17 minutes ago, The heart beats true said:

Sorry, which one is it?

You’ve taken that out of context to prove your point. Good for you.

42 minutes ago, Roost it far said:

You’ve taken that out of context to prove your point. Good for you.

Ok cool. Great thread. Don’t have an opinion. Gotcha.

4 hours ago, drdrake said:

Does that mean the header from soccer goes, the rebound from basketball, any action in any sport that has the potential to cause a head knock banned or as a participant you accept by playing that sport there is a chance of injury

Mate I’ve played basketball for 30 years at junior level, quite good senior level and old man ‘park footy’ equivalent and not seen a single person hit in the head on a rebound, let alone be concussed. This is a very silly comparison 

10 hours ago, Stiff Arm said:

Knee to back of head in marking contest will def go at some point.

There will be some over riding rule created that covers ALL contact with the head - marking, bumping, tackles, etc.

Incidental or not, any contact with the head will be instant free against

Reckon it will be around about the time a $500 mill settlement is reached for CTE damages to current/past players

Money is what forces the AFL to change

But will it be in time to save Max from his weekly dozen deliberate hits to the back of his head?

9 hours ago, drdrake said:

Does that mean the header from soccer goes, the rebound from basketball, any action in any sport that has the potential to cause a head knock banned or as a participant you accept by playing that sport there is a chance of injury

I am no expert but I believe that at least in some junior leagues headers are not allowed.  It does seem logical that repeated hits to the head from a 450 gram projectile (and gets heavier when wet)

And don't start me on boxing and that vile MMA / cage fighting 😠

 

 

19 minutes ago, Demonland said:

 

If ever the AFL has shown their hand about what their priority is, this is it. 

"The health and safety for players is paramount. 21 days will reduce the risk of too early a return to playing. Unless of course they play AFL. There it is money. We can't afford OUR players to be out that long!"

Disgusting. 

1 hour ago, Palace Dees said:

If ever the AFL has shown their hand about what their priority is, this is it. 

"The health and safety for players is paramount. 21 days will reduce the risk of too early a return to playing. Unless of course they play AFL. There it is money. We can't afford OUR players to be out that long!"

Disgusting. 

Exactly and we can’t have Filth employees missing in September, even when the innocent opponents career is wiped out…😡

9 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

Exactly and we can’t have Filth employees missing in September, even when the innocent opponents career is wiped out…😡

yes,  brayshaw was sacrificed on the altar of filth and greed.

i for one, won't forget.

1 hour ago, daisycutter said:

yes,  brayshaw was sacrificed on the altar of filth and greed.

i for one, won't forget.

I've been concussed many times both on and off the field.

Forget what?

 

On 15/09/2023 at 13:44, sue said:

Unless we make the sport completely no contact there will always be concussions even with perfectly legitimate tackles, random collisions of 2 players going for the ball.   If you don't want 'no contact' then you have to rank actions which can cause concussion vs the degree you are prepared to change the game.   My guess is that speccies would be low on the 'cause concussion' index and high on the 'not changing the game' index.

We need to sort this out: is it "specky", "spekky", "specie" or "speccie"? I think the first. Definitely not third or fourth. But there may be others

 

I really hope that they don't make helmets mandatory at junior level, unless there is clear medical evidence that it will reduce concussion.  I get the feeling the AFL just make it mandatory to try to increase participation rather than decrease concussion.  The concern with helmets for kids, there will be an age group say u14s that helmets are no longer mandatory, kids will need to learn  at that age how to protect their head.  I see kids u9 and 10 level now that wear helmets just go head first into contest, tackles it gives them the false sense of safety.

On 16/09/2023 at 00:05, monoccular said:

But will it be in time to save Max from his weekly dozen deliberate hits to the back of his head?

I am no expert but I believe that at least in some junior leagues headers are not allowed.  It does seem logical that repeated hits to the head from a 450 gram projectile (and gets heavier when wet)

And don't start me on boxing and that vile MMA / cage fighting 😠

Not a fan either but Mma is becoming so liked amongst young teenagers.

 

 

they may as well make it touch football 😠

6 hours ago, Bystander said:

We need to sort this out: is it "specky", "spekky", "specie" or "speccie"? I think the first. Definitely not third or fourth. But there may be others

 

I actually like the 4th.

But I also like Mars bars over Snickers so go figure.

18 hours ago, Palace Dees said:

If ever the AFL has shown their hand about what their priority is, this is it. 

"The health and safety for players is paramount. 21 days will reduce the risk of too early a return to playing. Unless of course they play AFL. There it is money. We can't afford OUR players to be out that long!"

Disgusting. 

Local football teams do not have access to industry level neurological testing. AFL players have access to some of the highest end medical and neurological experts in concussion, the rules are catching up but players like Angus could not speak higher of the medical teams surrounding him. 

a bloke i played footy with was accidentally knocked out cold in the last game of the season a few years back. i caught up with him a few weeks later. "you been to the doctor?" "na"
if it wasnt the last game of the season he'd have been wanting to play the next week, i guarantee it. the club wouldn't have let him but not all clubs are like that.

18 minutes ago, MrFreeze said:

Local football teams do not have access to industry level neurological testing. AFL players have access to some of the highest end medical and neurological experts in concussion, the rules are catching up but players like Angus could not speak higher of the medical teams surrounding 

A lot of truth in what you say, but I remain angry at the arrogance of the AFL.  Gus certainly had great support from the club medico's, but my understanding is that most was from outside the club and very specialised. Remember that the Maynard assault occurred in September.  All indicators were that Gus was right to go. It wasn't until 6 months later the true gravity of his condition was realised. That he had the entire off season to determine his state of health was the only blessing in this saga. The thought of it happening in season and being missed is frightening. 

Of course, that component is not the fault of the AFL. What frustrates me is the 'we know better' attitude.  Remembering the AFL drastically lowered the soft cap and TPP in covid to reduce costs. Players now get a lot more $ than they did pre covid, but the clubs ability to pay support staff (including medical) remains at those lower figures. This wouldn't be the case if they were serious about player welfare. Treat everyone who plays this game with a duty of care and make it 21 days for everyone.  As supporters we can live with a player missing an extra week, even if it isn't really necessary.  I'd much rather that than seeing another Brayshaw situation.