Alex McKinnon possibly Quadriplegic - Mclean guilty of dangerous throw - 7 weeks

[lockyno1]

Lockys suggestion of allowing the ball to be dropped if lifted is a good one because it has little if no impact on the game.

Just call it dead, hate using a cricket term, but it is deemed as a 'dead ball'. If you drop it in a defence situation you are not penalised!

 

[betcats]

Bullshit, while I don't wish to watch it again, someone else can than say if was it an instinctive protective movement. I say, it was not and I want to know why.

To me it looks like he ducked his head excpecting to roll out of it a bit, like he thought he was further vertical then he actually was.

There is nothing more too it imo. But you seem desperate to lay this at the feet of the nrl or the coaches somehow, goodluck with that.

 

[lockyno1]

you are an idiot

increasing the penalty would not have prevented this from occurring

it was not intentional

Players would think twice about lifting. You say...you lift, you have 5 weeks to think about it. Would the players lift? Maybe, but the less dumb players would think about the consequences! I mean not every player has no brains!

 

[herbert henry1908]

Yo can use 3, it would be a penalty, the deterrent is there. I think the NRL must act, this really should have been done 2-3 years ago though.

Can't agree with this one.


It would totally alter the game .

 

[9701]

Lockys suggestion of allowing the ball to be dropped if lifted is a good one because it has little if no impact on the game.

And of course the benefit of allowing a player to better control his fall.




It would be likely that a player wouldn't remember to do it in all instances but at least the option would be there & a player wouldn't feel the pressure to retain the ball.

I get where all the people saying being allowed to drop the ball is a good idea, however, if the refs did their jobs and penalised every single tackle that has gone past horizontal it wouldn't matter about the ball. You would drop it and still receive a penalty. The current rule actually being enforced would allow the dropping of the ball.

 

[ek999]

Yo can use 3, it would be a penalty, the deterrent is there. I think the NRL must act, this really should have been done 2-3 years ago though.

But then it is effectively a professional foul because you are giving away penalty to stop a try. That or a penalty try. Kasiano and Burgess would become two of the most valuable in the league the instant you bring in that rule. They will be looking to offload in every single tackle too. I like the sentiment of the rule but I don't think it would be practical.

Although with the Bulldogs forward pack next year it would probably give us a premiership. Don't need a fullback or halfback when you have 5 or 6 forwards capable of loading every single time they run the ball.

 

[El Diablo]

Players would think twice about lifting. You say...you lift, you have 5 weeks to think about it. Would the players lift? Maybe, but the less dumb players would think about the consequences! I mean not every player has no brains!

you don't get it

he would not have been thinking about lifting when this occurred

 

[ek999]

I get where all the people saying being allowed to drop the ball is a good idea, however, if the refs did their jobs and penalised every single tackle that has gone past horizontal it wouldn't matter about the ball. You would drop it and still receive a penalty. The current rule actually being enforced would allow the dropping of the ball.

I think they mean when ever a player is lifted off the ground not just when above the horizontal

 

[lockyno1]

But then it is effectively a professional foul because you are giving away penalty to stop a try. That or a penalty try. Kasiano and Burgess would become two of the most valuable in the league the instant you bring in that rule. They will be looking to offload in every single tackle too. I like the sentiment of the rule but I don't think it would be practical.

Although with the Bulldogs forward pack next year it would probably give us a premiership. Don't need a fullback or halfback when you have 5 or 6 forwards capable of loading every single time they run the ball.

Look 2 is fine, I'd be happy to add the third but he must and I repeat MUST tackle around the mid stomach area (only to be allowed in the 10m range).

 

[lockyno1]

you don't get it

he would not have been thinking about lifting when this occurred

So he is one of the 'dumb' ones. We know we have a few of them. That is where education comes into it. Coaches have to educate players on the risks of these tackles. I bet if players have to spend 1-2 hours at a spinal unit they wouldn't lift!

 

[lockyno1]

I think they mean when ever a player is lifted off the ground not just when above the horizontal

Correct, as soon as your feet leave the ground you can drop the ball. If it isn't a dangerous tackle, play the ball. If it is, penalty.

 

[magpie4ever]

To me it looks like he ducked his head excpecting to roll out of it a bit, like he thought he was further vertical then he actually was.

There is nothing more too it imo. But you seem desperate to lay this at the feet of the nrl or the coaches somehow, goodluck with that.

Well it is the elephant in the room, that head movement wasn't natural and was not an instinctive protective motion. It needs to be asked because if it goes to a court case, it will be raised.

 

[El Diablo]

So he is one of the 'dumb' ones. We know we have a few of them. That is where education comes into it. Coaches have to educate players on the risks of these tackles. I bet if players have to spend 1-2 hours at a spinal unit they wouldn't lift!

it happened in a split second and other factors contributed to it

nobody involved would have been thinking they were lifting

go to LA

 

[Tucantango]

one on one, probably ok. comes in as shit happens.

third man in, living above horizontal. Goodbye. immediate send off, 4 weeks. no interpretation for the refs. if it happens. see ya later.

as for the law.

NSW
In New South Wales your injury has to be completely stabilised to pursue a lump sum claim (aka Common Law Claim) and your work related impairment is over 15% for physical and psychological injuries. Negligence also has to be established from the workplace accident.

Pursing a NSW Common Law Claim takes your past and future losses into consideration as well as the pain your have been going through and the agony. The insurance companies does not take these into account which therefore limits your compensation. The Common Law Claim is through the grounds of the legal scheme. Some of the benefits include:
- Past and future pecuniary losses
- Past and future health expenses
- Past and future out of pocket costs
- Pain and suffering.


VIC
To pursue a Common Law claim negligence has to be established. If your employer was negligent for your injury and you have sustained an injury that has left you with a permanent disability of 30% whole person impairment, have ongoing medical treatment and loss of wages then you may be entitled to run a Common Law Claim.

What are the benefits of pursuing a common Law Claim in Victoria?
Pursing a Common Law Claim in the state of Victoria can help recover your past and future losses and pain and suffering that the insurance company just does not take into account. Therefore this can help you significantly with your financial concerns and also emotionally as you will have the support with you during the life of your Victoria Workers Compensation Claim. By seeking legal advice you will be educated on your further entitlements after a workplace injury.

from my reading being made a quad will get you $257.000 in insurance payout. if you can prove negligence. pretty much uncapped.

Thanks for that!

The issue of 'uncapped damages' is very pertinent.

By the way do you know if Victoria has similar legislation to NSW's 'Employee Liability Act'?

 

[edabomb]

"Fairfax Media was told that Newcastle players were taught to tuck their heads and roll to protect themselves when lifted in a tackle but McKinnon is thought to have become disorientated after McLean tipped him off balance after being held upright by Jesse and Kenny Bromwich."

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-league/...neck-injury-20140325-35gkb.html#ixzz2x2Yilley

 

[Danish]

If you want to stop gang tackling, then start rewarding one on one tackling. A couple easy changes:

1) Any one on one tackle means the tackled player cannot play the ball until the tackler is square at marker, signified by a call of "play it" by the ref when the marker is ready

2) Any 2 person group tackle initiated around the legs WITHOUT lifting e.g. one low, then one high. Shall be deemed a dominant tackle and the tacklers will be given additional time to hold down

3) As soon as forward progress is halted, held is called. Additional time allowed for tacklers to get back to marker


Seriously all this wrestling nonsense only came about when the rules were changed to punish text book tackling styles in an effort to artificially speed up the play the ball. Once players started getting pinged for holding onto the legs and holding down, coaches had to develop wrestling techniques to hold up the player, extend the tackle, and give their side a chance to get back onside again.

Remove all the stupid "holding down" and "MOOOOOOVE" calls from the game and wrestling suddenly becomes redundant.

 

[ek999]

Look 2 is fine, I'd be happy to add the third but he must and I repeat MUST tackle around the mid stomach area (only to be allowed in the 10m range).

We'll have to agree to disagree because I can't see how it would be practical.

Good tackles around the legs have to be rewarded more though

 

[lockyno1]

We'll have to agree to disagree because I can't see how it would be practical.

Good tackles around the legs have to be rewarded more though

Happy to agree to disagree. I think it could work. They could at least trial it in the NSW Cup for a couple of weeks. Agree on your 2nd point, legs tackles should be 'dominant'

 

[League_God]

I just wrote to the Melbourne Storm Football Club

To whom it may concern


I have never felt the urge to contact a football club before but the event of the last football game compels me to do so. I love to watch the great game and have for many decades.


I'm immensely saddened by the tragedy of what's happened to the young Newcastle boy Alex McKinnon as I think everyone is.


What saddens me more is the shame I feel for your club and your Captain Cameron Smith. No doubt you have seen the social media "storm" his comments on the field have started? Imagine this poor young bloke Alex on the ground unable to feel part of his body and the rush of shock taking over as he not only sees all his footballing dreams evaporate but perhaps his chance of a decent future as well. Just imagine as the world closes in around him the voice he can hear in the distance is of a petulant child ( your Captain ) arguing that it was his ( Mckinnons ) fault.


Cameron Smith in this moment brought shame upon himself , the Melbourne Storm Football Club and the game in general. Any decent person with honor and any sense of sportsmanship would find his actions a disgrace. Whether he knew of the severity of this young mans injury is irrelevant.


Let's all hope that Alex Mckinnon gets through this difficult time.

Well said mate!

I suggest everyone else who was appalled by Cam Smith's comments write a similar email

 

[betcats]

"Fairfax Media was told that Newcastle players were taught to tuck their heads and roll to protect themselves when lifted in a tackle but McKinnon is thought to have become disorientated after McLean tipped him off balance after being held upright by Jesse and Kenny Bromwich."

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-league/...neck-injury-20140325-35gkb.html#ixzz2x2Yilley

Rest easy magpie, the question has been asked and it was as as it looked, he was trying to roll out.