JB&B Leach Banner
Results 1 to 13 of 13

Thread: Question

  1. #1
    Got A Season Ticket Mr.Yat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    St.Helens - where else?
    Age
    70
    Posts
    409
    Rep Power
    0

    Default Question

    Look I know we have to protect players health and their long term quality of life and so to a large degree I understand the seemingly hard line approach taken by the Disciplinary Panel. However we do seem to be lacking consistency through the Leagues, if a game is televised it allows for almost forensic examination but if it's not, it doesn't. I also see incidents in games that (as a former amateur player and current badged coach) appear to be as obvious as some of those that are punished but appear to go unnoticed.
    After the start of the season furore the RFL approach definitely seemed to me to reduce intensity and take more of a pragmatic approach.
    My question is this: has the campaign to avoid direct contact with the head or avoidance of other dangerous contact, by imposing stricter punishment actually worked? Has there been a reduction in injuries?

  2. #2
    In The South Stand retro74's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    St Helens, Lancashire
    Age
    47
    Posts
    4,638
    Rep Power
    23

    Default

    I don’t think it has reduced injuries. I don’t know the numbers but I would not be shocked to learn that it has increased injuries

    The continual banning of first teamers for innocuous incidents must place undue pressure on some squads, leading to more stress on bodies and more injuries

  3. #3
    Got A Season Ticket
    Join Date
    Oct 2021
    Posts
    199
    Rep Power
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by retro74 View Post
    I don’t think it has reduced injuries. I don’t know the numbers but I would not be shocked to learn that it has increased injuries

    The continual banning of first teamers for innocuous incidents must place undue pressure on some squads, leading to more stress on bodies and more injuries
    This is probably right. The continual banning of Knowles, Sironen and Matautia has meant that Joe Bachelor has had to play pretty much every week, which can't be good for him in the long term.

  4. #4
    In The West Stand STIDDY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Location
    Kingdom of Wigoon
    Posts
    7,129
    Rep Power
    18

    Default

    Today's game is more defence orientated and with faster line speeds we are getting more mis timed tackles. You can also add the factor of the ever increasing "faking" of being injured from a tackle, in large part the disciplinary have to give the benefit of the doubt to the victim.

    A good example of that was the Welsby tackle, I,m old school and that was a great tackle, new school is any part of the head come into contact be it direct or secondary. The disciplinary mentioned that Atkin dipped at the moment of impact but was given the benefit of the doubt with a charge A to Welsby.

    The most irritating one is when a player "cops one" when falling before contact and the tackler can't react quick enough. In the Salford game, Sio fell to the ground at the moment Lees comes rushing in and there was a clash of head against shins, Kendall calls a penalty head high tackle because Sio was injured and had to have treatment again benefit of the doubt towards the victim.

    As for televised and non televised games its officiated differently, I think Leeds were on SKY for something like 7 games of the first 10 games and in that period had quite a fair number of yellow cards and bans against them.

  5. #5
    In The South Stand retro74's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    St Helens, Lancashire
    Age
    47
    Posts
    4,638
    Rep Power
    23

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Apollo8 View Post
    This is probably right. The continual banning of Knowles, Sironen and Matautia has meant that Joe Bachelor has had to play pretty much every week, which can't be good for him in the long term.
    We’re lucky he’s still fit to be honest, he’s done some work this season for sure. Needs a rest after the GF

  6. #6
    In The South Stand retro74's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    St Helens, Lancashire
    Age
    47
    Posts
    4,638
    Rep Power
    23

    Default

    I wonder how many people have been injured due to a bad tackle or foul play? Most injuries seem to be muscle related, just from exertion I assume

  7. #7
    Starting A Programme Collection
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    792
    Rep Power
    14

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mr.Yat View Post
    Look I know we have to protect players health and their long term quality of life and so to a large degree I understand the seemingly hard line approach taken by the Disciplinary Panel. However we do seem to be lacking consistency through the Leagues, if a game is televised it allows for almost forensic examination but if it's not, it doesn't. I also see incidents in games that (as a former amateur player and current badged coach) appear to be as obvious as some of those that are punished but appear to go unnoticed.
    After the start of the season furore the RFL approach definitely seemed to me to reduce intensity and take more of a pragmatic approach.
    My question is this: has the campaign to avoid direct contact with the head or avoidance of other dangerous contact, by imposing stricter punishment actually worked? Has there been a reduction in injuries?
    I think a lot of the controversy regarding suspensions etc., is due to the perhaps knee jerk reaction to both codes of rugby regarding civil actions brought by retired players suffering from early onset dementia, in the most part these are players who played at the beginning of the professional era when both codes of rugby became faster, harder collisions, and more double tackles and wrestling type manoeuvres to prevent release of the ball resulting in limbs being stretched out of their normal range

    Hopefully eventually players,by instinct and coaching ,will tackle lower and the number of citings will fall, there will always be the odd reckless tackle that will have to be punished. At the end of the day we don't want to see our present day players health fail at a later stage of life due to their lack of protection when they played.

    Even before the game went professional a lot of our players have paid the price for not being looked after by the game. We all loved crash tackles etc. I remember so called tackles that more or less finished players careers, we don't want that to happen again, it is a sport after all, not gladiators

    The argument about prejudice against certain players or clubs will always be there, for instance Leeds fans are exactly like us in claiming bias against their team
    Last edited by Woolyback; 20th September 2022 at 09:33.

  8. #8
    In The South Stand
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    2,503
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    The MRP has lost all sense of what it's meant to be doing. It's meant to identify serious incidents that were missed by the officials and hand out relevant punishment. Instead they are micro analysing and re-refereeing games to come up with anything that can technically be found to be a ban. Knowles' ban for example is a penalty technically, although it's so far to the 'soft' end of the scale it's one of those that wouldn't have raised a question if the Salford player doesn't feign injury. It's also entirely open to hype and reactive to the media companies and social media. For example, there were several incidents in the Catalans game that could have been bans for Leeds players. But because there was so much hype and controversy surrounding Catalans and their behaviour, they ignored it all. Same with the Wigan v Leeds semi final, so much hype about our game and the hysterical reaction to us winning that they ignored that game almost entirely. Again in our semi, the worst challenges in the game, two by Elijah Taylor and the high shot and twist of the head/neck on Lomax by Sneyd were completely ignored, because of the campaigning by Sky and the desperate people on Twitter.

    Has it reduced injuries? No, it's massively reduced the quality of the product the competition is offering. The push for everything to be a card at the start of the season probably had an impact, but the panel has no common sense and it's inconsistency and re-refereeing nature has left the fans, pundits and journalists desperately scrambling around for things to suggest for bans, rather than focusing on what should be an exciting final.

  9. #9
    In The North Stand With All The Old Folk fishy3005's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    earth
    Posts
    11,546
    Rep Power
    27

    Default

    In the NRL players are so scared of catching players high that they are going in low and as a result more tacklers are getting knocked out by flying knees. You could argue that more concussions are happening. Imo a knee to the head is more dangerous than an occasional tickle across the chin. This is what happens when the game is governed by people who have never played it.
    screaming in the family corner, scaring the kiddies

  10. #10
    Learning All The Songs KentishBarry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    2,462
    Rep Power
    17

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Woolyback View Post
    I think a lot of the controversy regarding suspensions etc., is due to the perhaps knee jerk reaction to both codes of rugby regarding civil actions brought by retired players suffering from early onset dementia, in the most part these are players who played at the beginning of the professional era when both codes of rugby became faster, harder collisions, and more double tackles and wrestling type manoeuvres to prevent release of the ball resulting in limbs being stretched out of their normal range

    Hopefully eventually players,by instinct and coaching ,will tackle lower and the number of citings will fall, there will always be the odd reckless tackle that will have to be punished. At the end of the day we don't want to see our present day players health fail at a later stage of life due to their lack of protection when they played.

    Even before the game went professional a lot of our players have paid the price for not being looked after by the game. We all loved crash tackles etc. I remember so called tackles that more or less finished players careers, we don't want that to happen again, it is a sport after all, not gladiators.
    The argument about prejudice against certain players or clubs will always be there, for instance Leeds fans are exactly like us in claiming bias against their team
    I agree with most of this, except that I don't think it's a knee jerk reaction. I think it's a RFL realisation that we have to look after players wellbeing. The problem is that one of the systems used to do this, the Match Review Panel, appear to be inconsistent in their approach. Maybe more transparency id needed from them?

  11. #11
    Starting A Programme Collection
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    792
    Rep Power
    14

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KentishBarry View Post
    I agree with most of this, except that I don't think it's a knee jerk reaction. I think it's a RFL realisation that we have to look after players wellbeing. The problem is that one of the systems used to do this, the Match Review Panel, appear to be inconsistent in their approach. Maybe more transparency id needed from them?
    Quite right, wrong choice of words, I should have said words to the effect of immediate reaction

  12. #12
    In The West Stand The Wee Waa Womble's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Harrogate
    Age
    31
    Posts
    6,899
    Rep Power
    26

    Default Question

    Both codes of rugby are panicking about head contact given the looming spectre of concussion lawsuits from ex-players. It was around $1 billion to settle these lawsuits in the NFL, even a fraction of that could bankrupt rugby league.

    You look at the concussion protocols even at amateur level now and its all about protecting the head. Rugby union are straight reds for head clashes if you are upright in the tackle. At amateur level any concussion symptoms is an automatic 17 day period of rest. Gone are the days of being knocked out and carrying on, or they should be. On Saturday one of our players took a knock to the head and felt a bit dizzy, he was yanked off and whinged about it, within 10 minutes he was feeling sick. One of the opposition was clearly knocked out and played on, took a turn for the worse after the game and had to go to hospital. Head contact, even accidental, is going to be stamped out of both codes over the next 5-10 years and we may end up with a more sanitised game because of it.

    As for the issue of more suspensions increasing the impact on players having to play more games. I dont agree with this, having to play twice over a weekend a couple of times a year does way more harm. Expecting the majority of players to play every single week (injury/suspension permitting) is perfectly reasonable, at one game a week.
    Forwards win games. The backs decide by how much.

  13. #13
    In The North Stand With All The Old Folk Buddy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Queensland, Australia
    Posts
    11,191
    Rep Power
    32

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by fishy3005 View Post
    In the NRL players are so scared of catching players high that they are going in low and as a result more tacklers are getting knocked out by flying knees. You could argue that more concussions are happening. Imo a knee to the head is more dangerous than an occasional tickle across the chin. This is what happens when the game is governed by people who have never played it.
    It certainly seems like there have been more players knocked out this year than I can recall in the past.

    The issue for me with the MRP is as always with Rugby League and that's inconsistency. Taylor's tackle in the first few minutes was the worst in the game imo and it isn't even reviewed?


    Sent from my SM-F711B using Tapatalk

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •