1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Sam Burgess' injury: why is playing on allowed?

Discussion in 'News' started by Jethro, Oct 9, 2014.

By Jethro on Oct 9, 2014 at 11:50 AM
  1. Jethro

    Jethro This space is for rent Staff Member Premium Member 2016 Tipping Competitor

    7,128
    1,492
    Ratings:
    +1,897 / 7
    DISCORD

    On Sunday night, I noticed one online commentator claim that Sam Burgess should have been replaced because of his fractured cheekbone but declare his performance one of the greatest ever by a British sportsman.

    Can we have it both ways?

    Read More
     

Comments

Discussion in 'News' started by Jethro, Oct 9, 2014.

    1. Jethro

      Jethro This space is for rent Staff Member Premium Member 2016 Tipping Competitor

      7,128
      1,492
      Ratings:
      +1,897 / 7
      DISCORD

      On Sunday night, I noticed one online commentator claim that Sam Burgess should have been replaced because of his fractured cheekbone but declare his performance one of the greatest ever by[​IMG] a British sportsman.

      Can we have it both ways?

      We now have the contradictory development of South Sydney being investigated by the NRL over Burgess' alleged concussion but not over him being permitted to play on with a serious facial fracture which could have resulted in blindness.

      Rugby league's evolution never goes in a straight line. There are always twists, turns and dead ends.

      In 2014, brain injuries are the issue of the moment, largely because of events in American Football regarding a class action by players. In the NRL, shoulder charges have been banned and a concussion assessment rule implemented to address the concerns, despite traditionalists claiming the game is "getting soft".

      Conversely, the terrible neck injury to Alex McKinnon led to some interpretation changes among NRL referees but nothing concrete in terms of stamping out the lifting tackle. There was a fear a previous rule change to stop the cannonball tackle may have led to an increase in the practice and another alteration to the game's laws, without proper investigation, could have another unforseen and negative outcome.

      Penrith coach Ivan Cleary commented during the season that although things are being cleaned up, "these are still tough men who put up with a lot of pain". He believes halfback Peter Wallace playing on with a serious knee injury played a major role in inspiring his teammates to progress so far in the competition.

      If rugby league players stop ignoring painful injuries to continue in matches, what would we be left with? And how might that happen?

      There are two powerful factors in determining what is acceptable and what isn't: community standards and legal action.

      Community standards are at the point that someone staggering with concussion – once deemed funny and depicted in cartoons with birds circling one's head – is no longer acceptable.

      I would argue that community standards currently regard what Sam Burgess did as heroic, not irresponsible. We are not at the point yet where watching someone play on with an injury such as his makes us sick in the stomach.

      At some point in the future, we will probably get to that point. For now, the vast majority of people would have preferred Burgess stay out there and do what he did.

      Little has been said about an attempted head butt on Burgess in the scrum, probably the only event on Sunday night at ANZ Stadium that did not show the game in a good light.

      But changes can be accelerated ahead of community standards by legal action. If a player sues a club for negligence after being allowed to stay on the field with a serious injury, the evolution of the game would be sped up considerably – money talks.

      Once we get to that hurdle we will again face the question of whether we want rugby league to be one sport – for participants and spectators – or whether we will have to divide the two for safety reasons.

      The punching ban by David Smith clearly demonstrated a determination not to make that split yet.
      .
      .
      Steve Mascord

      http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-league/league-news/sam-burgess-injury-why-is-playing-on-allowed-20141009-113ebk.html
       
    2. Kevinward777

      Kevinward777 Well-Known Member

      1,799
      719
      Ratings:
      +1,245 / 32
      Thank's Jethro. Interesting read.
       
    3. dogsofwar

      dogsofwar New Member

      2
      0
      Ratings:
      +0 / 0
      is that the guy from SBTV on the footy show? LOL!
       
    4. Kevinward777

      Kevinward777 Well-Known Member

      1,799
      719
      Ratings:
      +1,245 / 32
      Yes, and it's also the guy that smoked you lot in the big game.
       
    5. Harry

      Harry Active Member

      310
      87
      Ratings:
      +87 / 0
      Its up to the Doctor at the game, at the end of the day he is the main one responsible to make the decision what happens with a player every elses is just hearsay
       
    6. Daddycool08

      Daddycool08 Well-Known Member

      779
      281
      Ratings:
      +371 / 4
      "But changes can be accelerated ahead of community standards by legal action. If a player sues a club for negligence after being allowed to stay on the field with a serious injury, the evolution of the game would be sped up considerably – money talks" and the rest of the saying is "and bullshyte walks."

      As the reporter correctly suggests that legal action would be used if the player was permanently damaged.

      What about if the player was taken from the field and not allowed to play the rest of the game and subsequently found not to be in danger?

      Would a player have a right to demand compensation for not being allowed to play in the biggest game of the year?

      It's a tough game played by tougher men than I but I think we need to have leadership here.

      NRL it's now over to you but I'll not hold my breath for a good answer or even an answer of any type.

      Gee it's hard NOT to be critical of the NRL. :mad:
       
    7. Mark from Brisbane

      Mark from Brisbane Living the dream Premium Member

      16,338
      5,349
      Brisbane
      Ratings:
      +12,746 / 258
      In the old era....play on and become a legend of the game.

      In the modern era.....should have been taken off, regardless of what South's wanted, if an innocent punch is a "blight to the game", the Sam's head on Sunday night was like showing Frankenstein to the kiddies prior to bedtime.

      BUT, of course we know it IS Souths, and the National Rabbitohs League wanted them to win, so "where's the carpet and brush" was the order of the day.
       
    8. globaleagle

      globaleagle Où est mon chapeau Premium Member 2016 Tipping Competitor

      11,784
      4,708
      Ratings:
      +7,795 / 58
      Tis easier to ask for forgiveness, than for permission.
       
    9. Brissie Kid

      Brissie Kid Well-Known Member

      2,691
      743
      Ratings:
      +829 / 10
      Give it a rest media. He wasn't concussed. You can see he played the ball as normal and then ran about pointing to his cheek, looking for a penalty and then a trainer.

      Why don't these sooks try to ban UFC or boxing? Too hard? No media traction for them?

      The players in league know full well what they are getting into. Tell the doctors and muck stirrers to rack off from our game.
       
    10. Jethro

      Jethro This space is for rent Staff Member Premium Member 2016 Tipping Competitor

      7,128
      1,492
      Ratings:
      +1,897 / 7
      .
      Related article:

      Damage is done: NRL response to Sam Burgess' injuries too little, too late

      October 9, 2014 - 6:38PM
      Peter FitzSimons

      In the end, it was that worthy medico, Sam Burgess himself, who was able to draw on his deep diagnostic powers and long medical background to sum up the problem with his cheekbone, after, in the first minutes of the grand final, it had collided at full pace with the crazy brave ramming head of Bulldogs prop James Graham. In response to a question from Brad Fittler at half-time, Doc Burgess gave his diagnosis: "It's fooked, it's gone."

      And, of course, not just his cheekbone. After an impact like that, how could he possibly not have been concussed as well, a fact that he acknowledged in an interview with 2KY yesterday when he said that when it came to the grand final, "I don't remember too much of it."


      Click here to read the full article.
      .
      [hr]
      .
      Related article:

      NRL to issue Souths a 'please explain' over handling of Burgess head knock

      October 8, 2014
      Adrian Proszenko

      The NRL is set to launch an investigation into South Sydney's handling of Sam Burgess' head injuries amid concerns the star forward was allowed to continue to play in the grand final while concussed.

      Burgess was lauded for his courage for playing the entire decider with a fractured cheekbone and eye socket. The rugby-bound forward was not taken from the field for concussion tests but later admitted to radio 2KY "I don't remember too much of it" in a pointer towards a possible concussive symptom.


      Click here to read the full article.
      .
       
      • Like Like x 2
    11. TWO DOGS

      TWO DOGS Well-Known Member Premium Member 2016 Tipping Competitor

      702
      272
      Berry
      Ratings:
      +429 / 1
      Where's the broom and the carpet, Jethro? There will be no recriminations from the NRL.
       
      • Like Like x 1
    12. Jethro

      Jethro This space is for rent Staff Member Premium Member 2016 Tipping Competitor

      7,128
      1,492
      Ratings:
      +1,897 / 7
      Turd Greensnot would have them stashed behind his office door as they're required too often to be put away in the cleaner's storeroom.
       
      • Like Like x 1
    13. HoldenV8

      HoldenV8 Well-Known Member

      6,552
      1,852
      Adelaide
      Ratings:
      +6,741 / 125
      I have to admit that I saw no evidence that he was concussed and should have been taken from the field. He had a fractured cheekbone and eye socket, other than that Bargarse seemed to be fully coherent (or as coherent you can be playing for the Vermin).

      I'm no doctor and my medical expertise is limited to a St Johns first aid course, but I highly doubt that Sam was concussed. He didn't seem groggy and its pretty obvious that he wasn't out there playing on rubber legs.

      This is much ado about nothing IMO.
       
    14. Ralphie

      Ralphie Well-Known Member Premium Member 2016 Tipping Competitor

      3,648
      489
      Bredbo
      Ratings:
      +2,093 / 231
      This is a tough one. I know Matty Ballin would have played on too, but the reality is that with a fractured cheek bone and eye socket you are one hit away from being blinded in that eye. Forget the concussion rule, in the modern era it's about player welfare and the decision should be taken away from the player and the club for that matter. Such injuries should be assessed by an NRL Doctor who won't be swayed by a personal relationship with the players.

      The problem with this incident is he was lauded as a hero, which will only encourage others to play on when they really shouldn't.
       
    15. mozgrame

      mozgrame Well-Known Member

      7,009
      3,013
      Ratings:
      +4,571 / 45
      I guess the decision was ultimately left to Sam himself. Maybe he thought any panel beating is good panel beating on such a rough head. No cosmetic improvements noticeable, but at the stage his looks are in, anything would be worth a go.
       
      • Like Like x 1
    16. Jethro

      Jethro This space is for rent Staff Member Premium Member 2016 Tipping Competitor

      7,128
      1,492
      Ratings:
      +1,897 / 7
      .
      Related article:

      NRL is trying to have its cake and eat it too on player safety

      October 10, 2014 - 10:06PM
      Jon Tuxworth
      Sports reporter at The Canberra Times


      Saturday Serve

      The gladiatorial aspect of rugby league is its crucial quality that separates it from the rest.

      But the NRL can't preach safety all season, then laud a player for risking permanent damage simply because it's September.

      What if Sam Burgess copped another knock flush on his shattered cheekbone during the grand final and suffered irreparable damage.

      Would the media be using words like "courageous", "brave" and "inspirational", or "irresponsible" and "failed in duty of care"?

      The hypocrisy and contradiction within the media regarding whether Burgess should have stayed on or not is mind boggling.

      Much of the debate since the grand final has centred around whether or not Burgess was concussed, but does it really matter?

      You don't need to be a doctor to know another knock flush on his broken cheekbone or eye socket could have dire consequences.


      Click here to read the full article.
      .
       
    17. mozgrame

      mozgrame Well-Known Member

      7,009
      3,013
      Ratings:
      +4,571 / 45
      He's still nowhere near as tough as Toovey.
       

Share This Page