I'm not a passionate supporter of banning it but I can accpet it as its such a minor part of the game. Some musings to some of the points raised -
NFL comparison is irrelevant - The NFL dwarfs the NRL by virtually every measure but there are obvious similarities between the two ? certain amount of plays to get so far, having ball runners being tackled, many with shoulder charges. Unlike the NRL there have been large, long term studies done on the effects of repeated concussions in the NFL. There was a strong correlation with repeat concussions and FATAL brain diseases and suicides later in life. Not a 30% or 50% increase but 300-400% more likely.
Back in 2011 intentional helmet-to-helmet collision were banned. Not only this but defenseless players cannot be hit in the head or neck with the shoulder or forearm. A defenseless player includes passers, kickers, receivers without time to avoid contact, ball carrier whose progress stopped etc.
Is there much difference between padded helmet-to-helmet collisions and non-padded head-to-shoulder collisions and far as trauma goes?
NFL still allows shoulder charges - Aside from a defenseless player, yes, the NFL still allows shoulder charges as a legitimate tackling technique. Would they, however, if there were no helmets or huge shoulder pads?
What about other injuries? Do they not matter? - You can?t compare a knee injury, even a serious career ending one which could also be surgically corrected later, with a FATAL brain disease. There is a difference between injuries likely to inconvenience your life and those likely to kill you. It?s the reason spear tackles are banned. Has anyone died from a spear tackle in the NRL? No? Then why are they banned? You can?t even go beyond horizontal now. Risk mitigation, along with dangerous throws, tripping, crusher tackles etc.
Boxing/MMA is allowed - There is a difference in liability which rests with the insurance companies rather then the governing body. Generally speaking boxing club membership has a reasonably high premium component, which then skyrocket on the individual for pro fights, as well as ironclad waivers. And as others have said the whole raison d?etre is taking head shots. No one plays league for that.
More concussions come from the knee/hip - The onus here is on the defender?s technique. Accidents will always happen with tackles gone wrong but the big difference is intent. A defender doesn?t go into the tackle trying to inflict concussion on himself, but rather the ball carrier. Maybe concussion is not the intent but trying to whack the guy as hard as possible with the shoulder and knowing that concussion is a distinct possibility. The ball carrier doesn?t have much of a say, unlike the tackler.
The Jarrod McCraken incident players were sued, not the NRL - Only because spear tackles were contrary to the rules and deemed foul play.
All 16 doctors supported the proposal. Not a single dissenting voice. Not one. To suggest the ARLC then ignore it is non-sensical. There would?ve been an injunction before the season starts by some medical body or safety advocate now the word is out.
(NLF) Commissioner Roger Goodell spoke at the Harvard School of Public Health, where he trumpeted the league?s efforts to increase the safety of its players and proclaimed that ?medical decisions override everything else.?
Thousands of ex-players are suing the NFL. Compensation may still be sought from the NRL as well in future but if they didn?t draw a line in the sand, in light of the club doctors support, it would be open season, potentially bankrupting the game.
Three retired NFL players received at least $2 million in disability payments as a result of brain trauma injuries from their playing days, according to an article by ESPN and the PBS series ?Frontline.?
The payments were made in the 1990s and early 2000s by the Bell/Rozelle NFL Player Retirement Plan, a committee comprising representatives of the owners, players and NFL commissioner.
As there is currently no such benevolent fund in league the buck will stop with the NRL.
Civilisation is inexorably moving to remove risk and promote safety in all facets of life. It is unavoidable. People may vote with their feet next season, and so be it, but it won?t change this decision. It is done. Time to move on.
