Knock out

First topic message reminder :

Despite some great performances and a very welcome win what will stick in my mind is George North. He d already had 1 concussion check and took another hefty blow to the noggin and stayed on. How and why it was allowed is beyond me. Its too serious a pointtobe ignored. Does the tmo need to be involved more here?

nathan wrote:

Hammersmith harrier wrote:George is a big boy, he doesn't need some overbearing hysterics telling him what to do.

and i'm sure he'll say the same thing 30 years down the line when he doesn't even recognize  who his grandchildren are....

Is it down to you to decide what he can and can't do then, oh no it's not so stop with the over the top hysterics.

Allty wrote:

MrsP wrote:See this is where these protocols need to be over-ridden by good clinical judgement.

North should not be playing this weekend no matter what the RTP guidelines say.

The man suffered 2 serious blows to the head in one match, at least one of which the medical team acknowledge lead to LOC. (In my opinion he was KO'd both times). How can it be a good idea for him to play again 8 days later? T.

_______________________________________________________________



Or even training .............IMHO

Totally agree Allty.

And I think we can all see the problems we have to overcome in having concussion taken seriously. Anyone who has read what Hape and Lamont have written about their experiences, or who watched what happened to Fritz, will know that those attitudes exist in many people involved in rugby, not just keyboard warriors.

There are still quite a few dinosaurs out there.

Well it definately should be down to qualified medical opinion in my eyes in regards to whether he should come off and whether he can play at the weekend. Trouble is there are a lot of questions about this whole process, especially in this specific case. North should have no say in it whatsoever.

Hammersmith harrier wrote:George is a big boy, he doesn't need some overbearing hysterics telling him what to do.

yeah, lets just get rid of the referee in boxing too. where does he get off stopping the fight.

Hammersmith harrier wrote:

nathan wrote:

Hammersmith harrier wrote:George is a big boy, he doesn't need some overbearing hysterics telling him what to do.

and i'm sure he'll say the same thing 30 years down the line when he doesn't even recognize  who his grandchildren are....

Is it down to you to decide what he can and can't do then, oh no it's not so stop with the over the top hysterics.

The point is if a player smashes an arm, say, he can make a rational decision as to what he is capable of doing and if he should come off the pitch.

He gets concussed, his brain is still working but can produce garbage. He is not capable of making a rational decision.

Hammersmith harrier wrote:

nathan wrote:

Hammersmith harrier wrote:George is a big boy, he doesn't need some overbearing hysterics telling him what to do.

and i'm sure he'll say the same thing 30 years down the line when he doesn't even recognize  who his grandchildren are....

Is it down to you to decide what he can and can't do then, oh no it's not so stop with the over the top hysterics.

What?

Theres been Poopie loads of warning signs and it's people like you that will kill the sport when parents keep their kids well away from the sport.

Havent gone through all the pages yet... Did North see a neurologist this week? If yes is he allowed to play this weekend? Just trying to compare with Sexton who was out for 3 month...

The GRTP protocol allows increasing levels of activity every 24 hours so long as no symptoms are reported. They can not move to the next level of activity until they have been symptom free on the previous level. So a player can be back to playing in 7 days if they do not report any symptoms.

Clearly Sexton had symptoms and the sense to report them.

Griff wrote:

Cowshot wrote:Well, to try to be constructive about this, there is one thing that could be done that might help: scrum caps. They won't help much with rotation and only a little with whiplash, but they might just take a little off the edge of the straight impacts. Maybe it is something that should be considered in addition to the procedures and existing medical systems? Helmets in the American football style I know bring their own problems, but a little padding and no hard shell might be well worth it.

There have been a number of studies into protective clothing and equipment in sport and some of the findings were the opposite of expected - that padding and protection lead to more injuries and bigger impact.  The theory being that those wearing head guards/chest plates/shoulder pads, etc. felt a bit invincible/more protected and therefore less at risk (logical I suppose) and were therefore more likely to go into contact harder than if they were not wearing it.  The protection was therefore negated somewhat.  The other theory was that people wearing them actually saw it as an opportunity to strike with the padding, i.e. using the protection as a striking weapon, lead with the head more, attack with the should extended, etc. and therefore impact and injury risk was greater.

So protective gear logically makes sense.  But in reality, and with us stoopid humans, it may not actually be the case.  I'll see if I can dig up the journal articles online.

ie a false sense of security.

quinsforever wrote:what a shambles.

even the pink hat cowboys saw the incident replayed on the big screen.

IRB showing how toothless they are once again. Lip-service to player safety is decided to be sufficient.

I was under the impression that Gats and his coaching staff have a tv where they're sat.

Just read the BBC stuff on Wales not being sanctioned and that they're looking at giving replay access to medical staff. Nothing seems to be mentioned about the fact various members of the Welsh team (not medical) are viewing footage continuously and that there should be a duty of care than any member suspecting a player has been KO'd should raise it with the medical staff? Is that not a sensible thing? It seems that because the medical team didn't see it, it's fine.

I deliberately kept away from this issue until the dust settled, now I need to clarify some points
1) North after what happened should be nowhere near a Rugby field at the moment or on this weekend, as he was clearly knocked out after the 2nd incident, IF he passed the pitch side and following days protocols, they are obviously NOT fit for purpose as DR. Barry O'Driscoll has pointed out, and had the courage to resign from the IRB over.

2) A couple of posters have expressed the opinion that we didn't want him taken off, and ignored the evidence in front of them, as we had no one capable of taking his place,
RUBBISH, Liam Williams was on the bench and had already replaced him once, Gatland pre selection had said he (North) was under pressure for his place.

3) Quins in one of your posts early on page 3, you accused the WRU of being LIARS, about there being no feeds to the medical area, I hope for but don't expect an apology from you, as the Chief Medical Officer mentioned in the BBC article today, that that is actually true and verified by World Rugby or whatever it is now called, and this error will now be righted.

Sounds like a learning thing, an honest error, mistakes are made and this is life. But in the article in MrsP's post above there's talk of him possibly being ok to play this weekend. That seems crazy, but it's probably just an attempt to take the heat out of the seriousness of the blunder by implying he was fine all along. He won't play, surely.

HammerofThunor wrote:Just read the BBC stuff on Wales not being sanctioned and that they're looking at giving replay access to medical staff.  Nothing seems to be mentioned about the fact various members of the Welsh team (not medical) are viewing footage continuously and that there should be a duty of care than any member suspecting a player has been KO'd should raise it with the medical staff? Is that not a sensible thing? It seems that because the medical team didn't see it, it's fine.

We assume they're watching game footage. Or it could be live stats from OPTA (or similar) such as distance covered, rucks hit, heart rate, etc. (if they were wearing the sensors). Odds are its live footage (I assume we're talking a bbc feed? They don't have their own cameramen obvs) but I'm not sure we can say 100%.

I would very much think they do have their own cameras. Not that this means they will be focused on injured players of course but they must surely film all the games themselves for analysis, no?

quinsforever wrote:how many bare-faced lies will world rugby allow them to get away with?

were treating another player when the second North knockout happened?

dont have a video screen in their booth?

c'mon, more often the obvious answer is the right one. wales couldnt afford for him to come off at that point in time.

the booth mentioned is the coaching booth. where they clearly do have video feeds. lots of them. the "already treating another player" line of defense has already been dropped so that was obviously a fib.

80,000 fans dont have access to video, but they saw it on the in-stadium big screen. if the medics pitchside dont have a screen pitchside (which is understandable as opposed to the booth) surely they, like everyone else in the stadium, looks at the big screen when something is shown on it?

whole thing stinks, but there was plausible deniability as there is no record of communications between booth and medics.

Yep lets TMO collisions, then we can start carding them, the game needs more breaks…in 10 years we'll be TMOing the TMO and stopping the game to iron out central contractual issues and creased shirts.
Rugby is a contact sport, injuries happen and concussion is bad, very bad. But every player who steps on a pitch knows those risks and chooses to do so. When we start using technology to second guess medics and inject some good old fashioned liability issues coupled with letting the crowds oohs and aahs influence officials when they see slow motion collisions, we are on the slippery slope to destroying this game

MrsP wrote:I would very much think they do have their own cameras. Not that this means they will be focused on injured players of course but they must surely film all the games themselves for analysis, no?

Really? I've not seen anyone bar the broadcasters walking round with a camera? Maybe Neil Jenkins has got a GoPro strapped to his ginger bonce when he runs on with the kicking tee and water bottles?!

But seriously, the likelihood is that they have the bbc feed to their laptops. I was just saying that there's all sorts of other data that they get fed too so it's not 100% that they have the game in the booth, but that's the strongest likelihood.

I can't say for sure obviously but I would have thought they would have a high angle camera at least to watch patterns etc, no?

HammerofThunor wrote:Just read the BBC stuff on Wales not being sanctioned and that they're looking at giving replay access to medical staff.  Nothing seems to be mentioned about the fact various members of the Welsh team (not medical) are viewing footage continuously and that there should be a duty of care than any member suspecting a player has been KO'd should raise it with the medical staff? Is that not a sensible thing? It seems that because the medical team didn't see it, it's fine.

Indeed.

Health and safety and rugby does not mix. By definition. No one who completed a risk assessment of a game would let it go on.

This is a violent game of collisions, big men moving fast. This is the thin end of the wedge; we have already emasculated the scrum contest and made the tackle area a minefield, you can't even punch your oppo any more, and now we are going to film the head on heads and then we have evidence to use in court 50 years later when Player X decides the medic at the game let him get a TBI which means he now can't smell his Hob Nobs.

It's the knock out blow for the game is what it is.

i saw what you did there. very funny.

but its just the way of the world. 70 years on from the end of a world war, and guess what, we are less interested in people dying doing their jobs!

its the kind of stuff people need to worry themselves about as the big stuff is a distant memory.

Gwlad wrote:Health and safety and rugby does not mix. By definition. No one who completed a risk assessment of a game would let it go on.

This is a violent game of collisions, big men moving fast. This is the thin end of the wedge; we have already emasculated the scrum contest and made the tackle area a minefield, you can't even punch your oppo any more, and now we are going to film the head on heads and then we have evidence to use in court 50 years later when Player X decides the medic at the game let him get a TBI which means he now can't smell his Hob Nobs.

It's the knock out blow for the game is what it is.

Cardiff Dave wrote:

Gwlad wrote:Health and safety and rugby does not mix. By definition. No one who completed a risk assessment of a game would let it go on.

This is a violent game of collisions, big men moving fast. This is the thin end of the wedge; we have already emasculated the scrum contest and made the tackle area a minefield, you can't even punch your oppo any more, and now we are going to film the head on heads and then we have evidence to use in court 50 years later when Player X decides the medic at the game let him get a TBI which means he now can't smell his Hob Nobs.

It's the knock out blow for the game is what it is.

Is that the 'I have a concussion' emoticon or the 'I took the comment about punching seriously and am a bit of a dimwit' emoticon?

This would be a fail safe and somthing I mentioned in the OP. i can t see a sane reason against it.

MrsP wrote:I can't say for sure obviously but I would have thought they would have a high angle camera at least to watch patterns etc, no?

I imagine that they will just have access to the broadcasters footage but an ability to choose which footage they see and angles they view it from similar to the TMO.

Griff wrote:

HammerofThunor wrote:Just read the BBC stuff on Wales not being sanctioned and that they're looking at giving replay access to medical staff.  Nothing seems to be mentioned about the fact various members of the Welsh team (not medical) are viewing footage continuously and that there should be a duty of care than any member suspecting a player has been KO'd should raise it with the medical staff? Is that not a sensible thing? It seems that because the medical team didn't see it, it's fine.

We assume they're watching game footage. Or it could be live stats from OPTA (or similar) such as distance covered, rucks hit, heart rate, etc. (if they were wearing the sensors). Odds are its live footage (I assume we're talking a bbc feed? They don't have their own cameramen obvs) but I'm not sure we can say 100%.

Several times coaches have said in interviews that they watched the replay and thought it was a red, or something like that so they clearly have access to it. And that's immediately after the game so they haven't seen the game after the whistle. We certainly can't say 100% but it hasn't been denied. It's just been said that the medical team don't have access to it, which I can believe. We also know that the bench can see the big screens and this is where the medical team sit. Did no one see it? If they did, did they not think to raise it with the medical team? Perhaps not, probably not...but they should of.

Gwlad wrote:

Cardiff Dave wrote:

Gwlad wrote:Health and safety and rugby does not mix. By definition. No one who completed a risk assessment of a game would let it go on.

This is a violent game of collisions, big men moving fast. This is the thin end of the wedge; we have already emasculated the scrum contest and made the tackle area a minefield, you can't even punch your oppo any more, and now we are going to film the head on heads and then we have evidence to use in court 50 years later when Player X decides the medic at the game let him get a TBI which means he now can't smell his Hob Nobs.

It's the knock out blow for the game is what it is.

Is that the 'I have a concussion' emoticon or the 'I took the comment about punching seriously and am a bit of a dimwit' emoticon?

Neither.

Part of the BT agreement with the clubs involved the access of the footage, and improving the infrastructure in the stadiums for coverage, etc. I would have thought the BBC would have a similar deal with the unions. I would have though they could access various camera, more than what is broadcast but that's just a guess.

Not trying to defend the Welsh management or medics but just trying to get to the bottom of this ignorance vs cover up thing: Rhys Long, the Welsh video analyst (chubby guy, couple of chins), sits in the box with the coaches. I believe the North 2nd incident was around the same time as a try (going on what people on here said - I can't remember to be honest). So maybe that was an opportunity to see the North incident, or maybe it meant that they were rewinding and pouring over the try itself and missed other 'stuff' in the background??? Possible? I can't see how they could have missed it on the big screen TBH, but maybe they were gathered round the laptops making notes on who to shout at and blame for the try!

It is a bit difficult to accept that the only people in the country who did not see it are in the employ of the WRU.

The English player closest to the incident knew North was in trouble as he can be seen stopping to check on him.

Griff wrote:Not trying to defend the Welsh management or medics but just trying to get to the bottom of this ignorance vs cover up thing: Rhys Long, the Welsh video analyst (chubby guy, couple of chins), sits in the box with the coaches. I believe the North 2nd incident was around the same time as a try (going on what people on here said - I can't remember to be honest). So maybe that was an opportunity to see the North incident, or maybe it meant that they were rewinding and pouring over the try itself and missed other 'stuff' in the background??? Possible? I can't see how they could have missed it on the big screen TBH, but maybe they were gathered round the laptops making notes on who to shout at and blame for the try!

I accept that the medics don't have access to the footage. I accept that they didn't notice at the time, as you said there was a lot going on. I just can't see how no one in the camp saw the replays 10 mins later (or whenever it was). And then if they did, why not mention it to the medical team? Perhaps they assumed the medics knew everything they needed to know. If that's the case then what needs to happen is the education of everyone involved in the team, from the ball boys to the video analysts. Any sign of KO needs reporting to the medical team, who can then review the footage themselves and assess the player.

MrsP wrote:It is a bit difficult to accept that the only people in the country who did not see it are in the employ of the WRU.

The English player closest to the incident knew North was in trouble as he can be seen stopping to check on him.

So they must be lying right?

Jeebus you have blown this trumpet endlessly. The WRU and IRB are happy with what happened, so are the players, so is George.

What exactly do you want to happen regarding this incident and future ones?

Should the game come to a stop after every tackle to check everyone is ok?

Have you ever played the game yourself?

MrsP wrote:It is a bit difficult to accept that the only people in the whole World who did not see it are in the employ of the WRU.

The English player closest to the incident knew North was in trouble as he can be seen stopping to check on him.

Adjusted.

Gwlad wrote:

MrsP wrote:It is a bit difficult to accept that the only people in the country who did not see it are in the employ of the WRU.

The English player closest to the incident knew North was in trouble as he can be seen stopping to check on him.

So they must be lying right?

Jeebus you have blown this trumpet endlessly. The WRU and IRB are happy with what happened, so are the players, so is George.

What exactly do you want to happen regarding this incident and future ones?

Should the game come to a stop after every tackle to check everyone is ok?

Have you ever played the game yourself?

Just out of interest do you think the medics should have bothered about checking halfpennys neck for so long?

Gwlad wrote:

MrsP wrote:It is a bit difficult to accept that the only people in the country who did not see it are in the employ of the WRU.

The English player closest to the incident knew North was in trouble as he can be seen stopping to check on him.

So they must be lying right?

Jeebus you have blown this trumpet endlessly. The WRU and IRB are happy with what happened, so are the players, so is George.

What exactly do you want to happen regarding this incident and future ones?

Should the game come to a stop after every tackle to check everyone is ok?

Have you ever played the game yourself?

Not at all sure what this has to do with anything but, yes I have!

And nowhere have I suggested the measures you mention.

But the IRB being happy with the situation is not really very reassuring, is it?

What I don't understand - ignoring video replays etc - is how Wales can not have known he was hit in the head when someone is shown attending to him in the aftermath of it on the video. Even if they didn't see the incident live, is it really believable that they treated him without realising that what they were treating was another blow to the head?

2:01:36 on the video.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b051ws7s/six-nations-rugby-2015-wales-v-england#group=p02j4np8

Some one should of brought this to the attention of the referee and he should of stoped the game untill he (NORTH) was taken off.

It is all right Jamie Roberts saying Wales have confidence in the Medical staff..But then what else would he say....After this week end i think their should be an independent Medical officer at every match.

I just hope that George North does not suffer any long term damage.

majesticimperialman wrote:Some one should of brought this to the attention of the referee and he should of stoped the game untill he (NORTH) was taken off.

It is all right Jamie Roberts saying Wales have confidence in the Medical staff..But then what else would he say....After this week end i think their should be an independent Medical officer at every match.

I just hope that George North does not suffer any long term damage.

Why don't you go and read what the Medical Officer has to say about an Independent Doctor being available.

wayne wrote:

majesticimperialman wrote:Some one should of brought this to the attention of the referee and he should of stoped the game untill he (NORTH) was taken off.

It is all right Jamie Roberts saying Wales have confidence in the Medical staff..But then what else would he say....After this week end i think their should be an independent Medical officer at every match.

I just hope that George North does not suffer any long term damage.

Why don't you go and read what the Medical Officer has to say about an Independent Doctor being available.    

I was just giving my opinion about what happen at every game since this week end.

I don't believe a word coming out of the Welsh camp on this - and even if it is true its outrageously negligent.

majesticimperialman wrote:

wayne wrote:

majesticimperialman wrote:Some one should of brought this to the attention of the referee and he should of stoped the game untill he (NORTH) was taken off.

It is all right Jamie Roberts saying Wales have confidence in the Medical staff..But then what else would he say....After this week end i think their should be an independent Medical officer at every match.

I just hope that George North does not suffer any long term damage.

Why don't you go and read what the Medical Officer has to say about an Independent Doctor being available.    

I was just giving my opinion about what happen at every game since this week end.

The point is Madge there was an Independent Doctor and he did do the evaluation to the first incident Protocols, as was mentioned by the Welsh Medical Officer, this is available on the Wales Online Web page, I think it was taken from the WRU website

TJ wrote:I don't believe a word coming out of the Welsh camp on this - and even if it is true its outrageously negligent.  

I wouldn't expect anything different from YOU.

wayne wrote:

majesticimperialman wrote:

wayne wrote:

majesticimperialman wrote:Some one should of brought this to the attention of the referee and he should of stoped the game untill he (NORTH) was taken off.

It is all right Jamie Roberts saying Wales have confidence in the Medical staff..But then what else would he say....After this week end i think their should be an independent Medical officer at every match.

I just hope that George North does not suffer any long term damage.

Why don't you go and read what the Medical Officer has to say about an Independent Doctor being available.    

I was just giving my opinion about what happen at every game since this week end.

The point is Madge there was an Independent Doctor and he did do the evaluation to the first incident Protocols, as was mentioned by the Welsh Medical Officer, this is available on the Wales Online Web page, I think it was taken from the WRU website

I think its more about the 2nd incident andw hat can be done to prevent it happenning again.

No 7&1/2 wrote:

wayne wrote:

majesticimperialman wrote:

wayne wrote:

majesticimperialman wrote:Some one should of brought this to the attention of the referee and he should of stoped the game untill he (NORTH) was taken off.

It is all right Jamie Roberts saying Wales have confidence in the Medical staff..But then what else would he say....After this week end i think their should be an independent Medical officer at every match.

I just hope that George North does not suffer any long term damage.

Why don't you go and read what the Medical Officer has to say about an Independent Doctor being available.    

I was just giving my opinion about what happen at every game since this week end.

The point is Madge there was an Independent Doctor and he did do the evaluation to the first incident Protocols, as was mentioned by the Welsh Medical Officer, this is available on the Wales Online Web page, I think it was taken from the WRU website

I think its more about the 2nd incident andw hat can be done to prevent it happenning again.

If you actually read the article, these things are being put in place, with the live feeds being pumped into the Medical Teams Booth.
The WRU does many things WRONG, and I think they will do some more by selecting North tomorrow.

I have and its a good logical step.

I wonder what info the independent Medical Officer was given about the first incident?

MrsP wrote:

Gwlad wrote:

MrsP wrote:It is a bit difficult to accept that the only people in the country who did not see it are in the employ of the WRU.

The English player closest to the incident knew North was in trouble as he can be seen stopping to check on him.

So they must be lying right?

Jeebus you have blown this trumpet endlessly. The WRU and IRB are happy with what happened, so are the players, so is George.

What exactly do you want to happen regarding this incident and future ones?

Should the game come to a stop after every tackle to check everyone is ok?

Have you ever played the game yourself?

Not at all sure what this has to do with anything but, yes I have!

And nowhere have I suggested the measures you mention.

But the IRB being happy with the situation is not really very reassuring, is it?

Yes it is, it means the rules are being followed.

Over cautious people would ruin this game entirely if the health and Safety czars are allowed anywhere near it we will end up playing touch rugby.

North is fine, he says he is fine, the WRU say he is fine

Fine, he might be dribbling over his porridge in his 50s but, THAT IS HIS CHOICE.

If we TMO collisions the game is as good as dead

Gwlad wrote:

MrsP wrote:

Gwlad wrote:

MrsP wrote:It is a bit difficult to accept that the only people in the country who did not see it are in the employ of the WRU.

The English player closest to the incident knew North was in trouble as he can be seen stopping to check on him.

So they must be lying right?

Jeebus you have blown this trumpet endlessly. The WRU and IRB are happy with what happened, so are the players, so is George.

What exactly do you want to happen regarding this incident and future ones?

Should the game come to a stop after every tackle to check everyone is ok?

Have you ever played the game yourself?

Not at all sure what this has to do with anything but, yes I have!

And nowhere have I suggested the measures you mention.

But the IRB being happy with the situation is not really very reassuring, is it?

Yes it is, it means the rules are being followed.

Over cautious people would ruin this game entirely if the health and Safety czars are allowed anywhere near it we will end up playing touch rugby.

North is fine, he says he is fine, the WRU say he is fine

Fine, he might be dribbling over his porridge in his 50s but, THAT IS HIS CHOICE.

If we TMO collisions the game is as good as dead

The rules weren't followed in the second instance. The TMO/video proposed use would be to see if there were clashes of heads. The second one was missed by everyone but Watson (?) but was clear on replays. The fact that you don't give a flying fig about player safety says a lot about you.

Gwlad wrote:
Fine, he might be dribbling over his porridge in his 50s but, THAT IS HIS CHOICE.

I spent about 20 minutes writing up a response to your posts. Then I saw this again and realised you would not be interested.