concussion rule - need extra player on bench

[broncos2010]

Its just getting past stupid this new rule, I can understand its all about player safety but pretty much nearly in every game this week one team has not finished with a full 17 on the bench, just for example in yesterdays game tigers had no one left on the bench.

Please NRL if your going to use this rule correctly let the club be able to use an 18th/19th player then if a concussion happens, its destroying the game in some way in the opening 4 rounds.

 

[1 Eyed TEZZA]

I'm warming to this idea.

 

[dogslife]

There'd have to be a mandatory week off for the player involved or something similar, otherwise clubs will just abuse the system to get a fresh pair of legs on the field

 

[Pete Cash]

I think its something to be considered. Joel Edwards was knocked into lalaland today and didn't return leaving the Raiders quite vulnerable in defence (Fensom had been injured earlier in the game). I know injuries happen and all but the concussion rule has been introduced to save players brains so to speak. They aren't necessarily injuries that would keep a player from playing on in a less caring world.

Certainly something for the NRL to consider anyway.

 

[Matchball]

Yes. Just look at the Tigers depleted bench.
We didn't have one.

 

[eozsmiles]

There'd have to be a mandatory week off for the player involved or something similar, otherwise clubs will just abuse the system to get a fresh pair of legs on the field

A compulsory week off might tempt teams to bend the rules the other way too, and say a player is ok. If you're down 30-0 with 5 minutes to go and you take off the star halfback with a headknock you can almost give away the next game. I can see a player being told to stand on the wing for 5 minutes until it's over rather than sit down.

This is why we need neutral doctors - regardless of the rules the neutral doc will call it as they see it and nobody can scam anything.

 

[afinalsin666]

There'd have to be a mandatory week off for the player involved or something similar, otherwise clubs will just abuse the system to get a fresh pair of legs on the field

Keep an under 20s guy around to pull double duty in that case. That'd be the only way I can see it working.

 

[Pete Cash]

A compulsory week off might tempt teams to bend the rules the other way too, and say a player is ok.

This is why we need neutral doctors - regardless of the rules the neutral doc will call it as they see it and nobody can scam anything.

Yep the NRL just sends a neutral doctor to each game and if a player fails a concussion test they are replaced for the entire game. its not that hard to implement imo.

 

[Chook Norris]

Yep the NRL just sends a neutral doctor to each game and if a player fails a concussion test they are replaced for the entire game. its not that hard to implement imo.

I believe that was the original idea but the NRL stopped going ahead with it for some reason

The NRL has aborted plans to introduce independent doctors to monitor game-day concussions, believing club medicos are best qualified to determine player safety.
.
.
.
‘‘It’s not something we’re currently looking at, no,’’ Greenberg said. ‘‘There have been some governance changes where doctors now report directly to CEOs and boards rather than coaches. We need to empower club doctors to allow them to act appropriately and make good decision about their players.’’

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-league/...ussion-risk-20140219-3303n.html#ixzz2xR8C76Cs

 

[eozsmiles]

...and with the amount of $$ floating around at the moment the NRL can afford to implement some independent medical practises. I'm not sure if any other sports have neurological experts at the ground specifically to assess such things, but it wouldn't be a bad thing. Full respect to the club doctors etc currently involved, I'm not questioning their abilities or professionalism, but I'm guessing many of them specialise in tissue/orthopaedic stuff rather than brain injury or spinal injury?

 

[eozsmiles]

Yep the NRL just sends a neutral doctor to each game and if a player fails a concussion test they are replaced for the entire game. its not that hard to implement imo.

100% agree

 

[thorson1987]

Keep an under 20s guy around to pull double duty in that case. That'd be the only way I can see it working.

I do like this idea

 

[Walt Flanigan]

Yeah I'm with the neutral doctor and extra man idea.

 

[GongPanther]

This will not go ahead due to the can of worms that it will open up in regards to abusing this rule.

It's the loopholes or workarounds that other clubs MIGHT know of that makes this,or any other rule-change unfair.

ANY rule changes should only be implemented until after the current competition concludes and at least 2 months before the competition proper starts.

Then after these rules have been implemented into the general rule book,have a freeze of any rule changes for at least 5 years,unless a rule change is to be introduced or changed when it has the players safety and welfare in mind.

That way,we don't have the debacle of what we had when the NRL brought in some new rules with only weeks to spare.

 

[eozsmiles]

This will not go ahead due to the can of worms that it will open up in regards to abusing this rule.

It's the loopholes or workarounds that other clubs MIGHT know of that makes this,or any other rule-change unfair.

ANY rule changes should only be implemented until after the current competition concludes and at least 2 months before the competition proper starts.

Then after these rules have been implemented into the general rule book,have a freeze of any rule changes for at least 5 years,unless a rule change is to be introduced or changed when it has the players safety and welfare in mind.

That way,we don't have the debacle of what we had when the NRL brought in some new rules with only weeks to spare.

The neutral doctor rule doesn't effect the way players or coaches go about their business. All the NRL have to do is employ some doctors. They could bring that rule in for next friday.

The 18th man rule might have some more logistical problems. But really it just means a player steps up from NSW cup and maybe misses a game that w'end if he isn't needed in 1st grade.

 

[juro]

I'm wondering whether the number of blows to the head have increased this year compared to others. Now a team can target players easier, knowing that a player could be rubbed out for the match due to the new concussion rule if they get hit hard or often enough.

 

[Canard]

Don't most supporters want reduced interchanges to open up the game!

Isn't this in effect creating the same outcome?

 

[Walt Flanigan]

Don't most supporters want reduced interchanges to open up the game!

Isn't this in effect creating the same outcome?

No, because only one team is disadvantaged.

 

[carlosthedwarf]

Keep an under 20s guy around to pull double duty in that case. That'd be the only way I can see it working.

That was my suggestion over a year ago. Allow one U20s player on the bench as an emergency. If you have more than one player lost to concussion then that's bad luck but at least you have one spare if needed.

 

[Nugget10]

The NRL can claim the rule was brought in for player safety but I thought it was a sneaky way to combat diving. If players stopped laying down for a penalty there would be less blokes being benched for concussion.