Rumoured/Confirmed Signings and More Crap XX

[oldmancraigy]

Yeah one guy attacks at first receiver and defends in the middle, the other doesn't lock scrums.



There were plenty of lock/five-eighths back in the day when the two positions were often split left and right. But now the 'five-eighth' is split with the 'halfback', and the 'bloke who wears number 13' (probably the best descriptor) defends in the middle and fills any of a number of roles in attack. Middle half is one of them. So is standing second dummy half I guess. Locking scrums isn't.

Everyone knows the fullback plays lock. In defence that is. Who is the lock in attack? Isnt it the hooker??

 

[Kornstar]

Parramatta facing NRL investigation over three incidents, including Nathan Peats concussion




The ugly fallout from a weekend of concussion controversy could leave Parramatta nursing one nasty and expensive black eye.
The Daily Telegraph can reveal the Eels are being investigated for three separate incidents in the ugly loss to the Warriors ? and if found guilty they face a possible six-figure fine, loss of competition points and the suspension of staff.
While it is understood the NRL is still not considering employing independent doctors to monitor concussion incidents, NRL head of football Todd Greenberg has vowed to get tougher on clubs ignoring player safety guidelines.
But that is cold comfort for one of Melbourne?s top sporting doctors, who declared the decision to allow Nathan Peats to play on after his ugly knockout was medically ?inappropriate?.
The Daily Telegraph has also discovered the Eels are being questioned over separate incidents involving Isaac De Gois and Will Hopoate in the same game.
Manly are also in the NRL?s firing line over an incident involving young centre Brayden Wiliame who was also allowed to return to action after a head knock, while South Sydney are still be investigated for an incident in round two involving Adam Reynolds.
The NRL has the ability not only to fine clubs but deduct competition points (even if they did not win the game) and suspend staff.
While the NRL would not speculate on possible outcomes, last year four clubs were whacked with $20,000 fines relating to concussion breaches ? and all those incidents involved the reaction of onfield trainers, not club doctors.
That is the difference here because the players were taken from the field before being allowed back on.
But while it could take the NRL another week to determine its findings, The Daily Telegraph sent vision of the Peats incident to respected sports doctor Peter Larkins who ruled on the spot.
?It was an inappropriate call by the medical person,? Larkins said.
?To me he clearly was unconscious and had a significant concussion episode. So end of story in AFL circles and other sports at international level.
?He is finished for the day ... no matter how well he does in the tests subsequent to that.?
Larkins also accused the NRL of ?dragging its feet? on player safety issues.
?I just want to make it clear that the NRL seems to be the one sport that is dragging its feet,? he said.
?And I don?t know how many times I?m going to say that because I said it in 2014, I said it in 2013, and I?m saying it in 2015.
?I think it really, really puts enormous pressure on the League, the Commisioners and the lawyers for the League to allow these things to continue to be brought up in the public eye.
?It can only lead to bad news.?
Asked how much an AFL club would be fined for allowing a player back on the field after similar incident to what Peats suffered, Larkins said: ?$50,000.?
Larkins said he was also concerned about allegations coaching staff might be overruling medical staff at some clubs.
While Greenberg would not comment on possible outcomes, he said in a statement that the NRL ?will impose heavy penalties and strengthen the concussion policy if necessary to protect player welfare?.
?The last thing anyone, particularly the fans, wants to see is players put at risk by being sent back on the field when they should be taken out of the game, assessed and treated,? Greenberg said.
?So, if we need to change our policy relating to concussion to make it stronger then that is what we will do.?

From <http://www.news.com.au/sport/nrl/parramatta-facing-nrl-investigation-over-three-incidents-including-nathan-peats-concussion/story-fndv34of-1227275428239>

So Manly and Souths are under investigation but only our name is in the title? Sounds about right.

Sounds like they sent the tape to probably 20 doctors and this is the only guy that gave them the answer they wanted.

Also, where does the loss of competition points come from? Greenburg didn't mention it and the doctor only said fines for AFL, just more money.

The Telegraph just made shit up again.

 

[Gronk]

Heard cranky BA say "the Dr said he's right. I don't ask qns. If he's right we put him on. If he's not then we don't. Maybe they want us to get a Dr to check on the Dr ?"

 

[The Elephant In The room]

Heard cranky BA say "the Dr said he's right. I don't ask qns. If he's right we put him on. If he's not then we don't. Maybe they want us to get a Dr to check on the Dr ?"

Hopefully the NrL will come out and tell us which club docs we can trust to apply the concussion rules/tests properly and which one are obviously dodgy quacks.

If there was ever going to be a question mark over the concussion rules it would have been last week when Adam Reynolds went off of a concussion test, and when he came back on his play was clearly affected by the knock. But again, the doc said he passed the test so what do you do?

I wouldn't be surprised if players "dumbed themselves" down during the initial baseline tests to make the. Easier to pass during the regular season.

 

[Joshuatheeel]

So Manly and Souths are under investigation but only our name is in the title? Sounds about right.

Sounds like they sent the tape to probably 20 doctors and this is the only guy that gave them the answer they wanted.

Also, where does the loss of competition points come from? Greenburg didn't mention it and the doctor only said fines for AFL, just more money.

The Telegraph just made shit up again.

Yep, that Doctor is making up his own rules:

. &#8220;He is finished for the day ... no matter how well he does in the tests subsequent to that.&#8221;

Well that's not how it works in league, there is a test which Peat's passed

 

[Barry O'Speedwagon]

So Manly and Souths are under investigation but only our name is in the title? Sounds about right.

Sounds like they sent the tape to probably 20 doctors and this is the only guy that gave them the answer they wanted.

Also, where does the loss of competition points come from? Greenburg didn't mention it and the doctor only said fines for AFL, just more money.

The Telegraph just made shit up again.

They know where they sell their papers, mate. And this shit works for them, so they'll keep doing it.

It is quite a laughable article, even by their own 'standards'.

 

[Twizzle]

So we had a club doctor review Peats yet the NRL who have had no contact with Peats can reveiw him remotely ?

Imagine the money doctors would make if they could do that

 

[Barry O'Speedwagon]

They're not reviewing Peats, they are presumably reviewing the process that occurred in order for him to get back onto the field, to see if all the right boxes were ticked. If they were, we've got nothing to worry about.

Ultimately, if the NRL are serious about this they need to use an independent MO, and remove the perception of a conflict of interest from the situation.

 

[Gronk]

If the NRL want to provide Drs as they do refs and ground managers then so be it. In the meantime, they need to quit questioning the integrity of medical professionals.

 

[emjaycee]

From the television coverage and post match interview it appears that the Warriors Dr didnt think Peats should return (conflict of interest here perhaps). This opinion is what drove the incessant questioning of BA at the presser by the NZ reporter, which i bet is what triggered the NRL's interest in how we handled our injured players.

 

[oldmancraigy]

I thought the Warriors Dr said Peats couldnt go back on? Thr Eels Dr said 'no probs'.

Or did I imagine hearing that?

Edit: yes MJC! Thats my understanding

 

[hineyrulz]

Wo cares what the Warriors doctor thinks???? It's on our doctor to make the decision talk about a mountain out of a molehill. Until the NRL change it to an independent doc this rubbish will still go on.

 

[forward pass]

So Manly and Souths are under investigation but only our name is in the title? Sounds about right.

Gee some people on here really have a media complex. Big f**king deal.

Yeah - the media are all out to get us. Johns, Rothfield - the whole lot of them. They want us OUT of the comp once and for all.

 

[strider]

Wo cares what the Warriors doctor thinks???? It's on the our doctor to make the decision talk about a mountain out of a molehill. Until the NRL change it to an independent doc this rubbish will still go on.

exactly - i was rather peeved that the dumb merkins on the commentary were all obsessed with the wariiors doc thinking he was not ok ... irrespective of whether he was or wasn't, that is NOT the current process - and as already mentioned having the OTHER team doctor involved is not less a conflict of interest than just the player's team doctor


TBH I reckon Peats should NOT have come back on .... the point is we are meant to be protecting the players from potential future issues - and if these sort of head knocks are potentially bad then I think any case where you are obviously concussed should require the player to no longer take part in the game - BUT they need to change the rules so you can bring in an extra 5th replacement (but of course merkin coaches will exploit that to get a fresh player involved)

 

[Gronk]

If they are so worried about concussion, maybe they should look at the attacking player leading with shoulders and knees a tad more.

 

[ParraSteve]

IT would be hard to police but if a player showed signs of a concussion then he should not be allowed to return to the field at all. Set aside 2 reserves on top of the 4 interchanges that can be used for such incidents.

 

[Fearless Freeman]

Parramatta facing NRL investigation over three incidents, including Nathan Peats concussion




The ugly fallout from a weekend of concussion controversy could leave Parramatta nursing one nasty and expensive black eye.
The Daily Telegraph can reveal the Eels are being investigated for three separate incidents in the ugly loss to the Warriors ? and if found guilty they face a possible six-figure fine, loss of competition points and the suspension of staff.
While it is understood the NRL is still not considering employing independent doctors to monitor concussion incidents, NRL head of football Todd Greenberg has vowed to get tougher on clubs ignoring player safety guidelines.
But that is cold comfort for one of Melbourne?s top sporting doctors, who declared the decision to allow Nathan Peats to play on after his ugly knockout was medically ?inappropriate?.
The Daily Telegraph has also discovered the Eels are being questioned over separate incidents involving Isaac De Gois and Will Hopoate in the same game.
Manly are also in the NRL?s firing line over an incident involving young centre Brayden Wiliame who was also allowed to return to action after a head knock, while South Sydney are still be investigated for an incident in round two involving Adam Reynolds.
The NRL has the ability not only to fine clubs but deduct competition points (even if they did not win the game) and suspend staff.
While the NRL would not speculate on possible outcomes, last year four clubs were whacked with $20,000 fines relating to concussion breaches ? and all those incidents involved the reaction of onfield trainers, not club doctors.
That is the difference here because the players were taken from the field before being allowed back on.
But while it could take the NRL another week to determine its findings, The Daily Telegraph sent vision of the Peats incident to respected sports doctor Peter Larkins who ruled on the spot.
?It was an inappropriate call by the medical person,? Larkins said.
?To me he clearly was unconscious and had a significant concussion episode. So end of story in AFL circles and other sports at international level.
?He is finished for the day ... no matter how well he does in the tests subsequent to that.?
Larkins also accused the NRL of ?dragging its feet? on player safety issues.
?I just want to make it clear that the NRL seems to be the one sport that is dragging its feet,? he said.
?And I don?t know how many times I?m going to say that because I said it in 2014, I said it in 2013, and I?m saying it in 2015.
?I think it really, really puts enormous pressure on the League, the Commisioners and the lawyers for the League to allow these things to continue to be brought up in the public eye.
?It can only lead to bad news.?
Asked how much an AFL club would be fined for allowing a player back on the field after similar incident to what Peats suffered, Larkins said: ?$50,000.?
Larkins said he was also concerned about allegations coaching staff might be overruling medical staff at some clubs.
While Greenberg would not comment on possible outcomes, he said in a statement that the NRL ?will impose heavy penalties and strengthen the concussion policy if necessary to protect player welfare?.
?The last thing anyone, particularly the fans, wants to see is players put at risk by being sent back on the field when they should be taken out of the game, assessed and treated,? Greenberg said.
?So, if we need to change our policy relating to concussion to make it stronger then that is what we will do.?

From <http://www.news.com.au/sport/nrl/parramatta-facing-nrl-investigation-over-three-incidents-including-nathan-peats-concussion/story-fndv34of-1227275428239>

WALOC (What A Load Of Crap). Dr Larkins (an AFL person through and through) has a long history of knocking the NRL but the Tele "forgot" to mention this because it might detract from their attention grabbing headline. All the other stuff in the article is just pure "ifs", "maybes" and of course possible worst case outcomes. The author Paul Crawley was once a reasonable jurno but now it seems he might have suffered too many "knocks" as well.

 

[jono]

So we had a club doctor review Peats yet the NRL who have had no contact with Peats can reveiw him remotely ?

Imagine the money doctors would make if they could do that

And our respected Dr Larkins has made a thorough informed diagnosis via video........
In my pharmacy I have CCTV for security which I can view from my admin office....if I'm bludging there and my staff ask me to check out a rash or whatever, I just tell 'em to get the customer to hold the affected area up to the camera so I can diagnose remotely

 

[El Diablo]

Larkins is always the go to man for the DT and he always goes on about how much better the AFL is

that's why they use him

 

[Gronk]

And our respected Dr Larkins has made a thorough informed diagnosis via video........
In my pharmacy I have CCTV for security which I can view from my admin office....if I'm bludging there and my staff ask me to check out a rash or whatever, I just tell 'em to get the customer to hold the affected area up to the camera so I can diagnose remotely

I got a pharmacist joke...

Q: Did you hear about the new "morning after" pill for men?
A: It changes their blood type.

;-)