On Triple M yesterday, the topic of concussion was raised, with James Graham stating actually understanding what a concussion is he realised he received way more than originally first thought. Ideas keep floating around of how to assist it, Graham mentioned a theory back in the day where athletes were asked "If you could take something that will help you win Olympic Gold but it would kill you in 5 years would you still take it?" and majority said yes they would, this is the same for NRL players. Tallis mentioned that the NRL should bring in a waiver for players to sign so they know what they get into, like on cigarette packets it has in big, bold print that it will kill you yet people still buy them regardless.
I think it is a fair idea and rejected this notion of players sueing the ESL and NRL for getting concussions. At the end of the day, nobody is making you play NRL. If you want to retire then retire that is your choice, if people do not like it then bad luck. Nobody has a gun to their head to play, it is up to them. It is like people sueing cigarette companies after they get lung cancer, you made that choice.
I have no issue with players signing waivers, this policy of sueing the code after playing can be abused to get more money out of the code and it is not fair. I agree with Tallis.
However, i will say i do not agree with Tallis on the whole a head of footy is a made up title and head coach should 100% be in control. Is he an idiot? You let a coach have 100% control you get Des Hasler at Canterbury, looked what happened. So Tallis aint the best person for words of reason in the game but he is right here.
Replies
There needs to be more Data before waivers are introduced so that Players are informed and can make an appropriate decision. It would be very interesting if they actually got some actuarial boffins to run the numbers in terms of all NRL players that have had significant careers and the rate of early onset dementia.
We have already seen our 80s stars starting to present with this (Ray Price. Steve Mortimor now Mario Fenech). Its a worry for the game no doubt .
I think the game is definitely better than the 80's now by a mile but we still have a way to go.
Thanks for sharing this, LB.
Some time ago, Michael Ericson opined that waivers would probably not legally work in the NRL.
The NRL still have a duty of care, and unlike boxing or pro-wrestling where blows to the head are permissible, for now they're against the rules.
The other point that almost always gets missed is concussion is the tip of the iceberg.
It's about far more than concussion.
The NRL do a reasonable Job dealing with concussions and align themselves to the latest in international safety protocols, etc. Player welfare and so on.
But, If you look at what the CTE experts have shown in their studies (the ones in the Brain Banks slicing brains open not the ones paid for by the NRL who wrote papers putting doubt into the link between the game and CTE and any long term effects )- it's a real concern.
For one, it's widespread in high contact sports such as boxing, NFL and thus RL, RU, and probably even the AFL. From junior/college level to pro and elite. It's a serious degenerative brain disease.
Two, and importantly, it's not just caused by heavy knocks or concussion. It's caused by repetitive head traumas - even small traumas caused by the huge G-forces in collisions (most NRL are over 20G every game).
The longer you play, the more your chances.
It's not just about hits to the head, big knocks or concussion. It's small traumas done often enough.
All that gets missed, because we're focused on concussions.
And perhaps it would explain why the NRL keep it an arm's length and have their commissioned experts writing papers downplaying the link between CTE/head traumas in the game and any side effects (anyone see the contradiction and irony?)
Now, at the moment it's not causing a drama for our game.
But, in years, in decades to come think of these three things.
One, a breakthrough. CTE can become tested in the living (unlike now, relying on donors).
Two, widespread testing occurs (perhaps with some resistance from some sporting bodies).
Three, laywers intervene in court rooms.
And it becomes accepted that the longer you play a high collision gameong enough you have a high chance of even if you're careful and don't suffer from concussions.
That's when some of this will really hit the fan, especially for mums and dads when little Johnny or Mary want to play the game.
The difference is in the old days the players welfare was non existent you played until you couldn't stand.
Even at junior level were more aware of it My dad said the other day he remembered me getting flattened of a shoulder charge my coach Pete who was a butcher came out wiggled his fingers in my face gave me some water and said I was good. Dad said in hindsight why did anyone let Pete the butcher decided if you were good or not.
Players now have all the best medical advice and data and policies and that will continue to grow as much as we complain about the softening of the game it's a necessary evil.
My son plays footy he loves it I played all my childhood but sometimes I wonder if I'd rather him play soccer