Toast All things Paul Roos + Coaching: McCartney joins coaches

[Gysberts2Bate]

Again it inadvertently gives an advantage to one side over the other.

If you want subs you have them for all injuries or none. Having it only for a specific injury is just dumb

Depends on your perception of how dangerous concussions are I suppose.

 

[Topkent]

Depends on your perception of how dangerous concussions are I suppose.

It's completely irrelevant.

 

[Gysberts2Bate]

It's completely irrelevant.

The way in which concussions are treated differently to other sporting injuries is irrelevant to the discussion of why a concussion sub is a valid idea?

 

[Cannon82]

The sooner they bring in commentary off button, the better. Imagine watching footy at home live and only hearing the crowd, whistles and maybe the bumps. Would be ideal. Not having to listen to absolute morons like Dwayne Russell.

Actually, I did enjoy listening to the tears roll down his cheeks when cats got beaten by gws on Saturday

CHAOS BALL!

Getting the crowd / games noises with no commentary option would be excellent. Often during the cricket I'll mute the broadcast and play music instead, but the crowd noises etc in footy add to the atmosphere a lot more than in cricket.

 

[Cannon82]

The way in which concussions are treated differently to other sporting injuries is irrelevant to the discussion of why a concussion sub is a valid idea?

It seems a pretty stupid idea to have a sub rule for one type of injury.

"Johnny broke his leg in six places - someone go hit him over the head with a wok so we can use our concussion sub."

 

[dee_mac]

The way in which concussions are treated differently to other sporting injuries is irrelevant to the discussion of why a concussion sub is a valid idea?

If the sub is only for concussion and not not all injuries it could be exploited. Say we lose Viney with a broken foot in the first quarter - can't replace him with the concussion sub. Gets to 3Q time and Dom Tyson has only had 3 kicks, Norf sub him off with suspected concussion and get an extra fresh rotation for the last quarter

 

[Topkent]

It seems a pretty stupid idea to have a sub rule for one type of injury.

"Johnny broke his leg in six places - someone go hit him over the head with a wok so we can use our concussion sub."

If the sub is only for concussion and not not all injuries it could be exploited. Say we lose Viney with a broken foot in the first quarter - can't replace him with the concussion sub. Gets to 3Q time and Dom Tyson has only had 3 kicks, Norf sub him off with suspected concussion and get an extra fresh rotation for the last quarter

Yeah I really dont know why this is hard to understand.

 

[Gysberts2Bate]

Yeah I really dont know how hard this is understand.

We aren't all as smart as you ):

 

[Topkent]

We aren't all as smart as you ):

What happened to your 2nd POTY of badge, you being robbed?

 

[Tulip]

G2Bs point is valid. A broken leg is a broken leg, operate and set it and let it heal: but concussion is a huge worry. CTE scans in the NFL are showing how serious the implications of concussion can be on players' lives. Australia doesn't have the budget for that kind of research at this stage, but there's a very real risk of it changing or ending contact sports like AFL. The default argument is "trust the doctors", but the docs are in the dark about concussion too. 10 years ago they sent players back on if they could talk, and now they still seem to send guys back on for the good of the team when the individual is clearly NQR. I wouldn't have a concussion sub, I would have a failed concussion test as a mandatory trip to hospital and a week off afterwards. But that would involve a kind of subscription that the AFL's win-at-all-costs culture may not be able to sustain. Concussion is a live issue, every year the research stacks up and it looks terrible.

 

[Topkent]

G2Bs point is valid. A broken leg is a broken leg, operate and set it and let it heal: but concussion is a huge worry. CTE scans in the NFL are showing how serious the implications of concussion can be on players' lives. Australia doesn't have the budget for that kind of research at this stage, but there's a very real risk of it changing or ending contact sports like AFL. The default argument is "trust the doctors", but the docs are in the dark about concussion too. 10 years ago they sent players back on if they could talk, and now they still seem to send guys back on for the good of the team when the individual is clearly NQR. I wouldn't have a concussion sub, I would have a failed concussion test as a mandatory trip to hospital and a week off afterwards. But that would involve a kind of subscription that the AFL's win-at-all-costs culture may not be able to sustain. Concussion is a live issue, every year the research stacks up and it looks terrible.

Both of you are arguing irrelevant points. No one said Concussion isn't serious you guys are off on a tangent.

All we said is why is that a substitution but a compound fracture at the opening bounce isn't?

Just bring back the sub at a teams discretion then and don't limit it to a certain injury. It's completely unfair.

You guys are completely ignoring the vaild points we have presented

 

[Proper Gander]

This is all ******* Roos’ fault

 

[Cannon82]

G2Bs point is valid. A broken leg is a broken leg, operate and set it and let it heal: but concussion is a huge worry. CTE scans in the NFL are showing how serious the implications of concussion can be on players' lives. Australia doesn't have the budget for that kind of research at this stage, but there's a very real risk of it changing or ending contact sports like AFL. The default argument is "trust the doctors", but the docs are in the dark about concussion too. 10 years ago they sent players back on if they could talk, and now they still seem to send guys back on for the good of the team when the individual is clearly NQR. I wouldn't have a concussion sub, I would have a failed concussion test as a mandatory trip to hospital and a week off afterwards. But that would involve a kind of subscription that the AFL's win-at-all-costs culture may not be able to sustain. Concussion is a live issue, every year the research stacks up and it looks terrible.

If the AFL had a win-at-all-costs culture they wouldn't have a concussion test. Why are people looking to the NFL? The neurological effects from boxing have been studied for donkey's.

 

[Gysberts2Bate]

Both of you are arguing irrelevant points. No one said Concussion isn't serious you guys are off on a tangent.

All we said is why is that a substitution but a compound fracture at the opening bounce isn't?

Just bring back the sub at a teams discretion then and don't limit it to a certain injury. It's completely unfair.

You guys are completely ignoring the vaild points we have presented

I argued your point and you ignored the argument. If a player has a compound fracture and the team uses their sub for that and then someone else gets a concussion five minutes later they've burned their sub so they're probably going to keep playing that bloke even though it could lead to more serious brain damage. If it's the other way around the bloke with the compound fracture can't go back on anyway.

It's not unfair when it affects all teams equally. You win some, you lose some. The AFL has never been completely fair.

 

[Topkent]

I argued your point and you ignored the argument. If a player has a compound fracture and the team uses their sub for that and then someone else gets a concussion five minutes later they've burned their sub so they're probably going to keep playing that bloke even though it could lead to more serious brain damage. If it's the other way around the bloke with the compound fracture can't go back on anyway.

It's not unfair when it affects all teams equally. You win some, you lose some. The AFL has never been completely fair.

Reduce the interchange to 8 per quarter then.

It makes no sense to me that if 2 blokes go up for a mark and one lands on their head and other blows out their ACL then only one can be replaced.

 

[Gysberts2Bate]

Reduce the interchange to 8 per quarter then.

It makes no sense to me that if 2 blokes go up for a mark and one lands on their head and other blows out their ACL then only one can be replaced.

It makes no sense to me that a bloke who hits his head will be sent back onto the field despite the risk when one who blows their ACL won't.

 

[Topkent]

It makes no sense to me that a bloke who hits his head will be sent back onto the field despite the risk when one who blows their ACL won't.

Where's the evidence that a bunch of concussed guys are continuing to play

 

[PerfectFooty]

Where's the evidence that a bunch of concussed guys are continuing to play

Port Adelaide did it last year or the year before? and we're fined for permitting Hamish Hartlett to go back on when he was concussed

 

[Topkent]

Port Adelaide did it last year or the year before? and we're fined for permitting Hamish Hartlett to go back on when he was concussed

Pretty sure that was 3 seasons ago and it's a single example. Plus they were fined as you said. It's hardly a trend that needs a rule

 

[Cannon82]

I argued your point and you ignored the argument. If a player has a compound fracture and the team uses their sub for that and then someone else gets a concussion five minutes later they've burned their sub so they're probably going to keep playing that bloke even though it could lead to more serious brain damage. If it's the other way around the bloke with the compound fracture can't go back on anyway.

It's not unfair when it affects all teams equally. You win some, you lose some. The AFL has never been completely fair.

Guess we need a groin test and a groin injury sub as well after what we did with Joel Smith a month ago.

Let the medical staff do their thing. It's what they're there for. We don't need a rule and a substitute for every single occurrence.

 

[schmuttt]

Guess we need a groin test and a groin injury sub as well after what we did with Joel Smith a month ago.

Let the medical staff do their thing. It's what they're there for. We don't need a rule and a substitute for every single occurrence.

Except for our own staff, who somehow seem to make player injuries worse.

 

[Gysberts2Bate]

Guess we need a groin test and a groin injury sub as well after what we did with Joel Smith a month ago.

Let the medical staff do their thing. It's what they're there for. We don't need a rule and a substitute for every single occurrence.

Groin injuries can't ruin someone's life to the same extent that concussion can, and the medical advice on groin injuries is far more advanced/concrete than that on head injuries. That's the point.

 

[Cannon82]

Except for our own staff, who somehow seem to make player injuries worse.

Maybe they do, but then getting competent medical staff into the club is a separate issue, no?

 

[Cannon82]

Groin injuries can't ruin someone's life to the same extent that concussion can, and the medical advice on groin injuries is far more advanced/concrete than that on head injuries. That's the point.

Broken bones, torn ligaments etc can have long-lasting / permanent debilitating effects. Watching Jack Trengove plod around the last few years is enough to see that. Where you view the state of medical science on head injuries doesn't make a substitute for one type of injury at 3/4 time any less of a stupid rule.

You want to do something about concussions? Padded helmets with lots of crush material mandatory across the board. Same for everyone, won't be exploited by unscrupulous people and doesn't put a poxy rule in place for one incident out of a hundred.

 

[Tulip]

Broken bones, torn ligaments etc can have long-lasting / permanent debilitating effects. Watching Jack Trengove plod around the last few years is enough to see that. Where you view the state of medical science on head injuries doesn't make a substitute for one type of injury at 3/4 time any less of a stupid rule.

You want to do something about concussions? Padded helmets with lots of crush material mandatory across the board. Same for everyone, won't be exploited by unscrupulous people and doesn't put a poxy rule in place for one incident out of a hundred.

If you don't like the proposed concussion sub, and I don't either, then that's fine. But you're being deliberately obtuse saying the long term effects of a bad ACL or foot or groin are anywhere near as severe as the long term effects of multiple concussions. You only need to look at Greg Williams to see this. Jack Trengove's football career has been impacted by his foot issues. Thankfully, he has retained his mental capacity and will be able to re-train for pretty much any other job he wants after footy.