Jonas and Butters subbed back on after head clash - with no concussion protocol undertaken

[CrowToon]

How can this be anything other than negligence on the part of the medical staff?

 

[RICHOLEGEND12]

It was pathetic.

And made my worse by Hamish just brushing off Holmes during the game. And Wayne Carey , Jobe Watson and Hamish all just sweeping it under the rug in the post match and Hinkley in his press conference. The point of a concussion test, is exactly that to to test for concussion.. how can a dr clear them without actually testing for it?

We would all hate to see player miss a vital game etc for concussion. But that was pathetic, and made even worse by the pathetic cheer leading by the channel 7 commentary team..

 

[Bald]

Given the fact it's a Richmond supporter who started the thread and clearly has an unbiased opinion about concussion I am wondering how many weeks they reckon the player who slammed Butters' head into the ground is getting? Where were they a few weeks ago when your supporters were defending Tom Lynch putting an elbow through someone's head for the #790970 time in his career.

Not saying it's not a valid question to ask, but it is like WB supporters asking if the HTB/ high rules need to be altered.

No I don’t think the supporter of the OP matters at all.

The issue here is very clear and as a club with form, questions must be asked.

 

[PrisonBars4life]

No I don’t think the supporter of the OP matters at all.

The issue here is very clear and as a club with form, questions must be asked.

It absolutely matters. In a close game where the opposition was the beneficiary of a significant umpiring advantage wants to divert attention to an issue about player safety when their supporter base clearly doesn't give a s**t about it based on their defense of players like Tom Lynch and Cotchin who have SIGNIFICANT Form in the area. For the record, the port supporters are absolutely filthy with the medical staff and or/ the head coach who might be driving the decisions. The club has rushed players back all year given the injury list and position on the ladder and several players have been reinjured (i.e Mckenzie, Duursma, Aliir, Fantasia) so putting players out on the field when they are injured is a sore point at the moment. I am yet to hear any real evidence other than 'normally, 'should', etc. If the docs looked at them, said 'they are not concussed, test them again when they come off to check for delayed concussion, I don't see the issue. If they haven't bothered to check, the person responsible should be looking for a new job.

 

[PrisonBars4life]

Nice deflection on an important issue.
This thread should be on the main board so it gets the attention it deserves.
Port opened a massive can of worms tonight and deserve to be wacked.

Will find out in 24-48 hours. If it turns out they did everything right, some people might need lawyers.

 

[1990crow]

It absolutely matters. In a close game where the opposition was the beneficiary of a significant umpiring advantage wants to divert attention to an issue about player safety when their supporter base clearly doesn't give a s**t about it based on their defense of players like Tom Lynch and Cotchin who have SIGNIFICANT Form in the area. For the record, the port supporters are absolutely filthy with the medical staff and or/ the head coach who might be driving the decisions. The club has rushed players back all year given the injury list and position on the ladder and several players have been reinjured (i.e Mckenzie, Duursma, Aliir, Fantasia) so putting players out on the field when they are injured is a sore point at the moment. I am yet to hear any real evidence other than 'normally, 'should', etc. If the docs looked at them, said 'they are not concussed, test them again when they come off to check for delayed concussion, I don't see the issue. If they haven't bothered to check, the person responsible should be looking for a new job.

Incredibly poor post. You are blinded by your support for your club.
They massively ****ed up tonight.

 

[Power Raid]

I thought Jonas warranted a concussion test given his reaction to the hit but thought butters was just split open

who makes the call? The Doc and anyone else?



Personally I am of the belief our season has been over since the early rounds. Thus the 4 points tonight should not have been a temptation to cut corners, even if that was a risk.

 

[1990crow]

Will find out in 24-48 hours. If it turns out they did everything right, some people might need lawyers.

Doubt it. Everyone should be showing care for concussion and questioning what happened here.
As the optics are horrible.

 

[Grand Uncle Horace]

No I don’t think the supporter of the OP matters at all.

The issue here is very clear and as a club with form, questions must be asked.

Even had the Club not had form that was a disgrace. The 'patching up' itself was done with ludicrous haste and done poorly.

Of course they should have been tested. Their coach's comments that they are tough blokes and were good to go according to the experienced docs indicates his ignorance. Each of the boxers I knew were all tough as hell. Each had evident brain damage.

The interchange stewards will have the times when they came off and returned. The doc would be advised to make detailed notes of what he did and his observations.

This will not go away.

 

[PrisonBars4life]

It was pathetic.

And made my worse by Hamish just brushing off Holmes during the game. And Wayne Carey , Jobe Watson and Hamish all just sweeping it under the rug in the post match and Hinkley in his press conference. The point of a concussion test, is exactly that to to test for concussion.. how can a dr clear them without actually testing for it?

We would all hate to see player miss a vital game etc for concussion. But that was pathetic, and made even worse by the pathetic cheer leading by the channel 7 commentary team..

WTF are you talking about? Holmes wouldn't shut up about it for several minutes. The call almost certainly came from a producer as Hamish almost apologized after a break completely unrelated to the play at the time as it was clearly pointed out to them that if they didn't STFU and they turned out to be wrong, they would all be getting sued.

 

[PrisonBars4life]

Doubt it. Everyone should be showing care for concussion and questioning what happened here.
As the optics are horrible.

Only if you're correct. I just don't believe the doc hasn't tested them. It would not only threaten their job in the AFL, but tarnish their reputation in the profession as a whole. It's perfectly legitimate to ask the question, but Holmes was stating it as fact, which for her sake, she would want to be right about.

 

[1990crow]

WTF are you talking about? Holmes wouldn't shut up about it for several minutes. The call almost certainly came from a producer as Hamish almost apologized after a break completely unrelated to the play at the time as it was clearly pointed out to them that if they didn't STFU and they turned out to be wrong, they would all be getting sued.

Holmes did exactly as she should have, as a person responsible for commenting on important issues - such as concussion protocols potentially being compromised. There's no way they can be sued for what was obviously a poor look, and given the rules, would appear to have been broken.

 

[1990crow]

Only if you're correct. I just don't believe the doc hasn't tested them. It would not only threaten their job in the AFL, but tarnish their reputation in the profession as a whole. It's perfectly legitimate to ask the question, but Holmes was stating it as fact, which for her sake, she would want to be right about.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.news.com.au/sport/afl/i-thought-wed-moved-past-that-sickening-head-clash-rocks-afl/news-story/ee8dfe3f8f6dbf00b77a0348f5c21d78%3famp

Believe all you like, but no tests were undertaken.

 

[tiger_tough]

Given the fact it's a Richmond supporter who started the thread and clearly has an unbiased opinion about concussion I am wondering how many weeks they reckon the player who slammed Butters' head into the ground is getting? Where were they a few weeks ago when your supporters were defending Tom Lynch putting an elbow through someone's head for the #790970 time in his career.

Not saying it's not a valid question to ask, but it is like WB supporters asking if the HTB/ high rules need to be altered.

Not sure what the relevance of that ramble is.

If port were down by 10 goals or it was round 23, would they have had concussion tests? If the answer is yes then there is a big issue. No doubt the docs will just say there were no symptoms and that will be the end of it. Did the doc have the players best interest at heart? Only he will know.

It's not a good look but if they showed no signs on the bench they can't get in trouble surely. Its poor but thats what it boils down to. But If there was a cover up and that gets out they're in big trouble.

 

[PrisonBars4life]

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.news.com.au/sport/afl/i-thought-wed-moved-past-that-sickening-head-clash-rocks-afl/news-story/ee8dfe3f8f6dbf00b77a0348f5c21d78%3famp

Believe all you like, but no tests were undertaken.

Saw the press conference. Hinkley said he was told they were not concussed. Said that both appeared fine after the game, even after Butters was clearly hit hard again. If you want to call them liars, that's fine. Might not want to do it publicly though.

 

[Grand Uncle Horace]

Expect Butters may need an x-ray to check on his cheekbone. If there is a hairline fracture that will no doubt be put down to the second incident when he was tackled and hit the ground.

 

[PrisonBars4life]

Holmes did exactly as she should have, as a person responsible for commenting on important issues - such as concussion protocols potentially being compromised. There's no way they can be sued for what was obviously a poor look, and given the rules, would appear to have been broken.

As I have said, you can ask the question. You can't state it as fact and continue to harp on about the fact for minutes as though the matter has already been decided.

 

[cleanhands]

Not sure what the relevance of that ramble is.

If port were down by 10 goals or it was round 23, would they have had concussion tests? If the answer is yes then there is a big issue. No doubt the docs will just say there were no symptoms and that will be the end of it. Did the doc have the players best interest at heart? Only he will know.

It's not a good look but if they showed no signs on the bench they can't get in trouble surely. Its poor but thats what it boils down to. But If there was a cover up and that gets out they're in big trouble.

Hopefully both players front up next week

 

[1990crow]

Saw the press conference. Hinkley said he was told they were not concussed. Said that both appeared fine after the game, even after Butters was clearly hit hard again. If you want to call them liars, that's fine. Might not want to do it publicly though.

How would Hinkley know they weren't concussed? No test was undertaken.
For all we know they present symptoms in the coming days.

You seem to have some reading comprehension skills limitations. Hinkley saying they are fine is not the same as actually conducting a test. Stating no test was done is not lying, it is fact.

 

[1990crow]

As I have said, you can ask the question. You can't state it as fact and continue to harp on about the fact for minutes as though the matter has already been decided.

What did she say that wasn't true? She correctly stated no test was undertaken.

 

[Cyclonus]

Saw the press conference. Hinkley said he was told they were not concussed. Said that both appeared fine after the game, even after Butters was clearly hit hard again. If you want to call them liars, that's fine. Might not want to do it publicly though.

Lol what a nerd, talking about lawyers going after forum posters haha

 

[PrisonBars4life]

How would Hinkley know they weren't concussed? No test was undertaken.
For all we know they present symptoms in the coming days.

How would you? If the concussion symptoms are delayed then they wouldn't be taken off. I would assume the protocol would be to have a look at them and talk to them and if there are any concerns, perform the tests. If they were lucid and displaying no signs of concussion whatsoever, then further testing wouldn't be required. That is what Port seem to be claiming here and to eb frank, looking at the incident they clearly have zero to worry about on the Butters front (he is up within 10 seconds and is more interested in the giant hole in his face). I assume the AFL will ask the question about Jonas.

 

[PrisonBars4life]

What did she say that wasn't true? She correctly stated no test was undertaken.

And then crapped on for another several minutes about it. Defamation is about the imputation of the words, not the words themselves. She was absolutely implying the doctor had acted improperly. She would want to be right about it.

 

[1990crow]

How would you? If the concussion symptoms are delayed then they wouldn't be taken off. I would assume the protocol would be to have a look at them and talk to them and if there are any concerns, perform the tests. If they were lucid and displaying no signs of concussion whatsoever, then further testing wouldn't be required. That is what Port seem to be claiming here and to eb frank, looking at the incident they clearly have zero to worry about on the Butters front (he is up within 10 seconds and is more interested in the giant hole in his face). I assume the AFL will ask the question about Jonas.

The incident itself warranted a test to be undertaken. Which requires a 20 minute break. This obviously didn't happen.
Simply asking a player if they are ok isn't acceptable anymore.

 

[1990crow]

And then crapped on for another several minutes about it. Defamation is about the imputation of the words, not the words themselves. She was absolutely implying the doctor had acted improperly. She would want to be right about it.

Stop talking about things you don't understand. There is no potential case against her.