Non-eels footy stuff

[Gronk]

I couldn't see anywhere in those links where they said they would start penalising and sin binning the shit out of anything that looks remotely like a high tackle.

No-one is suggesting that concussion issues haven't been discussed. The decision to significantly change the enforcement of the rules within the space of a week is what lacked consultation.

I can't see how its even possible to dispute this.

You're argument would have merit if the action of hitting someone in the head was somehow unavoidable.

Was it just good luck that the Eels / Warriors game had no incidents ? IIRC it was only pelicans like Sandow who "forgot" that shoulder charges were banned. Most adjusted quickly. Now it's just a fine (provided you don't hit his head).

 

[Gronk]

There is no doubt in my mind that the threat of litigation is a stronger driving factor than genuine concern about payer welfare. If player welfare was a bigger factor then they wouldn't have come up with a solution that will likely result in more players (defenders) getting concussed.

Its entirely driven by the NRL's self interest. They want to be able to point to 'action' when the inevitable litigation arises.

That might be cynical, but I reckon its accurate.

I might seem critical, but its exactly the sort of half baked shit strategy that I've had to dream up in the past to help protect a nervous CEO and Board. Fear can be a significant motivator.

Does it really matter if this is motivated by risk minimisation vs player welfare ? What's your point ? The tort of negligence is one of the most significant headwinds the game has ever seen since the super league war and the pandemic.

 

[84 Baby]

This goes beyond appeasing stakeholders. There was no easy way when you mandate change, like seatbelts, bike helmets, pool fences etc. When it comes down to a billion dollar business being derelict in their duty of care, you've got to draw a line in the sand and just do it. You then deal with the butt-hurt accordingly. Unlike the NFL who pretended it wasn't a problem until it was a problem, we need to be agile and on the front foot. You need to be able to demonstrate to the court (yes there will be claims) that the NRL did all things necessary to mitigate head injures as the science became available.

The litigation shit storm has just hit the UK.

The UK concussion court case may destroy the NRL

https://www.theroar.com.au/2020/12/16/the-uk-concussion-court-case-may-destroy-the-nrl/

I’ve got no problem with them implementing rules pre-discussion.
I, if I were an NRL player, would definitely have a problem with it being implemented pre-no discussion whatsoever and then declaring that the changes are a success.
There’s obviously some “protecting them from themselves” consideration but that doesn’t mean you cover your ears to anything to the issues raised by literally the only people directly affected by the rule changes

 

[Gary Gutful]

Does it really matter if this is motivated by risk minimisation vs player welfare ? What's your point ? The tort of negligence is one of the most significant headwinds the game has ever seen since the super league war and the pandemic.

This was my point.

If player welfare was a bigger factor then they wouldn't have come up with a solution that will likely result in more players (defenders) getting concussed.

I'm not disputing that something needs to be done. I'm suggesting it would have been more successful if it was done with more collaboration and input from those that understand the issues better than the NRL does.

It will get worked through and eventually the game will look better than the shit show that was on display last weekend, but it didn't have to be that way.

 

[84 Baby]

You're argument would have merit if the action of hitting someone in the head was somehow unavoidable.

Your argument would have merit if the NRL had discussed with players why head hits happen and how to avoid them.

 

[Gary Gutful]

You're argument would have merit if the action of hitting someone in the head was somehow unavoidable.

What?

So because the action of hitting people on the head is unavoidable, the NRL are allowed to make decisions on rule changes without consulting players?

I'm not following why my argument doesn't have merit.

Was it just good luck that the Eels / Warriors game had no incidents ?

There were 7 other games over the weekend that were significantly impacted. I'd say there was an element of luck that the Eels game wasn't one of those. After all, you yourself have suggested it is unavoidable.

IIRC it was only pelicans like Sandow who "forgot" that shoulder charges were banned. Most adjusted quickly. Now it's just a fine (provided you don't hit his head).

Thats not in dispute and not really relevant to the point I am making.

Of course players will adapt, but are we certain that we will see less concussions as a result of these changes?

 

[Gronk]

the NRL are allowed to make decisions on rule changes without consulting players?

This is in dispute. The NRL advised all clubs that it was happening 3 May.

Consulting Players ? I call your last weeks shit show and raise you the shit show that would have occurred for months after the Telecrap/Courier Mail/Herald Sun made it front page news every day. They knew it was going to upset a few or even a lot, but ripping off the bandaid was the best way to go.

 

[Gronk]

 

[Gary Gutful]

This is in dispute. The NRL advised all clubs that it was happening 3 May.

Thats not consultation mate. Consultation is a two-way process where feedback is sought. God knows, they could have used it!

Consulting Players ? I call your last weeks shit show and raise you the shit show that would have occurred for months after the Telecrap/Courier Mail/Herald Sun made it front page news every day. They knew it was going to upset a few or even a lot, but ripping off the bandaid was the best way to go.

Thats weak. It possible to consult players, act quickly and manage adverse media.

Player and fan unrest could have easily been avoided but they went off half-cocked, without all of the information at hand.

 

[eels_fan]

 

[Gronk]

Player and fan unrest could have easily been avoided but they went off half-cocked, without all of the information at hand.

Don't agree. You could not "consult" behind closed doors and the Rugba League media would have had a field day during the consultation process. When has radical change ever been met with bilateral support (media, RLPA) in this sport ? How long did it take to get the Collective Bargaining Agreement through the RLPA - 3 years. Nah, rip the band aid off, PVL does media and it settles down in a few weeks.

 

[84 Baby]

Don't agree. You could not "consult" behind closed doors and the Rugba League media would have had a field day during the consultation process. When has radical change ever been met with bilateral support (media, RLPA) in this sport ? How long did it take to get the Collective Bargaining Agreement through the RLPA - 3 years. Nah, rip the band aid off, PVL does media and it settles down in a few weeks.

Implementation could’ve still be done before consultation. The reason why shit like the CBA take so long to resolve has a lot to do with the NRL avoiding consultation on other issues and the reason the NRL media have a field day is because certain people lap it up

 

[Gary Gutful]

Don't agree. You could not "consult" behind closed doors and the Rugba League media would have had a field day during the consultation process. When has radical change ever been met with bilateral support (media, RLPA) in this sport ? How long did it take to get the Collective Bargaining Agreement through the RLPA - 3 years. Nah, rip the band aid off, PVL does media and it settles down in a few weeks.

It almost sounds from your last few posts that you are suggesting that it was sensible to do this because it is the best way to handle the media reaction. What about player welfare?

I think you are validating my cynicism.

Does that mean that all big changes can now be done without consultation? Just send them a letter and it will be fine because we dont want the media fallout?

Thats horseshit. It will result in countless poor "well intentioned", but clumsy actions like this that do very little for player welfare.

I'll remind you next time you are critical of ScoMo for using the same playbook.

 

[Gary Gutful]

Implementation could’ve still be done before consultation. The reason why shit like the CBA take so long to resolve has a lot to do with the NRL avoiding consultation on other issues and the reason the NRL media have a field day is because certain people lap it up

Good point. I'm yet to see any examples of employee agreements happen terribly quickly. Particularly if an organisation hasn't been great at engaging with their employees.

 

[84 Baby]

Good point. I'm yet to see any examples of employee agreements happen terribly quickly. Particularly if an organisation hasn't been great at engaging with their employees.

If you avoid discussion on a range of issues, when you finally a forced into a discussion the other party are going to bring up all that shit

 

[Gary Gutful]

It reminds me of the time I didn't catch up with @hineyrulz for a few months and then we finally had a few beers at Chardons. We spent the first 4 hours arguing about BA.

 

[84 Baby]

It reminds me of the time I didn't catch up with @hineyrulz for a few months and then we finally had a few beers at Chardons. We spent the first 4 hours arguing about BA.

I guess @Gronk has a point then cause by arguing about BA, you forgot that @hineyrulz owed you about 10 shouts

 

[hineyrulz]

It reminds me of the time I didn't catch up with @hineyrulz for a few months and then we finally had a few beers at Chardons. We spent the first 4 hours arguing about BA.

The first few hours were spent arguing if BA's hair will grow back. The next two hours were spent about the quality of semen in IPA's these days. Not much footy talk went on.

 

[hineyrulz]

I guess @Gronk has a point then cause by arguing about BA, you forgot that @hineyrulz owed you about 10 shouts

Pfffffffffffffffffhhhh!!!!!!!!

Gary is legendary for missing shouts, he wouldn't shout if Jarryd Hayne bit him. Just ask @Eelogical.


He's still waiting at the bar for his Fat Yak,

 

[Gary Gutful]

Pfffffffffffffffffhhhh!!!!!!!!

Gary is legendary for missing shouts, he wouldn't shout if Jarryd Hayne bit him. Just ask @Eelogical.


He's still waiting at the bar for his Fat Yak,

Oh, I thought thats what he called me so I had a sulk. Got on my lime scooter and went to Muddy Farmers.