Grounds are harder too. That’s probably something they could look at.
I think they need to be doing more to support former players. No one knew what CTE was when Frawley played.
They also need a transparent tribunal system which punishes action not outcome and where precedent is used to create consistency
The issue is that we know more about the impacts of collisions on the brain than we used to, and as such we need to adapt to the new knowledge. Players did not know that they risked life long brain related issues if they “manned up” and got back on the field after a hit
It’s a workplace they are allways responsible.
It’s not a hobby or activity where you do it at your own risk. They are covered by work safe etc.
I shudder to think what Joel Selwood brain will be like in 20 years
Should we just accept any future tragedies along the lines of Danny Frawley or should we actually try to make sure that people that play the game can live a full life. Complaining that your entertainment has gone soft, doesn’t really match up when you compare it to a real human life
Yeah I’m aware of that. My point is that once they have found out about the potential for long term brain injuries they have tightened aspects of the game up markedly which I’ve referred to in earlier posts. At what point do people allow for variables and injuries occurring in a combative contact sport?
Preliminary Point referred to it as a workplace and yes of course it is, but you’re not likely to get tackled and bumped in an accounting firm office.
Do you just wave to white flag and make it an unrecognisable, contact free sport because you’re afraid of litigation?
P.S. If there was a lag from when they were provided with the evidence and failed to make change then yes, fair enough, take the league to task for that time period where people sustained brain injuries.
You’ve gone straight to the most extreme outcome there. I was thinking more along the lines consistently updating our concussion protocols as we learn more and continuing to protect the head inside the game
Pay a tackle BEFORE the tackler has to slam the player into the ground.
What is your solution then to keep the fundamentals of what makes the game, the game, yet still make sure nobody ever sustains a brain related injury?
In some instances I agree this could be done better. In other instances the tackle and sling which goes on to affect concussion is a fairly rapid motion where it couldn’t be reasonable intervened by an umpire given they have to allow the player an opportunity to dispose of it.
There was a report some time ago that, with the exception of Victoria, injuries sustained on the sporting field are not covered by workers compensation type laws.
Why is Victoria different?
Laws differ between States, just like Victoria has voluntary assisted dying laws when some others don’t.
Luckily, no one ever repeatedly encouraged him to thrust his head into danger…
Absolutely.
A lot of the concussions are not from fist to head contact; they’re from head on ground.
AFL might have to introduce the key test ala cricket pitches
They didn’t even call him Premiership ruckman…CARNTS!
I think the only mitigation strategy that would really work is based on player management, not laws of the game.
They’ve made strides on this already - now if you fail a concussion test, you are done for the day. This might be where future efforts go, just enhancing this side of things.
Except that helmets have been shown to make the problem worse.
The thing is, despite everyone knowing about this sort of thing for a number of years now, most players still lead with their head, some because that’s the way they were taught as juniors, but lots of them do it to try and draw the free.
A helmet won’t fix that.
You’d almost need to introduce a rule that makes it illegal to lead with the head.
But similar to the below the knee rules I can see the AFL ■■■■■■■ it up.