Chronic Traumatic Encephalopathy - An Immediate Retirement

11 minutes ago, The Blues Ox said:

What an embarassment for a club Chairman. 

I actually don't think its as embarrassing as the actions of some of the players.

I think it is also a sentiment that will be shared.

You wont get any arguments from me on that one. If anyone was to be banished from the game I know who would be top of my list.

23 minutes ago, Les Tonks Sidestep said:

 

from my understanding the phrase that seems to be key is " did not take proper action to protect rugby league players" which will be based around the specific knowledge at the time, and what was being done with it, which could be interesting. 

If they were doing all that the scientific community at the time though that they should then it will be chucked out, if not then it probably will be upheld to an extent. I would assume the biggest issue is that neither side can agree on exactly what extent and therefore what damages. I would say its 99% certain they were not doing enough, but how much short of "enough" was it and the 2 sides just cannot agree hence it goes to court. 

For a sport that has forever railed against players being blacklisted and banned by another sport for doing nothing illegal or immoral its rather ironic a club chairman should now be proposing the same for our own game.

Wants players that have suffered brain injuries banned from any involvement in the sport but actively encourages players who have used PED's to continue to be involved. Priorities.

Listening to Cam McInnes on the James Graham Pod and he describes going to see some mates playing 'park footy' and not being able to watch. Players heads jerking back all over the place after being hit by people not tackling properly, players not being built or conditioned to take collisions or contacts like that.

He said in the NRL they are built, conditioned and trained to take these hits and trained to tackle properly etc.

I always assumed that the size, strength and speed of those at the top of the game made them far more at risk of things like CTE.  However McInnes seemed to think the opposite.

I wonder is that a pro trying to reassure himself or is there actually something to it?

30 minutes ago, OnStrike said:

Listening to Cam McInnes on the James Graham Pod and he describes going to see some mates playing 'park footy' and not being able to watch. Players heads jerking back all over the place after being hit by people not tackling properly, players not being built or conditioned to take collisions or contacts like that.

He said in the NRL they are built, conditioned and trained to take these hits and trained to tackle properly etc.

I always assumed that the size, strength and speed of those at the top of the game made them far more at risk of things like CTE.  However McInnes seemed to think the opposite.

I wonder is that a pro trying to reassure himself or is there actually something to it?

No amount of conditioning stops your brain rattling around in your skull during impacts

11 minutes ago, Les Tonks Sidestep said:

No amount of conditioning stops your brain rattling around in your skull during impacts

Thought that myself and it did sound a bit like he was trying to convince himself more than anything.

And maybe I'm trying to convince myself that playing at a lower level is perfectly safe!

48 minutes ago, OnStrike said:

Listening to Cam McInnes on the James Graham Pod and he describes going to see some mates playing 'park footy' and not being able to watch. Players heads jerking back all over the place after being hit by people not tackling properly, players not being built or conditioned to take collisions or contacts like that.

He said in the NRL they are built, conditioned and trained to take these hits and trained to tackle properly etc.

I always assumed that the size, strength and speed of those at the top of the game made them far more at risk of things like CTE.  However McInnes seemed to think the opposite.

I wonder is that a pro trying to reassure himself or is there actually something to it?

Agree. The point is you cannot "condition" your jelly like brain from being rattled around against the inside of your hard skull. 

1 hour ago, Les Tonks Sidestep said:

No amount of conditioning stops your brain rattling around in your skull during impacts

2 hours ago, OnStrike said:

Listening to Cam McInnes on the James Graham Pod and he describes going to see some mates playing 'park footy' and not being able to watch. Players heads jerking back all over the place after being hit by people not tackling properly, players not being built or conditioned to take collisions or contacts like that.

He said in the NRL they are built, conditioned and trained to take these hits and trained to tackle properly etc.

I always assumed that the size, strength and speed of those at the top of the game made them far more at risk of things like CTE.  However McInnes seemed to think the opposite.

I wonder is that a pro trying to reassure himself or is there actually something to it?

Neck strength decreases the risk of concussion. 

Also the process once a concussion occurs is virtually non-existent at lots of clubs. Blokes just have a spray of water and get up and carry on. Horrifying.

22 minutes ago, V02 said:

 

Neck strength decreases the risk of concussion. 

Also the process once a concussion occurs is virtually non-existent at lots of clubs. Blokes just have a spray of water and get up and carry on. Horrifying.

Yes, reduces the chances of a symptomatic concussion but that's not really the major problem (although repeatedly being concussed even with return to play policies in place isn't a great plan to ensure long term health) for even professional players: it's the constant bashing of the brain from non concussive symptom causing impacts which (can) cause  cumulative brain damage, which can't be monitored for, and doesn't become apparent until it's too late. 

Interesting developments in the NFL.

https://www.nbcsports.com/nfl/profootballtalk/rumor-mill/news/nfl-says-positions-wearing-guardian-caps-saw-52-decrease-in-concussions
 

“According to Miller, there has been a 52 percent decrease in concussions suffered by players at positions wearing Guardian Caps, compared to the concussion rate of players at the same positions over the last three years of training camps when Guardian Caps weren’t worn.

As a result, this year the NFL has more players wearing Guardian Caps, and they’re wearing them longer into the preseason. There are still no plans, however, to have players wear Guardian Caps during games.

The NFL is also continuing to promote research and development into position-specific helmets, such as helmets with more padding at the back of the helmet for quarterbacks, who get a large proportion of their concussions when the backs of their heads hit the ground. Miller said the early data on that front is promising.”

On 14/08/2023 at 20:48, Les Tonks Sidestep said:

No amount of conditioning stops your brain rattling around in your skull during impacts

No, but training tackle technique and the technique of taking a tackle to minimise head impact are very much conditioned in the professional game and less so in the grass roots and I think this is Cam’s warranted point.

On 20/08/2023 at 07:18, Sports Prophet said:

No, but training tackle technique and the technique of taking a tackle to minimise head impact are very much conditioned in the professional game and less so in the grass roots and I think this is Cam’s warranted point.

In the professional game, there are a lot more impacts (full time training and more games than an average amateur), the collisions are higher speed and greater force with bigger players.

It's not just the obvious concussions, it's the thousands of impacts which cause the soft brain to impact against the hard case of the skull.

Until the RFL/NRL do something meaningful then the cases which are going to court now are literally the tip of the iceberg. They are the first cohort of players from the start of the professional era, there will be hundreds more.

Players like Lachlan Coote, Stevie Ward, these are the ones diagnosed early. It is not a historic problem.

6 hours ago, Wakefield Ram said:

In the professional game, there are a lot more impacts (full time training and more games than an average amateur), the collisions are higher speed and greater force with bigger players.

It's not just the obvious concussions, it's the thousands of impacts which cause the soft brain to impact against the hard case of the skull.

Until the RFL/NRL do something meaningful then the cases which are going to court now are literally the tip of the iceberg. They are the first cohort of players from the start of the professional era, there will be hundreds more.

Players like Lachlan Coote, Stevie Ward, these are the ones diagnosed early. It is not a historic problem.

There is nothing to disagree with in your post.

I also agree with Cameron McInnes.

On 20/08/2023 at 00:14, Copa said:

Interesting developments in the NFL.

https://www.nbcsports.com/nfl/profootballtalk/rumor-mill/news/nfl-says-positions-wearing-guardian-caps-saw-52-decrease-in-concussions
 

“According to Miller, there has been a 52 percent decrease in concussions suffered by players at positions wearing Guardian Caps, compared to the concussion rate of players at the same positions over the last three years of training camps when Guardian Caps weren’t worn.

As a result, this year the NFL has more players wearing Guardian Caps, and they’re wearing them longer into the preseason. There are still no plans, however, to have players wear Guardian Caps during games.

The NFL is also continuing to promote research and development into position-specific helmets, such as helmets with more padding at the back of the helmet for quarterbacks, who get a large proportion of their concussions when the backs of their heads hit the ground. Miller said the early data on that front is promising.”

 

 

The last paragraph I am amazed has not been looked at long before now to be honest.. 

On 20/08/2023 at 07:18, Sports Prophet said:

No, but training tackle technique and the technique of taking a tackle to minimise head impact are very much conditioned in the professional game and less so in the grass roots and I think this is Cam’s warranted point.

Yes, Cam's point is valid in regards to observable/symptomatic injuries due to head impact but they're not really the main issue with regard to the (possible) cause of CTE. It's the numerous times the brain bashes into the skull when a player comes to an abrupt halt, or has their direction of travel change suddenly through collision etc none of which (thanks to the laws of physics) you can stop from happening no matter how conditioned or how perfect the technique.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-67192693

Another study, another set of frightening results 

30 minutes ago, OnStrike said:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-67192693

Another study, another set of frightening results 

Feels like a study in the obvious and a grift.  

What next? Boxers with longer careers at more risk? 

27 minutes ago, Leonard said:

Feels like a study in the obvious and a grift.  

What next? Boxers with longer careers at more risk? 

Grift? I think as more studies like this emerge, it throws the whole future of the sport into doubt

68% wow that is shocking but not totally unexpected. 

9 hours ago, OnStrike said:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-67192693

Another study, another set of frightening results 

I admit I haven't read the study, but I wonder if there was an element of selection bias with the research - i.e. possibly the people who would want to donate their brains for research are perhaps people who have concerns about their brain health? It's no small deal donating a brain for research!

8 minutes ago, RugbyLeagueGeek said:

I admit I haven't read the study, but I wonder if there was an element of selection bias with the research - i.e. possibly the people who would want to donate their brains for research are perhaps people who have concerns about their brain health? It's no small deal donating a brain for research!

That is a very good point and the first time I've seen it raised. Kudos.

It certainly makes an awful lot of sense. Unless you were having major problems it probably wouldn't even occur to you to donate. As you say it is a huge, huge thing and so it is awfully likely that the worst affected would donate.

1 minute ago, Damien said:

That is a very good point and the first time I've seen it raised. Kudos.

It certainly makes an awful lot of sense. Unless you were having major problems it probably wouldn't even occur to you to donate. As you say it is a huge, huge thing and so it is awfully likely that the worst affected would donate.

Thanks. Should've also added that whilst there's undoubtedly a risk, the danger is to read too much in that headline figure of 68%, and incorrectly conclude that it means 68% of all rugby players will suffer with debilitating brain injuries.

3 minutes ago, RugbyLeagueGeek said:

Thanks. Should've also added that whilst there's undoubtedly a risk, the danger is to read too much in that headline figure of 68%, and incorrectly conclude that it means 68% of all rugby players will suffer with debilitating brain injuries.

Which can be seen in the post above yours!