-
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.
Head knocks
- Thread starter graystar1
- Start date
If you.you don't want to get hurt them don't play the sport. It's akin to a boxer suing for head damage.
What is rarely mentioned is the flow on affect to lower levels of footy - how can they survive?
Interestingly there doesn't seem to be any noise of players suing at lower levels where the concussion care would be far worse.
What is rarely mentioned is the flow on affect to lower levels of footy - how can they survive?
Interestingly there doesn't seem to be any noise of players suing at lower levels where the concussion care would be far worse.
No. Just do it much better. No more wet lettuce penalties. Control those things that you can influence.
Port fined 100k. I reckon that is a pretty weak response from the AFL seeing as they have history already in this area. Should have been docked points and doctor sacked.
www.foxsports.com.au
Power handed big fine for breach that ‘increased risk’ around star Aliir Aliir’s wellbeing
Power slapped with BIG fine over concussion breach
www.foxsports.com.au
Would have docked them points as well. 20 points.Port fined 100k. I reckon that is a pretty weak response from the AFL seeing as they have history already in this area. Should have been docked points and doctor sacked.
Power handed big fine for breach that ‘increased risk’ around star Aliir Aliir’s wellbeing
Power slapped with BIG fine over concussion breach
Would it be far worse? From my experience watching the QAFL its not the case, might even be more caution. Bush leagues, stakes aren't as high and players are members of the community, they the care might be better.
I have no idea, but just making the point it may not be the case.
Port fined 100k. I reckon that is a pretty weak response from the AFL seeing as they have history already in this area. Should have been docked points and doctor sacked.
Power handed big fine for breach that ‘increased risk’ around star Aliir Aliir’s wellbeing
Power slapped with BIG fine over concussion breach
Incredibly weak, and remember its really a $50k fine, the other was a fine but isn't included in their cap so who cares.
I'll give a scenario (and this is also why the doctor shouldn't be a club doctor but independent).
You are a goal down, 10 minutes into the final quarter of the GF and your star player clashes heads with someone but says they are ok to continue, do you:
A: Send the players back on, knowing it will only cost you $50k but gives you a chance of a premiership
B: Do the right thing for the players welfare
I'm pretty sure with this sort of weak penalty, most clubs would pressure the club doctor to do A.
There was a really concerning interview on radio a few weeks ago with a head trauma specialist. Professor somebody or other.
Anyway, he was saying that there is now overwhelming evidence that suggests that the majority of CTE cases do not come from direct head injuries but rather, repeat forces of resistance that are of a general nature instead e.g. being tackled without head contact of any kind, general bumping or contact with body on body such as in marking contests, running into pack situations etc. Basically, anything that involves any motion being resisted, and how the brain still moves around inside the skull when this happens.
When he was asked what does that mean for the game, he said there will need to be massive changes - stuff way way beyond what we've seen so far - if the AFL wants to eliminate as best as possible the chances of head trauma. It was then suggested that would mean having a game that nobody is familiar with nor wants (i.e. a game with zero contact) and whilst he tried to water it down, he had no real suggestions to the contrary.
AFL has been going the way of glorified basketball anyway I guess.
Anyway, he was saying that there is now overwhelming evidence that suggests that the majority of CTE cases do not come from direct head injuries but rather, repeat forces of resistance that are of a general nature instead e.g. being tackled without head contact of any kind, general bumping or contact with body on body such as in marking contests, running into pack situations etc. Basically, anything that involves any motion being resisted, and how the brain still moves around inside the skull when this happens.
When he was asked what does that mean for the game, he said there will need to be massive changes - stuff way way beyond what we've seen so far - if the AFL wants to eliminate as best as possible the chances of head trauma. It was then suggested that would mean having a game that nobody is familiar with nor wants (i.e. a game with zero contact) and whilst he tried to water it down, he had no real suggestions to the contrary.
AFL has been going the way of glorified basketball anyway I guess.
might as well kill any form for fighting sport, boxing, ufc, mma
While we are at it, throw out the olympics as well, pretty sure most of those sports have those kind of motions
I wonder how many ex AFL/VFL players out there are suffering from some form of concussion symptoms in their life post footy?
I love the game but it makes me a bit sick thinking it's participants are basically having their brains scrambled.
I love the game but it makes me a bit sick thinking it's participants are basically having their brains scrambled.
I witnessed an Under 8 get knocked out cold last Sunday, the sound was sickening. The club did the best they could with what they had (not even a stretcher available) at our home games we have a stretcher on both grounds and a proper hired medical person.
This kid could potentially play again this weekend, the AFL really need to lead the way on this. A young developing brain copping a few of these could be devastating later in life. Much to my kids disgust maybe helmets should be mandatory until a certain age level.
Dont get me started on girls footy, i watch my daughter play and the girls have no idea how to protect themselves and head knocks happen every week, unfortunately helmets are not cool dad.
This problem will only get worse as science advances and we learn more.
This kid could potentially play again this weekend, the AFL really need to lead the way on this. A young developing brain copping a few of these could be devastating later in life. Much to my kids disgust maybe helmets should be mandatory until a certain age level.
Dont get me started on girls footy, i watch my daughter play and the girls have no idea how to protect themselves and head knocks happen every week, unfortunately helmets are not cool dad.
This problem will only get worse as science advances and we learn more.
The helmet thing has been done to death a thousand times over.
Helmets do basically nothing more than protect against injury that is external to the brain e.g. fractures of the skull, bruising of the skull, cuts to the head etc.
Othwerwise, in their current design, helmets do next to nothing to prevent brain injury.
This is a big problem, concussion is a result of the head banging around inside the skull.
Yes, a hit on the head is a major cause of this, but you don't have to hit the head to rattle the brain. You just need a sharp movement and/or a quick stop, and the brain rattles around against the skull.
As a cyclist I would also warn against helmets being of any use in concussion. I am yet to see evidence that helmets do much at all, if anything, about stopping the brain rattling against the skull. You slam your head into the ground with a helmet on, it does little or nothing to stop the deceleration of the head. People often point to a broken helmet and claim that it protected them, a broken helmet is a helmet that failed, when it breaks any deceleration effect of the foam cushioning the fall is lost. Similarly, the helmets you see footballers wearing would do very little to stop the brain banging against the side of the skull, a little bit of cushioning but not much.
I don't know what the answer is. Australian Football is a contact sport. In any case, there are many situations where our heads decelerate very quickly, a car accident is an obvious one even when the head is not hit (should we have helmets in cars - think of the children!, also think that one of the largest causes of head injuries is car accidents). Any activity which causes the brain to rattle inside the skull is potentially dangerous, where do we draw the line?
This is not an easy issue and it goes a lot further than football and contact sports.
DS
Well this professor dude was saying that everyone is different where absorbing direct head knocks and absorbing basic and general continual sudden resistance to motion is concerned.
Some people only need one knock to the head to incur serious and permanent damage, whereas somebody else can receive multiple knocks of the same magnitude and not have any permanent damage at all.
Same with incidental or general resistance to motion that doesn't involve the head. He said that some people can play footy for 20 years and go through thousands and thousands of resistance to motion incidents and not have any issue. But others are left with permanent damage which itself fluctuates according to severity.
Exactly. As has been explained by endless experts that is why helmets - in their current form - do next to nothing to prevent brain injury.
It's the movement or rattling around of the brain inside the skull from sudden resistance to inertia that causes it.
What's being touted as a mitigation is helmets that have a movable shell inside of themselves to absorb impact. These are being trialled as we speak.
Interesting. Hopefully they get to a point where they can test who might be susceptible to CTE before they undertake contact sport.
