2 hours ago, Chook said:

Harley could have infected 7 billion people Diamond!

yeah but half of them could have barracked for the Suns... not to mention all those people camping on the Tweed Heads border

11 minutes ago, speed demon said:

As a doctor, I think the management of this situation was disgraceful. 

The footage, which the club doctor reviewed at the time of the incident, clearly shows both players:

* Clash heads at high speed

* Lose muscle tone

* Lack normal protective posturing while falling

* Momentarily motionless on the ground

* Appear confused and disoriented 

The clear interpretation is both players have been concussed and severely enough to have briefly lost consciousness. 

I'm not a Doctor, and a 1,000,00% agree with all of the above.

And that's the point.

Anyone, and i mean anyone, who watched that collision would have immediately assumed both players were concussed - for precisely the reasons you detail. 

Watching live, i felt sick seeing that collision. Jones looked out cold by the time he hit the ground. But i was even more concerned for Allir because of those body movements you describe (i feel sick just thinking about it).

I felt so uncomfortable i started watching the bombers game because i didn't want to watch the 100 replays i assumed 7 would show.

A little while later i started watching the Port game again and i was completely shocked that Allir was playing - in fact at first i was confused. I was watching on kayo and initially thought that perhaps the i had restarted it from earlier in the math.

Because i hadn't been watching i had no info on whether there had been a test or not, just assumed there had been and Allir had passed it. 

Beggars belief.

And what the hell was Hinkley talking about in the presser? I mean he says he is no doctor, but then says Allir sounded just fine to him? Just shut up for Christ's sake. Just sounded like amateur hour. 

Impossible not to at least have the thought, despite Hinkley's denial this would ever happen, the importance of winning trumped protecting players. 

Now you'd hope that is not true (hope being the operative word becuase the evidence is pretty damning), but that doubt goes exactly to your point about the integrity of the medical profession.

This is a big deal.

7 hours ago, Bitter but optimistic said:

There is a large parcel of [censored] still to hit the fan over this matter you would reckon?

The club should rightly be handed a Bugs Bunny.."eahhh, Whats up Doc"??

Edited July 31, 20231 yr by picket fence

7 hours ago, BDA said:

Port club doctor has a lot to answer for. He has a duty of care which he failed to uphold. He and the club need to be held to account 

I think it was a previous Port doctor that sent Nathan Eagleton back on the ground after a spontaneous collapse.

It turned out he had Wolf Parkinson White syndrome , which means he had had a cardiac arrest on the field. That doctor was so lucky it didn’t cause another arrest that day.

Th Aliir situation is probably worse, since the diagnosis was blatantly obvious.

All this while Shane Tuck (RIP) inquest is occurring and the recent CTE disclosure about the Adelaide AFLW player who took her life. 

I blew up about this on Demonland when it happened.  I was so angry that I was witnessing the deliberate creation of an unsafe work environment. All for  for the sake of winning a game of football. I would not let my son be drafted to that club and would take legal action to prevent it. I'd be confident on what we witnessed that I'd win the case in a court of law.

We have seen the tactics they use to target Max. There is no duty of care in anything they do. 

I'd suggest there are many lawyers salivating at the prospect of the AFL being soft on this because if they are, we won't have an AFL at all. At least not a game we will recognise.

It beggars belief...

A similar situation last year was ticked off by the AFL.

The ground has shifted significantly.

I would say the AFL were late to the party last year.

...but Port haven't bothered to show up this time.

A massive miscalculation at best.

14 hours ago, Chook said:

I actually feel for the AFL in all this. The AFL is trying desperately to get ahead of the concussion issue facing contact sport worldwide, and Port has laid a big steaming dump right in their lap.

Having had many dealings with the AFL on this matter,  I call BS on that statement.

I don't know enough on the workings of this to openly criticise club medical staff but I think it's beyond that now. The decision may well need to be taken out of player and club's hands as it is a conflict of interest and it doesn't matter if 9 times out of 10 they are doing the right thing because just 1 time is too many.

As I said I'm not a doctor but I really don't know in what world they thought it wasn't necessary to perform a SCAT5 test on Aliir. How can you go through all the checks and deem him ok to continue when the test itself can't be done in less than 10 minutes? (Please feel free to correct me if facts aren't straight).

The fact Port tried to list Jones as being out with a "migraine", shows how deceitful they are and the fact they are trying to by-pass the rules. It is clear as day and I don't care how they try to spin it, the facts are damning.

I actually think the majority of club Doctors, potentially every one other than the Port Dr, has erred on the side of caution and if they have one shred of doubt they are pulling players out. Not even being a medical professional, there is no way I could look at that footage and say, 'I'm comfortable there is no chance there was a concussion'.

I think the AFL will tighten the rules and in events like that, even if a player passes the relevant tests they will still be subbed out given how often concussion symptoms are delayed.

2 minutes ago, DistrACTION Jackson said:

The fact Port tried to list Jones as being out with a "migraine", shows how deceitful they are and the fact they are trying to by-pass the rules. It is clear as day and I don't care how they try to spin it, the facts are damning.

I actually think the majority of club Doctors, potentially every one other than the Port Dr, has erred on the side of caution and if they have one shred of doubt they are pulling players out. Not even being a medical professional, there is no way I could look at that footage and say, 'I'm comfortable there is no chance there was a concussion'.

I think the AFL will tighten the rules and in events like that, even if a player passes the relevant tests they will still be subbed out given how often concussion symptoms are delayed.

So the first section of the SCAT5 test is looking for red flags and these include neck pain, double vision, tingling, seizure, vomiting etc. I'd have thought common sense would have prevailed and that migrane could stand alongside most of these red flags. 

Without knowing how they operate and not wanting to pass too much judgement, the optics still look terrible. 

28 minutes ago, layzie said:

So the first section of the SCAT5 test is looking for red flags and these include neck pain, double vision, tingling, seizure, vomiting etc. I'd have thought common sense would have prevailed and that migrane could stand alongside most of these red flags. 

Without knowing how they operate and not wanting to pass too much judgement, the optics still look terrible. 

You just need to see how Port have handled similar situations in recently.

There was a Butters or Rosee incident just last year. Granted, the AFL was not as strict then but still Port seems to only care about winning, not the players healthcare.

Of course if you ask any player they won't want to be subbed out, but as others have noted before, this is where someone independent from the club and players should step in.

11 minutes ago, ElDiablo14 said:

You just need to see how Port have handled similar situations in recently.

There was a Butters or Rosee incident just last year. Granted, the AFL was not as strict then but still Port seems to only care about winning, not the players healthcare.

Of course if you ask any player they won't want to be subbed out, but as others have noted before, this is where someone independent from the club and players should step in.

For sure and we've seen in the last decade that clubs apply the 'win at all costs' mentality to varying degrees. 

If the AFL wants to protect itself from future litigation it has to show it is serious about the concussion issue.  Given the possibility of clubs' priorities overriding medical decisions, they must appoint and pay for independent doctors at matches.

All this just at the time when they have started halting matches when someone looks slightly injured without (to my knowledge) even announcing it is a new policy.  Why has it not been announced?  I suspect that they know it won't be enforced consistently and if it is a formal policy, teams will use it to halt momentum.

36 minutes ago, sue said:

If the AFL wants to protect itself from future litigation it has to show it is serious about the concussion issue.  Given the possibility of clubs' priorities overriding medical decisions, they must appoint and pay for independent doctors at matches.

All this just at the time when they have started halting matches when someone looks slightly injured without (to my knowledge) even announcing it is a new policy.  Why has it not been announced?  I suspect that they know it won't be enforced consistently and if it is a formal policy, teams will use it to halt momentum.

It will turn out like soccer with players feigning injury for tactical reasons. On another note I am happy it appears we have consistently and scrupulously adhered to injury protocols to the letter. Even going back to the 2021 GF when we didn’t use our injury substitute when it was so tempting to get Jordon on. 

Edited August 1, 20231 yr by John Crow Batty

Surley this leads to AFL appointed independent doctors. Wouldn't be hard to get a pool of 20 or so respected doctors to be paid handsomely for a 4 hour gig every other week

Edited August 1, 20231 yr by Bates Mate

I have watched this the past few weeks and my first thought was some clubs will use it to stop momentum in close games. AFL need to make it clear that big fines even the loss of games point will occur if any club tries to milk it. 

7 minutes ago, Bates Mate said:

Surley this leads to AFL appointed independent umpires. Wouldn't be hard to get a pool of 20 or so respected doctors to be paid handsomely for a 4 hour gig every other week

So who appoints the umpires now? 🙂

15 minutes ago, ManDee said:

So who appoints the umpires now? 🙂

By umpires I meant doctors of course 🤦‍♂️

Don't forget this one earlier in the season - Rozee and Hunter.  Pretty sure Rozee did not even get pulled off the ground to be checked.  Optics again look bad.  Apologies if this has already been posted. 

 

1 minute ago, Dodos Demons said:

Don't forget this one earlier in the season - Rozee and Hunter.  Pretty sure Rozee did not even get pulled off the ground to be checked.  Optics again look bad.  Apologies if this has already been posted. 

 

Exactly my point on Port. They are serial offenders, a fine is not good enough in my view.

In NRL the NRL can call a player off for tests using footage at the bunker. Not sure if there's a doctor in the bunker but it's an easy system in the sense that the trigger is a simple visual assessment of head contact. Not exactly rocket science

I don’t think that it was about winning the local derby, otherwise they probably would have cleared Jones as well… obviously he was unable to continue and so the ‘migraine’ call.  

I believe it was all about their upcoming match against Geelong next weekend… they did not want to go into that game minus two important players. I would have loved to see the AFL force them to sideline those players for two games, not just the one… and a full investigation to determine whether the club doctor was under any pressure to make that call.

I for one would be very happy to see Port drop into a little hole of misery over this.

We've seen players get suspended for multiple weeks for 'failing to protect' their opponent in a contest due to the contact being head high. I think it is being executed terribly but the principal of protecting the head is very sound.

As for the suddenly very likely prospect of us finishing in 2nd place, I would have previously been disappointed to miss out on the Melbourne-Collingwood qualifying final at the MCG, but now Port Adelaide have a big moral target on them and I want it to be my club which delivers the exclamation point that makes this incident remembered as costing Port any chance to regain momentum in season 2023.

Take 2nd from them. Play them in the 2nd-v-3rd Qualifying final at the MCG. Send a message with an emphatic victory.

15 hours ago, speed demon said:

As a doctor, I think the management of this situation was disgraceful. 

The footage, which the club doctor reviewed at the time of the incident, clearly shows both players:

* Clash heads at high speed

* Lose muscle tone

* Lack normal protective posturing while falling

* Momentarily motionless on the ground

* Appear confused and disoriented 

The clear interpretation is both players have been concussed and severely enough to have briefly lost consciousness. 
 

Both players should have been removed from the field, subjected to SCAT5 testing and - irrespective of the result - taken out of the game. 
 

Doctors prioritising an individual’s welfare ahead of their (or their employer’s) interests is essential for good healthcare and the integrity of the medical profession. 

Some might say it was more than disgraceful. Some might say it was negligent, plain and simple. Some might, I wouldn't 😉

I was annoyed watching On The Couch last night where they discussed a potential $50k fine with half suspended. That already happened, with Hartlett back in 2016. They were fined $20k with half suspended.

Ok you might say that was 7 years ago but it was the same doctor (I presume as he has been at the club 25 years), same coach, same club - so they should be given the full whack on top of the 10k which was suspended back then.

I don't think financial sanctions are sufficient - of course they won't penalise them points but must be something beyond financial sanction. They have traded their 1st rounder to North this year so draft sanctions may not work either. Not sure what else could be on the table.

Edited August 1, 20231 yr by Dr. Gonzo