Souths Duty of Care

[ellskimore]

This is what one of America's leading concussion specialists, Chris Nowinski, said about Kyle Turner after his concussion in the prelims last year.

"I am sickened that Kyle Turner would be cleared and asked to play again," he said. "In America, he would have been shut down for an extended period of time after the third concussion, and retirement would have been discussed after a fourth in a year."

Honestly, this is bad. The guy has got to consider his health and life beyond football. Persistent damage to the brain should not be taken lightly and he will suffer later in life.

 

[seanoff]

I think Souths and the NRL have made it Kyle's choice. In reality it IS his career and he can do what he wants, although they have intervened and gotten specialists and advice from former players etc etc.

Do I want to see him play on? Of course I do, he's a kid who's worked his ass off to get where he is and he should keep trying until it becomes a reality that he can't.

Do I think he should play on? I'm not too sure but I know he 100% needs to wear headgear if he is to play. I don't think he ever got a concussion wearing them but I could be wrong so correct me. If things are done right this could work out for him, but if he gets another few bad concussions he should seriously consider hanging up the boots.

not his choice and a cop out by the club if that is the line. they are under no obligation to play him. none. the NRL are also under no obligation to let him play. he needs to be protected. if that is from himself, so be it.

headgear does nothing to protect against concussion. if it did the NFL wouldn't have lawsuits out its ears. helmets stop the gaudy bleeding injuries. brain injuries, nope.

if he gets another few concussions, bad or otherwise, one of them is a good chance of being fatal.

he really shouldn't play this year and probably ever again.

 

[Penrose Warrior]

I think Souths and the NRL have made it Kyle's choice. In reality it IS his career and he can do what he wants, although they have intervened and gotten specialists and advice from former players etc etc.

Do I want to see him play on? Of course I do, he's a kid who's worked his ass off to get where he is and he should keep trying until it becomes a reality that he can't.

Do I think he should play on? I'm not too sure but I know he 100% needs to wear headgear if he is to play. I don't think he ever got a concussion wearing them but I could be wrong so correct me. If things are done right this could work out for him, but if he gets another few bad concussions he should seriously consider hanging up the boots.

Another few?!?!? He's had seven for f**k's sake. Another few and he's a garden plant.

It's his career but players can't be trusted to make those calls themselves. They're league players not brain specialists. 9 times out of 10 the players are going to take a 'it'll be sweet' mentality because they're so desperate to keep playing. At the end of the day, nothing they do for the rest of their lives matches the adrenaline of running out to play in the NRL. It's an impossible choice.

As someone else said, headgear doesn't do a single thing for concussion. In fact it's probably detrimental in terms of giving the player a sense of being bulletproof against head knocks.

I can't believe this won't be taken out of his hands and force him to sit for at least the rest of the season. It's f**ked if he plays this Friday and I hope the media really jump all over it if he does. But I refuse to believe he will, surely Souths are not concerned with a football match over a young man's brain.

 

[POPEYE]

Just as most referees were never meant to play League at this level neither is Kyle . . . he should consider learning the whistle immediately

 

[Spanner in the works]

The NRL really needs to step in and retire him immediately. Compensate him now otherwise we'll end up compensating his family when that last head knock proves fatal. Prevent the court case, save his life, and avoid the multiple court cases that will surely follow.

 

[muzby]

I think Souths and the NRL have made it Kyle's choice.

and this statement perfectly sums up why souths are failing in their duty of care to their players..

that attitude is akin to allowing a drunk person to drive even if you had the opportunity to take his keys off him.

 

[The Charlatan]

I think Souths and the NRL have made it Kyle's choice. In reality it IS his career and he can do what he wants, although they have intervened and gotten specialists and advice from former players etc etc.

Do I want to see him play on? Of course I do, he's a kid who's worked his ass off to get where he is and he should keep trying until it becomes a reality that he can't.

Do I think he should play on? I'm not too sure but I know he 100% needs to wear headgear if he is to play. I don't think he ever got a concussion wearing them but I could be wrong so correct me. If things are done right this could work out for him, but if he gets another few bad concussions he should seriously consider hanging up the boots.

Reality is he is potentially one more knock from severe, irreparable damage to his brain. The reality is that it is not his choice, as any workplace has to consider the welfare of their employees, even if it is against the wishes of the employee. If a brickie breaks his back on site and cannot lift bricks anymore, does the company allow him to keep working and risk further serious injury, or do they make the decision to terminate his employment in the interest of his welfare by not risking a further debilitating injury?

What does he do if he keeps playing, cops a devastating injury and then goes on to sue the NRL and Souffs? What do you say then as a fan/member of the club? Oh well, his choice, tough shit?

 

[adamkungl]

Lucky the shoulder charge is banned so we don't have concussions any more :sarcasm:

 

[muzby]

for those with doubts about the seriousness of being knocked out & concussions in football, just take a look at boxing...

note the recommendation from the kiwi doctor to a bloke who got knocked out on the weekend.. certainly hasn't named him to fight next week..

What the knockout punch really does to the brain


The ability to knock an opponent out with a single punch is a skill all fighters aspire to. That single, forceful blow that will instantaneously end a bout is something all combat sports fans crave.

But what really goes on inside a fighter’s head when they are on the receiving end of one those knockout punches? And what are the potential ramifications?

This week we saw Kiwi fighter Will Quarrie knocked unconscious in an undercard to the Joseph Parker fight in New Zealand. Quarrie was hit so hard by his opponent that his legs buckled and he fell out of the ring onto the table of shocked spectators.


As a result of the fight, Quarrie suffered a severe concussion so bad that it forced doctors to recommend he not return to the ring before November this year.

After being cleared of any serious brain trauma via a CT scan, the Kiwi managed to walk away with relatively minor injuries, suffering short-term headaches and blurred vision.
So what actually causes a fighter to be knocked unconscious and receive a concussion? We broke down the science of the KO to find out the kind of damage those devastating blows can do to a fighter’s brain.

THE SCIENCE OF THE KNOCKOUT
When a person is hit with a large amount of force to their head, it causes the head and neck to jolt in the direction that force is pushing it. This force then impacts on the movement of the brain.

Our brains sit inside the skull, floating in cerebral fluid designed to protect it from trauma. When a fighter is hit hard, the sudden movement shocks the brain, which does not have time to adjust to the rapid acceleration and deceleration of the skull. This in turn causes the brain to move around in the cerebral fluid, colliding with the inside of the skull and causing trauma to the soft tissue of the brain.

The fighter’s brain, dependent upon the force delivered, will then usually bounce back in the opposite direction and suffer further impact as a result of striking the surface of the skull.

Imagine it like a Kinder surprise egg, the toy capsule inside being your brain. When you shake the egg, you can feel the capsule bouncing back and forth inside the chocolate shell.

That same concept applies to the movement of a fighter’s brain after they receive a knockout blow.

As a result of the overwhelming stimulation the brain tissue is receiving, the body sends out a series of neurotransmitters and excessive blood supply to the brain in an attempt to repair the damage.

According to neurologist and boxing physician Anthony Alessi, when blood supply to the brain is not sufficient to repair the level of damage, the fighter will lose consciousness.
“After a brain injury, the heart must supply sufficient blood flow for the brain to repair itself. If the demand outweighs the supply, the brain then shuts down and leads to an eventual loss of consciousness,” Anthony Alessi, M.D said.

Alessi told Popular Mechanics that a boxer’s feet are the first indication they may be on the verge of being knocked out.

“They become flat-footed, which is the inability to adjust. Boxers can’t move forwards or backwards quickly,” Alessi said.

“As you watch their feet, you realise that the same lack of coordination is going on in their upper extremities in their hands. And eventually they are unable to defend themselves.”
The impact of the powerful “knockout” punch can be devastating.


THE FACTS
According to research conducted in 2014 by the American Association of Neurological Surgeons, the force of a professional boxer’s punch is approximately the same as that of a 9kg bowling ball travelling at 32km/h, and colliding with a person’s head.
Not surprisingly, studies show that around 90 per cent of professional boxers will endure some form of brain injury throughout the course of their career, while numerous researchers have found that between 15-40 per cent of boxers showed signs of chronic brain injury.

This culminated in approximately 488 boxing-related deaths in the period from 1960 to 2011, with 66 per cent of these being attributed to head and neck trauma.

THE DEVASTATING EFFECTS
Despite a major development in concussion protocols and management in recent years, death in combat sports is still a very shocking reality.

In 2014 alone, three professional boxers were killed by knockout punches they received during scheduled fights. Phindile Mwelase of South Africa, Oscar Gonzalez of Mexico and Japanese fighter Tesshin Okada all passed away having never regained consciousness after being knocked out.

Earlier this year, Australian professional boxer Braydon Smith died after collapsing following a welterweight bout in Toowoomba, Queensland. The 23-year-old suffered severe swelling on the brain as a result of injuries suffered during the bout.

from here:

http://www.news.com.au/sport/boxing...oes-to-the-brain/story-fndkzthy-1227472056057

 

[betcats]

Lucky the shoulder charge is banned so we don't have concussions any more :sarcasm:

The player who died in qld recently was the result of a shoulder charge.

 

[adamkungl]

The player who died in qld recently was the result of a shoulder charge.

Yes.

He wasn't the first person to die playing a contact sport and certainly won't be the last, shoulder charge or not.

The risk of playing RL or contact sports is still absurdly high compared to not playing, as we can see with Turner here. Banning something on the small chance of serious injury on the small chance it goes wrong is completely ineffectual when the greater risk of just stepping on the field is so high.

 

[muzby]

Yes.

He wasn't the first person to die playing a contact sport and certainly won't be the last, shoulder charge or not.

The risk of playing RL or contact sports is still absurdly high compared to not playing, as we can see with Turner here. Banning something on the small chance of serious injury on the small chance it goes wrong is completely ineffectual when the greater risk of just stepping on the field is so high.

i love seeing a shoulder charge as much as the next guy (well, unless the 'next guy' is the one on the end of a shoulder charge) as it's great theatre and fires up the team..


the bigger issue is the number of shoulder charges that result in the shoulder making contact with the head / jaw of the ball carrier, in effect a high tackle.. and given the shoulder is being used, a fairly hard high tackle at that..

 

[adamkungl]

i love seeing a shoulder charge as much as the next guy (well, unless the 'next guy' is the one on the end of a shoulder charge) as it's great theatre and fires up the team..


the bigger issue is the number of shoulder charges that result in the shoulder making contact with the head / jaw of the ball carrier, in effect a high tackle.. and given the shoulder is being used, a fairly hard high tackle at that..

The number was completely fudged in the NRL's report.

Anyway I'll stop hijacking this thread... :lol:

 

[betcats]

Not sure how accurate this is but ive read that Ackerman wasn't even hit high and that whiplash did the damage.

 

[muzby]

The number was completely fudged in the NRL's report.

i'm basing it purely off the data i've seen on muzbystats.com which involved me doing my own research & looking at random examples of shoulder charges over the years..

yes, some hit in the right areas eg. the kane evans one on kasiano main point of impact hits him flush in the chest, sam's head doesn't get hit..

but then another famous one, the GI hit on young.. look where the main point of impact is..

 

[Sleep]

No matter how much whinging and stamping their feet people do, the shoulder charge is never coming back.

 

[Danish]

Not sure how accurate this is but ive read that Ackerman wasn't even hit high and that whiplash did the damage.

The bloke got 8 weeks for it, so I'd have to think there was some head contact involved.

 

[betcats]

The bloke got 8 weeks for it, so I'd have to think there was some head contact involved.

Well the shoulder charge is an illegal tackle and someone died as a result so he was always getting some weeks.

This is the second time I have read there was no head contact:

http://www.foxsports.com.au/nrl/nrl...re-an-nrl-player/story-fn2mcuj6-1227471729055

VERY few people knew James Ackerman?s name until he was killed by a shoulder charge.
Until then, the 25-year-old father of two was known only by people in his community as a hard working family man who loved his footy.
He was pretty good at it, too.
The prop forward played for the Sunshine Coast Falcons in the Queensland Cup ? just one rung down from the NRL ? with and against players contracted by NRL sides.

One of those players, Broncos contracted prop Francis Molo, is living through his own private hell as the man responsible for the shoulder charge that killed Ackerman.
Molo is serving an eight week suspension for the hit.

Just three years ago, back when the shoulder charge was legal, he might have been free to play the very next week.
There has to be a disincentive to stop these shots ? and not just those that come into contact with the ball-carrier above the shoulders.
The shoulder charge that killed James Ackerman did not connect with his head.
Running the ball back from a kick off at high speeds, the huge impact of the shoulder of the 107kg Molo hitting him in the chest and rocking his head back in a whiplash motion was enough to tragically end his life.
It has been a sad, reflective period for Australian sport. Alex McKinnon suffered a serious spinal injury live on TV last season and, just a couple of months later, Australian cricketer Phil Hughes was killed in a Shield game when he was hit by a bouncer.
Yet here we are, a matter of six weeks after James Ackerman adds to the catalogue of sporting tragedy, debating the shoulder charge?s return.

It started when Kane Evans pulled off a rollicking hit on Sam Kasiano in Friday night?s blockbuster between the Roosters and the Bulldogs.
Kasiano got up grinning, the crowd went ballistic and the intensity of the contest went up a notch.
Commentating for Channel Nine, Phil Gould didn?t hold back, saying this was what rugby league was all about.
Then came Peter Sterling, Paul Gallen and others mounting similar cases for wanting to see the explosive, yet risky, tackling technique return. The highly emotional debate was reopened and went into overdrive.
So why is it that, in this case, it?s left to James Ackerman?s brother Andrew to bring perspective to the debate?
To remind us what dire consequences really look like.
Is it because James Ackerman?s death, while shocking and tragic, didn?t hit the mainstream for longer than a few days?
He wasn?t on TV. He wasn?t a name. The public didn?t spend years getting to know him through his triumphs and struggles.

Should that be how we quantify the value of a human life?
The more famous the victim, the more public the tragedy, the more measured, and sombre and sensible the fallout?
That doesn?t sound like rugby league ? an egalitarian game that has always prided itself on its blue collar roots and what it can do for the battler.
If Ackerman had died in an NRL game, it?s inconceivable that there would be a campaign for the tackling technique that killed him to be legalised again.
Not six weeks after the death. Not ever.
You only have to think back to the overwhelming reaction and outpouring of emotion after the McKinnon and Hughes incidents. It was huge. It was touching.
It put sport in its proper place and perspective.
The thoughts of their friends and family was paramount in any public discussions about player safety when the inevitable naval gazing began for both sports.
That?s the least the friends and family of James Ackerman deserve. Sadly, this time around we as a rugby league community have got it wrong.

 

[adamkungl]

It's the one and only time this has ever happened. It's literally a one in a million shot.

Whatever, Australia prides itself on banning everything possible at the smallest risk. Enjoy the downward spiral of Rugby League.

The future is here:

 

[betcats]

Death is one in a million maybe, concussion and brain damage is not.