action that created the contact. Whether he hit him in the head or had anything to do with his subsequent subbing is the arguable part.
 
MD Jazz said:
Different collision. Shiel/Cotchin were side by side, not approaching the ball in different directions like Wilmott/Hayward. Silly comparison. Cotchin initiated contact, Shiel was almost ignorant to it. Either way it was Cotchin's action that created the contact. Whether he hit him in the head or had anything to do with his subsequent subbing is the arguable part.
Click to expand...
Yes you've been flogging this dead horse for literally years now. And yet it's almost universally agreed that Cotchin had no case to answer as he never took his eyes off the ball and simply beat Shiel to the footy. I'm not the only one to make the "silly" comparison. It's a very similar collision and my point still stands. I notice you made no mention of that point.

For something really silly , consider your other dead hobby horse, blaming Lynch for concussing Keath. An idiotic action when caught horribly out of position, Keath basically ran backwards into Lynch with no realistic attempt to play the ball. Lynch who was leading at the ball, with his eyes on the ball, quite rightly braced himself for impact at the last moment when he realised Keath was going to cannon into him, should have received a free kick for front on contact.

Neither of these actions resulted in any penalty to Cotchin or Lynch and rightly so. You have a way of comparing apples with lemons which only leaves a sour taste in your mouth.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Jason King said:
He should be suspended. Just like drunk drivers, it's reasonably foreseeable that if you have a poor technique you might come off second best.
Click to expand...
it's a decent point... and maybe the AFL need to think about that ...

... when pontificating the 'head is sacrosanct' agenda... duty of care going both ways...
 
Brodders17 said:
If Wilmot goes for the ball the same way Hayward does the only difference to the result would have been that Wilmot got knocked out too.
Click to expand...
And the poor umpire wouldn't know who to give a free too - oh, wait, yes he would - Nick Daicos.
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: 2 users
YeOldeTiger said:
Yes you've been flogging this dead horse for literally years now. And yet it's almost universally agreed that Cotchin had no case to answer as he never took his eyes off the ball and simply beat Shiel to the footy. I'm not the only one to make the "silly" comparison. It's a very similar collision and my point still stands. I notice you made no mention of that point.

For something really silly , consider your other dead hobby horse, blaming Lynch for concussing Keath. An idiotic action when caught horribly out of position, Keath basically ran backwards into Lynch with no realistic attempt to play the ball. Lynch who was leading at the ball, with his eyes on the ball, quite rightly braced himself for impact at the last moment when he realised Keath was going to cannon into him, should have received a free kick for front on contact.

Neither of these actions resulted in any penalty to Cotchin or Lynch and rightly so. You have a way of comparing apples with lemons which only leaves a sour taste in your mouth.
Click to expand...
I never thought Cotchin should be suspended? Flogging a dead horse for years?

Two players approaching the ball side by side against approaching it from opposite sides of the ball? Similar? Apples & Lemons?

Lynch concussed Keith whilst protecting himself, that's a fact. Keith was an idiot the way he approached the contest. Lynch did what any normal footballer would do and protect himself. But he definitely didn't play the ball (he likely gets hit whilst open by Keith if he does). Lynch isn't watching the ball when he collects Keith. Why would he, an idiot was running recklessly at him. Keith had no way of spoiling the ball, he simply ran at Lynch.

I'm pointing out that the AFL has an issue with any instance that causes concussion. They need to be very clear about what players can and cannot do and what their duty of care is. I suspect if Lynch was to do the same thing this year he would be suspended, as would Cotchin.
 
I think the real change will be generational.

current players have muscle memory from u10's coaches holding a bag and teaching them the revered hip and shoulder.

very hard to unlearn technique, even harder to unlearn culture.

the H&S and 'Ran back with the flight' are the concussive half of The Holy Quadrella of our game:

The Speccy: The Torp': The Hip and Shoulder: Ran back with the flight

and so they should have been; they are extremely hard to do well, sport is ritualised war where courage is commodity No.1, and we never knew the science and long term effects of concussion.

but now we know, and we may just have to make do with a Holy Quinella, or revere new things (punters seem to enjoy Kiss Cam during breaks at The Gabba?)

ban the H&S, probably dont run back with the flight, eyes only for the ball. maybe teach kids to take a precautionary glance to see if there's any head about to be poleaxed by a knee?

Cultural change is what's needed, and that doesn't happen at a reactionary AFL rules committee meeting full of Old Xavs who are only qualified to sell Audis or Lexuses for a mates dad, on a fifth of the money

We create culture

teach kids to always protect others and their own heads.

maybe a squib becomes acceptable, if it preserves someones brain, theirs or yours?

squib needs rebranding and validation by dads (yes dads, not mums) across Australia? maybe we change the language and 'to squib' becomes 'protected'.

"jeez you protected yourself beautifully out there today son'

'very deft protection there by young gryan miers Jonathan Brown'

'not many have more acute hearing for footsteps than Kyron Hayden (that will test @spook McAvaney out) do they BT?'
'No, he is a marvellously careful and tough young player with a long career and a cognitively healthy retirement ahead of him JB'

perhaps in 20 years, we'll hear 'he didn't *smile* GLANCE!!!!!' screamed over the fence at The G or 'No Precaution whatsoever you green maggots'

the game has to change culturally

or it will end up like rugby union; a cultural relic of a bygone era.

It wont be the AFL that lead the change; they couldn't lead a Labrador with a rump steak.

it will be us, junior clubs, school teachers, players, families, umpires (gulp), the media (gulp), the courts, doctors and scientists

and the u10 coaches (gulp).

there's an "alcohol-free Bottle'O' in Byron Bay. Maybe 'monogamous brothels' and 'concussion free footy' are next? :oops:

(starts timer to see how long before 'woke' gets written)

acts like Websters yesterday will speed the process up. Doesn't help poor jy Simpkin but

end of rant thesis

#protecttheheadproperlyandtrytomstewartfortheftofapremiership
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Another retirement from concussions, Nathan Murphy, 24.
 
  • Sad
Reactions: 2 users
Tigers of Old said:
Bulldogs recruit Aiden O'Driscoll becomes the third player this year to retire from concussion. He hasn't played a game yet.

MSN

www.msn.com
Click to expand...

Do they get a payout?

surely that has to part of the games responsibility?

Are WorkSafe involved? or is it just another area where The AFL somehow manage to ring fence themselves from all Legislative responsibility: A law unto themselves, where a tick ameliorates every ill?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
eZyT said:
Do they get a payout?

surely that has to part of the games responsibility?

Are WorkSafe involved? or is it just another area where The AFL somehow manage to ring fence themselves from all Legislative responsibility: A law unto themselves, where a tick ameliorates every ill?
Click to expand...

Apparently he gets a $250k payout.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Biggest test will come prelim final.
Imagine Dusty going down with concussion automatically ruling him out of the GF.
Pre finals bye moved too pre GF bye.Covers the 12 days?
 
While indeed sad for his future as a professional footy player, this is a positive for his future health.

If these protocols had have been around years ago, maybe players like Shane Tuck would have decided to retire early, avoided the troubles he faced post football and still been with us.

The more awareness of concussion and affects, and better protocols, then better outcomes for player health and reduction in CTE cases in the future
 
  • Like
Reactions: 6 users
You must log in or register to reply here.
< Adam Simpson Gone!! | Play Balta BACK!!! >
Official PRE merch now on Redbubble!
Top Bottom