Rory lamont - 'I was forced to play while injured'

by **RDW** Sat Jul 27, 2013 11:33 am

First topic message reminder :

Damming and very concerning interview with Rory Lamont on the attitudes towards injuries in rugby in The Scotsman:

His left foot is in a medical boot used to aid recovery from ankle injuries, the Scotland internationalist having recently undergone what was his 16th operation during a ten-year professional rugby career. It proved to be one too many for the 30-year-old, who finally called time on rugby in May after deciding he no longer had the will to fight back from this latest setback after more than a year in rehab trying to make himself fit again.

There are some in Scottish rugby and further afield who will nod, and tell you it underlines their belief that Lamont was “a bit soft”; that he lacked the mental strength to deal with the harsh side of modern rugby union. Some qualified medical practitioners and highly-respected coaches will tell you ‘a lot of it was in his head’.

By the end of our interview, and a series of revelations of how he and other top names played for Scotland when seriously injured, and saying so, our concern is absolute at how aspects of modern rugby coaching and medical treatment remain in the dark ages.

Lamont is quick to state that he has enjoyed his rugby career and clutches the memories of playing for Northampton, Sale, Toulon, Glasgow and Scotland dearly. He is a phlegmatic character and, despite what he tells me of his career, has no trace of bitterness or regret. He refuses to say which coaches and medics mocked him or insisted that he play when he was insistent that his body was not up to it.

But this is a story that has to be taken seriously. Lamont retains good relationships in the game and does not wish to finish his career throwing criticism at individuals. Instead, he wants coaches to think twice and thrice when a player says he can’t play, and wants players, above all, to realise that they must stop the lies, the macho approach to hiding injury and simply accepting a coach’s demand to play when injured, and change the culture for the benefit of the players coming behind them.

It might sound grandiose, but once we get into Lamont’s examples of facing the All Blacks, having told the coaches he was not fit, the message begins to sink in.

“These are things I could not say when I was playing,” he began. “But this has to be spoken about because we are involved in a sport that is still only relatively new and where injuries are occurring frequently. Do we know how that is going to affect us as humans in later life? No, we don’t, because the first full-career pros have only just retired.

“It is important for me to say from the start that the game of rugby and the medical side of things have improved hugely in the past decade, and is far better and safer now in many ways, with better rehab, and prehab. I also want to make clear that I believe medics involved in sport and coaches have a very tough job, and you have to accept that mistakes happen to the very best, but the crucial part for me is that players are still not being listened to, and that is a major problem in the game.”

Lamont picks out Dr James Robson, the SRU’s head of medicine, as someone players retain huge faith in, not least because he will often back a player to the hilt in refusing a coach’s demand to play. Furthermore, he insists that the fact his career lasted until this year was down to excellent medical care and expertise from many in the game. But the examples where it was not is what needs addressed.

“This is the stuff that never gets spoken about and the public never get to hear,” he said. “But, in 2010, we played against the All Blacks. I had played against Stade Francais [for Toulon] ten days before and taken a huge hit to the quadricep, and had a massive bleed, haematoma, and could hardly run when I came over to join Scotland for training.

“I tried my best in training but, when I got to 60 percent of my speed, that was my limit. Five minutes into the team run the day before the game, I pulled up and said ‘this is no good’. The thigh went into spasm and I couldn’t run.

“I told them [medics and coaches] I couldn’t play and was looking at pulling myself out. I had done it once before, also against the All Blacks [in 2008], when I had a bad shoulder injury, but they disagreed and said it was in my head.

“So I had medics in one ear, coaches in the other. I want to play more than anyone and my body’s saying ‘no, no, no ...’ Next day, I’m doing the warm-up at Murrayfield and the quad’s stiff, my head is all over the place. I’m looking at the crowds and thinking I shouldn’t be here.

“I put it out of my mind and concentrate on my first job, to sprint from the kick-off and make the first tackle. The whistle goes, and I take off and, after about 15 metres, I feel something go ffffft in my thigh and the pain suddenly becomes excruciating.

“Two seconds into the game. I know if I go off now, this will screw the team, because we only had Nikki Walker covering the entire threequarter line, so we’d be short of cover, and we’re trying to beat the All Blacks for the first time.

“So, I get it treated, let it ease and stay on until half-time. I did my best but I played like Poopie. I never missed a tackle, because I couldn’t get near them. We lost four tries and Mike Blair to injury. I told them at half-time ‘I can’t stay on’, and they weren’t happy. But I stayed off. We lose heavily, a coach asks me after the game if I have a mental issue with playing the All Blacks. I just shake my head.

“The next day I return to France. I get it checked out and I’ve got a four-inch tear down my quad muscle – out of the game for another six weeks. Brilliant.

“I got hammered in the press for having a Poopie game. I tell the coach about the tear and there’s no apology or anything. Who cares?”

At club level, he recalls breaking his jaw in the first ten minutes of a game but being told to play on.

“My mouth is spitting blood, my jaw is in agony, I get treated and stay on the pitch. I come in at half-time and say ‘look, I need more painkillers; this is not good’. The response was ‘look, if you’re not interested in playing, we’ll replace you with someone who is’.

“I said ‘I do want to play’, so I get on with it, play the rest of the game, go home afterwards and don’t sleep at all. The next day, I phone the club doctor and say ‘I need to get to hospital now because I’m in agony’. We go, get x-rayed and it shows two pieces of my jaw are split, being held together only by muscle. Again, no apology from the doc or the coach.

“I had plenty of time in rehab but I broke my scaphoid [he points to obvious ugly scar down his wrist] once and played for eight months because every time I complained to the doc he’d say there was nothing serious. When it was finally diagnosed, the doc was ‘oh yes, it’s broken; should really have had that operated on straight away because now you run the risk of arthritis’. And I spent £5,000 of my own money to get the operation I was told I really needed.”

These incidents happened at various clubs in different countries. The issues are not of geography, but born of a culture still in rugby that is at odds with professionalism. It is not an easy issue for coaches, physios and doctors. Injuries are rarely black or white and diagnosis often an art, not a science. How many times do GPs and even specialists get it wrong, and some never see the severity of injuries in rugby which Dr Robson likens to those from car crashes?

Coaches, too, will invariably motivate players by pushing them through fears, when the pain was not as great as a player feared. But with 20-stone athletes crashing into each other, the game now has the potential to be more dangerous and errors of judgment more damaging.

There is a worrying acceptance among modern players that they will suffer serious injury at least once in their career, while a number of leading players have suffered from mis-diagnoses, had recovery periods doubled with changing opinions over the need for operations and been forced to retire through injury. Little is said.

So, Lamont’s testimony has to be welcomed. It comes from someone who knows plenty of pro rugby’s dark side. He says he has never suffered a recurrent problem and none of his 16 operations were for related injuries.

There has been a perception that he can be both brave and foolhardy, but, as one recalls his attempts to beat opponents to high balls, and clash mid-air, his leg once and ankle another time collapsing on landing, or taking a knee flush in the face as he desperately, and successfully, stopped a try by an England winger on the wet Murrayfield turf, many of Lamont’s daring efforts were also of the type that brought Scotland, and club supporters to their feet in raptures. And he was good, undoubtedly one of the best full-backs Scotland has produced in the professional era.

But the recollections above and incidents affecting fellow internationalists have led Lamont to believe in his own instincts. That manifested itself in defying medics and coaches, insisting on his own warm-ups and refusing to play with pain, and earned him a reputation for “having mental issues”.

A large problem in scale or small? It is impossible to tell. But it could be serious for every player affected and Lamont is hoping that by sharing his experiences he could help to effect change.

He added: “Ultimately, a player is responsible for his own body. But they also have to be listened to when they say they are injured or we’ll see more and more players being injured out of the game.”

Now any fan would say Rory played with bravery verging on recklessness - how could coaches think he was faking it?

Any thoughts on who the coaches he's not mentioned could be?

Very worrying read, and think it's fair to say this is a widespread problem in the game.

by screamingaddabs Mon Jul 29, 2013 2:52 pm

This is a problem throughout the game though, it's not just at the top level.

I had to quit rugby at 23 because of recurring hip problem. This was because I injured myself when I was 15 but kept playing on it because I didn't want to not play. Why did I not want to sit games out? Two reasons: 1- I enjoyed playing and it would have been annoying to miss games, 2- You are always told to "run it off" etc and to play through the pain.

The first point can't be sorted, people will always want to play when perhaps they shouldn't, but the second point can be worked on. Unfortunately it requires a cultural change, and this is very hard to achieve.

Every day I regret that I kept playing when I should have stopped. I now can't even play a game of 5 a side football or badminton on any kind of regular basis, nor can I go running to keep fit (I can just about manage cricket - but, as much as I love it you can't really call it a real sport!). The worst thing is that most of my friends from uni who played rugby have also had to "retire" well before their 30th birthday.

by fa0019 Mon Jul 29, 2013 3:43 pm

I'm sure players are asked to play injured and that players themselves hide their injuries so that they can get selected...

however on this situation its bad if it was totally correct but I would say that their are always two sides to the story.

If his max was indeed 60% speed then a prop would have been a legitimately better alternative on the wing. There was a replacement in Nikki Walker on the bench who was a good player. I doubt Robinson or any coach would think a Rory Lamont at 60% fitness is better then a Nikki Walker at 100%.

When people properly tear their quad they can't walk.. literally can't walk... I can't remember the game but Lamont says himself he played for 40 mins after injury.... now I'm not suggesting he is lying but probably exaggerating a little.... either that or he is superhuman (compared to fellow pros... not just mere mortals like ourselves).

It would have been quite obvious had he done so yet he admits he was destroyed in the press for having a bad game.... well if that was the case then no one could tell he had torn a quad during his performance. It just doesn't sound right to me.

by ChequeredJersey Mon Jul 29, 2013 3:47 pm

That's not true really, you can struggle to walk on a torn quad but depending on the tear and the person and the adrenaline rush it's not impossible that Rory played with one. The trouble with comparing injuries between different people is that the same ailment can present very differently in different people

by fa0019 Mon Jul 29, 2013 4:14 pm

I agree CJ... but wouldn't you say there is one thing stuggling to walk and then its one thing playing 40mins in a full contact game where 60000 people were watching you and they and the press by his own admission had no inkling of an injury.

Maybe he hid it quite well... but how many players do that on a injury which then takes 6 wks off.

I'm not doubting he was injured... but IMO it wouldn't make sense for coaching staff to play a guy with such an injury and given it was a performance he was particularly singled out in it would be in his interest to say.... "yes, but I was xxxxx".

by **RDW** Mon Jul 29, 2013 4:24 pm

To be fair the fact a scan showed a 4” tear that kept him out for 8 weeks or whatever it was suggests it was quite serious…

by fa0019 Mon Jul 29, 2013 4:32 pm

RDW, All I'm saying is that the account doesn't quite add up to me...its not suggesting it wasn't serious.

Robinson wasn't a great manager but he wasn't a complete idiot either.

Gatland in the latest lions series made a point of playing only players he felt were 100% fit and made huge changes from test to test.... what was the logic of him playing if he was so bad, PDivvy would have even been able to spot that.

I'm sure if you got an account from one of the coaches it would be a little less dramatic thats all.

by doctor_grey Mon Jul 29, 2013 4:54 pm

fa0019 wrote:RDW, All I'm saying is that the account doesn't quite add up to me...its not suggesting it wasn't serious.

Robinson wasn't a great manager but he wasn't a complete idiot either.

Gatland in the latest lions series made a point of playing only players he felt were 100% fit and made huge changes from test to test.... what was the logic of him playing if he was so bad, PDivvy would have even been able to spot that.

I'm sure if you got an account from one of the coaches it would be a little less dramatic thats all.

Yet Gatland selected broken -or recently repaired players. And, shock, they stayed broken or became broken again. Maybe Gats learned something.

by doctor_grey Mon Jul 29, 2013 5:00 pm

doctor_grey wrote:I am an idiot.
And need constant supervision.

bluestonevedder wrote:Nice post Dr Grey, and agree......

sad thing. he is right.

by neilthom7 Mon Jul 29, 2013 9:37 pm

I think there is a culture of rushing players back I have seen it at Ulster in the last season and even been critical of guys coming back too quickly. It simply causes even more injuries in a sport which lets face it is becoming more and more physical every year. What Rory has said there is damning and we definately need an attitude change in relation to this.

by bsando Mon Jul 29, 2013 10:30 pm

Pretty shocking, just goes to show the preparation for that game was not done properly, which that is maybe why Scotland were beaten so convincingly that day. Then again, sbw was unstoppable.

I doubt very much something like this would happen under Johnson or cotter. I am very happy with the direction Scotland are going at the moment. Regardless of players talents etc, the coaching setup seems much better.

by doctor_grey Tue Jul 30, 2013 1:54 am

I suppose I am a bit surprised people are shocked by these revelations. One does not need to be a physician to see players coming back early, re-injuring themselves, not regaining form for a long time, starting to rack up more injuries, and especially retiring early. This is as old as organised sport. This is how the game has always been played.

And now in the professional era of Rugby the risks are higher, the rewards are higher, pressure to perform is higher, pressure to keep one's place in the team is higher. Pressure on coaches and team management is higher. Even pressure on the physios and docs are higher. Everything adds up to a very visible death spiral.

This is why change cannot come from within. With all sports. It is always outside pressure which drives the change until there is no alternative. The NFL came to that place with concussions. Now they are leaders in research and evaluation techniques.

For us in Rugby, we all have played when we shouldn't have. At the highest level this is an every day occurrence. We all see it. This is why I am happy Lamont was willing to ostracise himself from significant portions of the Rugby establishment and tell his story. But it is not really news.

For me there are two valid counter points. First, players play hurt. This is normal. And if a player has a simple bruise or strain or even a broken finger, we should not over-react. They will always play. Bumps and bruises are normal, and a normal part of life. The problem is drawing the line between injury and a simple knock.
The second point is Rugby is great fun. It is hard to get people to stop playing. Who would want to if medically reasonably OK?

by **George Carlin** Tue Jul 30, 2013 6:32 am

Apparently, the SRU are starting an investgation into Rory's claims:

Rory Lamont: Injury 'ticking time bomb' claims to be probed
29 July 2013

Claims by former Scotland full-back Rory Lamont that players are pressured to play through injuries is to be investigated by his home rugby union.

Lamont says treatment of concussions in particular is a ticking health time bomb waiting to explode worldwide.

But Scottish Rugby chief executive Mark Dodson expressed surprise at the suggestions by the now-retired Lamont.

"We're right at the cutting edge of medical care and we mean to stay in that position," said Dodson.

"We have a world-leading medical team led by Doctor James Robson, who is respected throughout the world and who's a British Lions doctor.

"I'll have a look at it and I'm sure James will.

"We look after our players extremely well and ensure these people are fit, looked after properly and only reintroduced to the field when they're fit enough to do so.

"Moreover, we're talking to the RIB at the moment about concussion protocols that exist and the experiment that's taking place."

Lamont failed to fully recover after breaking his leg against France in a 2012 Six Nations match and the 30-year-old former Glasgow Warriors full-back announced his retirement from rugby in April because of the injury.

He recalled the autumn Test against New Zealand in 2010 when he started the match nursing a hamstring injury and failed to finish the match.

"I didn't feel that I could withdraw myself from that match," he said.

"I was unsure if I was going to be able to make it through the game. I felt that I didn't really have a choice if I wanted to keep on trying to be picked for Scotland and keep a good relationship with the coaches."

Lamont said he had witnessed players cheating concussion tests in a bid to be back in action before they are safely ready.

"Unless people identify the issues and come out and actually speak about it then things aren't going to change," he said.

"At the moment, it's a ticking time-bomb with the concussions. Sometimes you can be put under a huge amount of pressure, where you feel you have no other choice but to take the field, when you know there are possible consequences."

Perthshire-born Lamont won 29 caps for Scotland after making his debut against Wales in 2005.

His first spell with Glasgow was from 2004 to 2007, when he scored 19 tries in 55 games before moving to Sale Sharks and then Toulon.

He left the French club to rejoin Glasgow in 2011 but only made six appearances in his second stint.

"I spent a whole season with a broken scaphoid when I was at Toulon and I was refused to get a scan on it," added Lamont.

"They just kept playing it down as something insignificant, whereas effectively I was running the risk of arthritis in later life by not having it fixed."

I guess Dodson had to say something. The problem is now perhaps that journalists will invariably ask what the results of the investigation were.

by InjuredYetAgain Tue Jul 30, 2013 6:49 am

What surprises me a bit out of all of this is that it happened on James Robson's watch. He has been our doctor for yonks and we have all seen his antics on the Lions tours where he virtually becomes one if the players. I would be extremely surprised if his professional opinion was consistently overruled by coaches and he allowed it to continue.
Like most things, the truth is somewhere between the polar extremes that are offered to us

by doctor_grey Tue Jul 30, 2013 9:27 am

That response from the SRU is total nonsense.
But, this is not about the SRU. This could be almost any player from any country. I don't think Lamont is offering a polar extreme.

by **rodders** Tue Jul 30, 2013 4:40 pm

doctor_grey wrote:
Concussions are now taken very seriously in American football, and in fact in almost every American sport.

Really?

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/nfl/news/20130409/ex-players-call-nfl-brain-injury-panel-a-sham.ap/

by doctor_grey Tue Jul 30, 2013 5:50 pm

Yes, really.

It starts with research and the NFL is investing a lot of money and supporting some very detailed studies. Now. Cause, prevention, and care. And taking it very seriously now because the future of the league is at stake.

The article, and many others, highlight that many, many former players have terrible lives because of how concussions were virtually ignored, if not looked down upon - as in almost every other sport.

Yes, they very late to the table. But now there is no going back.

by funnyExiledScot Tue Jul 30, 2013 6:37 pm

To be honest Rory Lamont was pretty much broken all of the time, and I wonder whether the coaches simply lost patience.

If there is truth to what Lamont is saying, then it merits investigation. In fact his claims merit investigation full scope.

I'm mildly sceptical if I'm being honest. A real shame that Lamont never managed to stay injury free for more than 5 minutes, he was an excellent attacking fullback for a short while.

by thebandwagonsociety Tue Jul 30, 2013 8:20 pm

rodders wrote:
doctor_grey wrote:
Concussions are now taken very seriously in American football, and in fact in almost every American sport.

Really?

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/nfl/news/20130409/ex-players-call-nfl-brain-injury-panel-a-sham.ap/

ex-players also have their own motive in those kind of responses as they are trying to take a number of class action suits against the NFL and the owners. The NFL have two fights at hand, the first is to protect its current players, the second is to protect itself against an ex-player lawsuit. The NFL will try to say that no-one knew about concussion and it is only from these studies onwards that they have become aware of the risk (taking appropriate measures to protect players). The ex-players will try to saw that the NFL, owners, coaches and medical staff knew when players were not fit to play but decided to ignore that knowledge and forced players into harms way.

by thebandwagonsociety Tue Jul 30, 2013 8:21 pm

This is a very interesting thread by the way. Fair dues for not mentioning what's his name, and the other thing.

by doctor_grey Tue Jul 30, 2013 9:32 pm

thebandwagonsociety wrote:
rodders wrote:
doctor_grey wrote:
Concussions are now taken very seriously in American football, and in fact in almost every American sport.

Really?

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/nfl/news/20130409/ex-players-call-nfl-brain-injury-panel-a-sham.ap/

ex-players also have their own motive in those kind of responses as they are trying to take a number of class action suits against the NFL and the owners. The NFL have two fights at hand, the first is to protect its current players, the second is to protect itself against an ex-player lawsuit. The NFL will try to say that no-one knew about concussion and it is only from these studies onwards that they have become aware of the risk (taking appropriate measures to protect players). The ex-players will try to saw that the NFL, owners, coaches and medical staff knew when players were not fit to play but decided to ignore that knowledge and forced players into harms way.

The problem is American Football at all levels, high school and college and NFL is in trouble. And there are thousands more players in the schools and colleges than the NFL at any time. Everyone know about concussion risk. 50 years ago boxers who retired and were not all with it were called 'Punch Drunk'. Everyone in virtually all sports had their versions of Punch Drunk. But everyone know what it was and everyone knew the cause. To say different is - politely put - disingenious.

Its only after massive pressure that the NFL and US universities have invested huge sums of money to finally get ahead of concussions. American Football makes billions, no exageration, especially including the universities, the largest of which fill stadia which seat over 100,000 people. I have seen only a small number of the studies, but the ones I have seen are amazing. it took a lot but the NFL and the universities are finally out front and taking the lead. Outside of Boxing, American Football probably has the next highest rate of concussionsa. If we had an effort like this we could probably cure the common cold.

But just to be clear, everyone know this was a problem. Since before any of us were born.

by MrsP Tue Jul 30, 2013 9:40 pm

Grey,

Do you really think there was a good understanding of the extent of the problem for that long? Sure we all knew about the extradurals and the Parkinsons in boxers but I don't think we had much idea of the terrible consequences of repeated, relatively moderate head trauma in the long term?

by doctor_grey Wed Jul 31, 2013 1:05 am

Mrs.P,
Yes, I do. I truly believe at some level we knew there was a problem. Perhaps not with the word concussion. Clearly not as widespread, nor with the depth of understanding as now, but it was there. And certainly not as many guys because the players with milder cases would continue to play or retire. We never found out about them.

Even as little as ten or fifteen years ago there was much less discussion about head trauma, and most of it was usually somewhat disparaging: "He got his bell rung, he really got his bell rung, he can't shake it off, really not so tough, is he?". And any comments in a clubhouse about toughness would usually shut down any complaints by the poor guy with the headaches. And most of those guys would eventually fade into the woodwork and disappear. Easy. No more problem.

But we all knew when some guy was knocked into the 22nd century and continued to have the wobbles, it was due to the head injury. Now these same guys are on tv explaining their injuries and the treatment they receive (or should receive).

I am not sure this is the best analogy, but let's compare to cigarettes. Back in the 1930s people called them Coffin Nails. Though mostly an American expression, it was so widespread the phrase was used in the musical Guys and Dolls. 'Gimme a nail' meant 'please, may I have a cigarette'. No one knew the depth and breadth of the risks of smoking, but everyone knew they were bad and people died young.

my tuppence, for what its worth............

by Looseheaded Wed Jul 31, 2013 3:27 am

MrsP wrote:GG,

The NHS is free at the point of use but we do pay for it in taxes.

I agree that charging to see a GP is very harsh on certain sections of society but it does have some advantages.

How much is 30 Euro in real terms? How much does a pack of ciggies cost?

yes but the 'certain sections of society' that its harsh on are the ones who need it most

i'd happily pay taxes for the nhs even if i could afford private

by far one our greatest institutions

by Looseheaded Wed Jul 31, 2013 3:40 am

fa0019 wrote:I agree CJ... but wouldn't you say there is one thing stuggling to walk and then its one thing playing 40mins in a full contact game where 60000 people were watching you and they and the press by his own admission had no inkling of an injury.

Maybe he hid it quite well... but how many players do that on a injury which then takes 6 wks off.

I'm not doubting he was injured... but IMO it wouldn't make sense for coaching staff to play a guy with such an injury and given it was a performance he was particularly singled out in it would be in his interest to say.... "yes, but I was xxxxx".

quinton fortune played the rest of an international football match and even scored with a brooken leg

dont underestimatt the human body

by **George Carlin** Wed Jul 31, 2013 6:40 am

Adrenaline is an amazing analgesic and shouldn't be underestimated. O'Connell said that he was only vaguely aware at the end of the recent Lions test that his arm might actually be broken. Which it was.

by **rodders** Wed Jul 31, 2013 10:28 am

I'm surprised at the reaction to this.

Lets face it anyone who has played at any level, has played or tried to play through injury. Even at amateur level the pressure of losing your place or letting the side down is enough to feel obligated to do this.

In the professional game the pressure must be increased exponentially - with the financial implications of missing games through injury, pressure from sponsors etc.

It's just the nature of professional sport, it's a product and the consumers want to see the best players on the field as much as possible and see their teams win. Then when you factor in the macho nature and amateur old school traditions of a sport like rugby then that is potent comination of factors which make it very difficult for players to sit out games, even if their welfare is at stake by not doing so.

by GunsGerms Wed Jul 31, 2013 10:39 am

I agree Rodders.

by MrsP Wed Jul 31, 2013 10:44 am

I think the surprising thing about Lamont's revelations is that it is saying that he was saying he was not fit and was forced to play despite his protestations.

That is very different from a player who is under-reporting an injury or a coach who is complicit with a player in putting him on the field while injured in the hope that it would be okay.

Lamont is saying he was not believed when he said he was injured.

by **rodders** Wed Jul 31, 2013 10:51 am

Mrs P they should have the players welfare as their primary concern ... however they are under huge pressure too - the coaches to win games, the medical staff to get players on the field. It's the nature of the beast I'm afraid.

.

by Big Wed Jul 31, 2013 1:40 pm

funnyExiledScot wrote:To be honest Rory Lamont was pretty much broken all of the time, and I wonder whether the coaches simply lost patience.

If there is truth to what Lamont is saying, then it merits investigation. In fact his claims merit investigation full scope.

I'm mildly sceptical if I'm being honest. A real shame that Lamont never managed to stay injury free for more than 5 minutes, he was an excellent attacking fullback for a short while.

But was he broken because (for whatever reason) he was more injury prone, lower bone density or something like that. Or was he getting repeated injuries because he rarely had the opportunity to recover properly? Look at the way Wilkinson had repeated problems at Newcastle, but is fine now he is in Toulon. Or the amount of time Tait has had out at Tigers before getting a run of games and staying fit.

I'm a bit biased in that I knew Sean and Rory when they lived in Melton as teenagers. However, neither seemed shy of the physicality of the game and albeit he may have changed since then he didn't strike me as the type to completely fabricate something like this.

by welshy824 (new) Wed Jul 31, 2013 4:51 pm

I think all of us as players have at some point came back from an injury too soon and certainly for me this had led to a longer lay off due to either injuring something else trying to protect my previous injury or certainly having a poor game by my standards.

while everyone wants to play for their club/team sometimes you need to realise you are not fit and let someone else take your mantle, as it is both better for yourself, giving you more time to recover, and also for your team, who will now have a player who can give 100%.

by **rodders** Sat Aug 03, 2013 8:36 am

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-23545796

A brain injuries expert has discovered what he believes to be the first confirmed case of early onset dementia caused by playing rugby.

Dr Willie Stewart said the discovery suggested "one or two" players competing in the Six Nations every year may go on to develop the condition.

He examined sections of brain tissue for abnormal proteins associated with head injuries and dementia.

The former rugby player had higher levels than a retired amateur boxer.

Continue reading the main story

“In any Six Nations weekend that is one or two players who may go on and develop a dementia they wouldn't otherwise have been exposed to”

Dr Willie Stewart

Consultant neuropathologist

The boxer had been diagnosed with dementia pugilistica - more commonly known as punch drunk syndrome - which is thought to affect up to 20% of boxers who retire after long careers.

Symptoms, which usually appear between 12 and 16 years after the boxer's career begins, can include memory, speech and personality problems, tremors and a lack of coordination.

The condition has been recognised for more than a century, and until recently had been thought to only affect boxers who suffered repeated concussive injuries through being punched in the face.

by **RDW** Sat Aug 03, 2013 8:39 am

Well it looks like the sru have completely missed the point with this (no surprise) - taking Lamont's comments as a dig at the sru doctors (which it wasn't - he has nothing but praise for them) and even threatening legal action if he keeps making those comments!! They've also refused to meet with them to discuss his comments.

Unbelievable.

by Sponsored content

Rory lamont - 'I was forced to play while injured'

Rory lamont - 'I was forced to play while injured'

Re: Rory lamont - 'I was forced to play while injured'

Re: Rory lamont - 'I was forced to play while injured'

Re: Rory lamont - 'I was forced to play while injured'

Re: Rory lamont - 'I was forced to play while injured'

Re: Rory lamont - 'I was forced to play while injured'

Re: Rory lamont - 'I was forced to play while injured'

Re: Rory lamont - 'I was forced to play while injured'

Re: Rory lamont - 'I was forced to play while injured'

Re: Rory lamont - 'I was forced to play while injured'

Re: Rory lamont - 'I was forced to play while injured'

Re: Rory lamont - 'I was forced to play while injured'

Re: Rory lamont - 'I was forced to play while injured'

Re: Rory lamont - 'I was forced to play while injured'

Re: Rory lamont - 'I was forced to play while injured'

Re: Rory lamont - 'I was forced to play while injured'

Re: Rory lamont - 'I was forced to play while injured'

Re: Rory lamont - 'I was forced to play while injured'

Re: Rory lamont - 'I was forced to play while injured'

Re: Rory lamont - 'I was forced to play while injured'

Re: Rory lamont - 'I was forced to play while injured'

Re: Rory lamont - 'I was forced to play while injured'

Re: Rory lamont - 'I was forced to play while injured'

Re: Rory lamont - 'I was forced to play while injured'

Re: Rory lamont - 'I was forced to play while injured'

Re: Rory lamont - 'I was forced to play while injured'

Re: Rory lamont - 'I was forced to play while injured'

Re: Rory lamont - 'I was forced to play while injured'

Re: Rory lamont - 'I was forced to play while injured'

Re: Rory lamont - 'I was forced to play while injured'

Re: Rory lamont - 'I was forced to play while injured'

Re: Rory lamont - 'I was forced to play while injured'

Re: Rory lamont - 'I was forced to play while injured'

Re: Rory lamont - 'I was forced to play while injured'

Re: Rory lamont - 'I was forced to play while injured'