Injury The One danger of AF that does not exist in other codes

[Carringbush2010]

Well in respect it is two:

One - it is a 360 degree game, yes that does exist in soccer

Two - speed of collision, yes speed does also exist in all codes, yet only soccer has the potential of speed collision from all degrees, yet that is limited more so than AF because of rule differentials.

Emphasis on point two, in part due to point number one. The unawareness (not completely so, admitted, however in other codes you know it is and where it is coming from) of where or even if the collision is coming = seriously dangerous prospect.

This thread is purely from my optic point of view, I'm sure many would agree that because of the rules allowed and the speed of the game and the speed of the participants that this is the most highly dangerous part of the game and is likely more dangerous than, in this respect, more than any other code of football.

When you look at games like rugby league, union and gridiron, they're not a 360 degree game. Yes soccer is, but because of the rule differentials it does certainly make AF certainly more dangerous from a collision perspective.

Collision perspective between the other 4 codes aside (RL, Union, Gridiron and AF) is up for debate. Sure you could argue that by and large that the rugby codes and gridiron possess bigger participants............... I'd like (or cringe!) watching them play AF. However they do not participate in a 360 degree game where the collision is not known or where it is coming from......or know it's coming.

We've seen ad nauseum over the course of the games history many a collision that is incidental, at speed, that has resulted in significant injury and long term effects.

This is the first entry after the search of 'australian rules foobtall collisions'



This is the one danger of AF that other football codes do not possess, incidental speed collision, at least not on the same level.

Feel free to add your videos and even stories of your own.

 

[ApplecrossWC]

What’s AF?

 

[74561347]

Agreed Framework (between United States and Democratic People's Republic of Korea)

 

[Bicko]

Problem solved

 

[Power Raid]

Ice Hockey

 

[Carringbush2010]

Ice Hockey

All wearing motocross gear.

 

[Power Raid]

All wearing motocross gear.

My understanding is concussion is caused by the brain hitting the inside of the skull and thus why head protection offers little benefit

 

[Carringbush2010]

My understanding is concussion is caused by the brain hitting the inside of the skull and thus why head protection offers little benefit

Not disagreeing, but I don't agree that ice hockey is a football code.

 

[Dirty Bird]

Someone doesnnt watch american football.

 

[Cdog71]

I think it’s only a matter of time before it’s illegal to bump a player with the ball.
RU outlawed the shoulder charge about 15 years ago and League a couple of years after that and MO is they should, especially in junior footy.
I’m encouraging (forcing) my daughter to wear a helmet she’ll turn 13 at the start of the season and I get it that it doesn’t stop concussions but the reason is that it may cause an oppo player to be aware of the head a little more than otherwise. I don’t know for sure that it will but like you might see Hi Vis outve the corner of your eye it may minimise reckless attack on the player with the ball.
Another point..in junior footy in about 70% of collision injuries it’s a player who initiated contact.
Jumping into a marking contest, tackle, bump etc.
One area of junior community football that falls behind alotve other sports is coaching.
20 kids for one or two adults in 45-50 min doesn’t allow for quality one on one teaching. Too many clubs approach it as a numbers game in submitting teams rather than a place to learn the game and I reckon that’s why so many girls leave at 14-16.
They’ve been turning up to training for a couple of years and they don’t really improve.

 

[BringBackTorps]

The AFL's own expert, Prof. K. Norton, has stated that there are now a record no. of collision injuries in the AFL- ie from bumping, tackling, pushing, & general collisions. It is so common now to have, almost constantly, a very large no. players around the ball (& 32+ in 1/2 the ground).
Also, in the 1980's, there were an average of 40 tackles per game (20 per side)- now the average is 140 tackles per game.
These developments have been disastrous for the game- recognised by A. Demetriou in 2005, when he publicly criticised the massive flooding & low scoring game style of the Swans.

Because of 4 on the bench, & interchange, more players are getting to more contests, much more often.
Players are, on average, much heavier, stronger, fitter- & running faster: thus hitting harder. Force = Mass x Acceleration (Players are travelling at greater speed to contests, because they have had a lot of rests on the bench).

We need to revert to 2 reserves (subs) on the bench only, & no interchange, to reduce injury rates- the exception being players can come off for the Blood Rule, & for Head High Assessments. The midfielders can rest in the pockets, as they did for 100 years.
Players would again need to "pace themselves", so there would be more traditional positional play- the game would open up more from the 3 qtr.

Players could only be drafted in the future if they had exceptional kicking skills, tested thoroughly at the draft camp (left & right feet)- this would eliminate AFL clubs picking endurance athletes who could run all day (who they try to turn into footballers). Clubs would be forced to draft players with superb AF skills.

The AFL has mismanaged the game since c. 2005- many games now are unwatchable, due to the ugly, congested, scrappy, record stoppages' tackleball.

There were also many poor games prior to 2005 (muddy & wind-affected grounds - & no rain or wind at DS; & players kicking & handballing skills were then less proficient)... but we saw the skills of AF more often, with more long kicking, more high marking, more running bounces, & more scoring.

 

[owen87]

The AFL's own expert, Prof. K. Norton, has stated that there are now a record no. of collision injuries in the AFL- ie from bumping, tackling, pushing, & general collisions. It is so common now to have, almost constantly, a very large no. players around the ball.
Also, in the 1980's, there were an average of 40 tackles per game (20 per side)- now the average is 140 tackles per game.
These developments have been disastrous for the game- recognised by A. Demetriou in 2005, when he publicly criticised the massive flooding & low scoring game style of the Swans.

Because of 4 on the bench, & interchange, more players are getting to more contests, much more often.
Players are, on average, much heavier, stronger, fitter- & running faster: thus hitting harder. Force = Mass x Acceleration (Players are travelling at greater speed to contests, because they have had a lot of rests on the bench).

We need to revert to 2 reserves (subs) on the bench only, & no interchange, to reduce injury rates- the exception being players can come off for the Blood Rule, & for head high assessments. The midfielders can rest in the pockets, as they did for 100 years.
Payers would need to "pace themselves", so there would be more traditional positional play- the game would open up in the 3 qtr.

Players could only be drafted if they had exceptional kicking skills, tested thoroughly at the draft camp. (left & right feet)- this would eliminate AFL clubs picking endurance athletes who could run all day (who they try to turn into footballers). Clubs would be forced to draft players with superb AF skills.

The AFL has mismanaged the game since c. 2005- many games now are unwatchable, due to the ugly, congested, scrappy, record stoppages' tackleball.

There were also many poor games prior to 2005 (muddy & wind-affected grounds - & no rain at DS; & players kicking & handballing skills were then less proficient)- but we saw the skills of AF more often, with more long kicking, more high marking, & more scoring.

Most of what you've written simply doesn't work in a professional sport.

Players in the 80s were semi-professional.

It's a complete misnomer to suggest modern players have worse skills. They're just executing those skills significantly faster, under more pressure, whilst under more fatigue.

Tony Lockett wouldn't exist in the modern game, because defenders could completely ignore his existence and run off him all game.

 

[BringBackTorps]

Most of what you've written simply doesn't work in a professional sport.

Incorrect- & I'm discussing the AFL only, what other sports do in their sports, to make them more attractive, is for them to determine.
Many non-American sports oppose interchange (cf simple subs).

It should be noted that in RL & RU, in recent times, there has been much discussion (& Rule changes) by Officials & MSM experts to make their games more exciting & freeflowing ie RU & RL deliberately reintroduced fatigue, to achieve a more freeflowing game, with less stoppages. Many experts etc. want to see the light weight (under 80 kgs) skilful players be brought back, & allowed to thrive/show their flair. The light weights have increasingly been smashed out/eliminated from RU & RL by the ever larger behemoths eg.

. the NRL is considering lowering the interchange to 6 per game per team, where once the nos. were far higher- to reduce the impact (literally & figuratively) of the big forwards/other heavyweights, who would become fatigued.

. RU also wants a much more freeflowing game, with less long breaks in games & lessstoppages. Make scrums resets & line-outs much quicker. Less rests for the behemoths.

. soccer, for decades, has had many soccer fans complain about nil-all draws & other very low scoring games. Many fans have also complained about teams "parking the bus" & endless passing backwards etc.

It's a complete misnomer to suggest modern players have worse skills

Of course, I never said otherwise.

They're just executing those skills significantly faster, under more pressure,[Yes] whilst under more fatigue [?].

Correct- it is the interchange cancer that allows the current players to constantly run up & down & flood the ground, at much higher average speeds, cf the pre-interchange era. When they start to feel tired, they sprint to the bench- then later return, more ballistic, to continue to run far & hard.

Tony Lockett wouldn't exist in the modern game, because defenders could completely ignore his existence and run off him all game[Correct sadly- & to the AFL's detriment & shame]

You obviously don't know your AF history. You have no idea.

It was the gun full forwards, kicking bags regularly, who caused an explosion in AF's popularity (starting with Collingwood's Dick Lee from 1907- who came from the Rose Of Northcote FC, where he was already a goal kicking sensation, as a 15 y.o.).

Throughout history, the gun full forwards have, arguably, given AF its greatest boost in popularity- bordering sometimes on fan hysteria.
The other 2 claims of AF features that gave it the most popularity were the emergence in the:-

. late 1870's of long accurate kicking (with the 1877 compulsory use in the VFA of the rubber bladder, symmetrical Rugby Ball No.2).
. 1880's (with the more predictible Rugby ball trajectory), of overhead marking, & occasionally screamers (many females would scream when a player jumped high, some would occasionally feint, at their death-defying leaps).

Both long kicking & high marking are, shamefully, in decline in the recent era- despite being essential components of the AFL's Charter Of The Game.

GWS' President T. Shepherd ("Ugly congested style impacting on AFL's northern sell") agrees with my views (He was aware of the huge impact- & huge benefits for AF in Sydney- that W. Capper, T. Lockett, B. Hall, & L. Franklin have had on the "rugby stoppages & rugby maul accustomed" Sydney crowds).

GWS chief: 'Ugly' congested style impacting on AFL's northern sell

Greater Western Sydney chairman Tony Shepherd has raised concerns about the on-field look of the game.

www.theage.com.au

The diagnosis of CTE in a modern player, S. Tuck, is a tragedy- & a massive warning for the AFL, all players, & future prosperity. S. Tuck, however, was an amateur & professional boxer, & I don't know if it is known how many times he was punched in the head (including in sparring).

I think it’s only a matter of time before it’s illegal to bump a player with the ball.

I disagree (not only because the bump is an integral part of the game for 162 years)- for reasons outlined in my reply above, re the need to abolish the interchange, & revert to 2 subs. only. This will create much less ugly tackleball, forceful hits etc., & the record no. of collision injuries in recent times.

RU outlawed the shoulder charge about 15 years ago and League a couple of years after that and MO is they should, especially in junior footy.

In junior AF until U11-13, I would prefer that a "bear-hug " tackle be the only tackle permitted ie don't tackle the player to the ground. I have seen to many sling tackles at all levels of jnr & snr GR AF- should be an automatic send-off & suspension, which would soon eradicate it.

I’m encouraging (forcing) my daughter to wear a helmet she’ll turn 13 at the start of the season and I get it that it doesn’t stop concussions but the reason is that it may cause an oppo player to be aware of the head a little more than otherwise. I don’t know for sure that will...

Some jnr Clubs in Melb. make it compulsory for their players to wear a helmet.
According to preliminary studies (Dr P. Larkins), however, players in other teams (who don't wear helmets) have higher rates of injury when playing these teams. It has been hypothesised that the helmet-wearing players go in harder.

"Their (helmeted) opponents seemed harder at the ball...a false sense of security").

To helmet or not? Junior footy is divided on a vexed question

Two weeks ago, one of St Kilda City's three under-nines junior football teams played St Paul's McKinnon. It was just another Melbourne weekend morning; parents in warm clothes on the sidelines, takeaway coffees, dogs on leads.

www.theage.com.au

"When they put on a helmet, athletes gain a false sense of security".

Helmets don't eliminate concussions. It's time for the NFL to ditch them

The league’s brain trauma epidemic needs radical solutions. If recent changes aren’t protecting players then we need to rethink the game’s fundamentals

www.theguardian.com

Another point..in junior footy in about 70% of collision injuries it’s a player who initiated contact.[? I disagree]

I know in RU, most head injuries are caused to the tackler, not the tacklee (RU players often tackle around the waist, leading with their heads!).

I have never heard your claim in AF- can you provide a link?

One area of junior community football that falls behind alotve other sports is coaching.
20 kids for one or two adults in 45-50 min doesn’t allow for quality one on one teaching

I agree- but finding enough volunteer coaches has alwys been a problem.

In Auskick however, where I was once heavily involved, there are many parent coaches, & insrtructions on tackling technique was always given priority.
In jnr AF, I suspect many coaches are nonchalant if their players are tackling roughly their opponents (as long as their own players don't give away free kicks).
It is common for boys to quit the game from c. 15 upwards- for the more light weight boys, the game becomes increasingly too physical.

They’ve been turning up to training for a couple of years and they don’t really improve.

I disagree- anyone, male or female, who trains regularly should improve.
Because AF is such a difficult sport to play (one must use one's hands and feet, fear of contact places pressures on skills), AF requires considerable training & practice to become proficient & accurate under pressure. -probably hundreds of hours

 

[owen87]

Incorrect- & I'm discussing the AFL only, what other sports do in their sports, to make them more attractive, is for them to determine.
Many non-American sports oppose interchange (cf simple subs).

In RL & RU, however, in recent times, there has been much discussion by Officials & MSM experts to make their games more exciting ie reintroduce fatigue into their games, & make their games more freeflowing. Many experts etc. want to see the light weight (under 80 kgs) skilful players can be brought back, & allowed to thrive/show their flair. The light weights have increasingly been smashed out of the game by the ever larger behemoths eg.

. the NRL is considering lowering the interchange to 6 per game per team, where once the nos. were far higher- to reduce the impact (literally & figuratively) of the big forwards, who would become fatigued.

. RU wants a much more freeflowing game, with less long breaks/stoppages. Make scrums resets & line-outs much quicker.

. soccer, for decades, has had many soccer fans complain about nil-all draws & other very low scoring games. Many fans have also complained about teams "parking the bus" & endless passing backwards etc.


Of course, I never said otherwise.


Correct- it is the interchange cancer that allows the current players to constantly run up & down the ground, at much higher average speeds, cf the pre-interchange era. When they start to feel tired, they go to the bench- then later return, to continue to run far & hard.


You obviously don't know your AF history. You have no idea.

It was the gun full forwards, kicking bags regularly (starting with Collingwood's Dick Lee from 1907- who came from the Rose Of Northcote FC, where he was goal kicking sensation also, as a 15 y.o.).

Throughout history, the gun full forwards have, arguably, given AF its greatest boost in popularity- bordering sometimes o fan hysteria.
The other 2 claims of AF changes that gave it the most popularity were the emergence of,:-

. in the late 1870's of long accurate kicking (with the compulsory use in the VFA of the rubber bladder, symmetrical Rugby Ball No.2).
. in the 1880's (with the more predictible Rugby ball trajectory), over head marking, & screamers (many females would scream when a player jumped high, some would occasionally feint at their death-defying leaps).

GWS' President T. Shepherd ("Ugly congested style impacting on AFL's northern sell") agrees with me (He was aware of the huge impact- & huge benefits for AF in Sydney- that W. Capper, T. Lockett, B. Hall, & L. Franklin have had on the "rugby stoppages & rugby maul accustomed" Sydney crowds).

GWS chief: 'Ugly' congested style impacting on AFL's northern sell

Greater Western Sydney chairman Tony Shepherd has raised concerns about the on-field look of the game.

www.theage.com.au

You've missed the point completely.

 

[Cdog71]

Incorrect- & I'm discussing the AFL only, what other sports do in their sports, to make them more attractive, is for them to determine.
Many non-American sports oppose interchange (cf simple subs).

It should be noted that in RL & RU, in recent times, there has been much discussion (& Rule changes) by Officials & MSM experts to make their games more exciting & freeflowing ie reintroduce fatigue into their games, & make their games more freeflowing & less stoppages. Many experts etc. want to see the light weight (under 80 kgs) skilful players be brought back, & allowed to thrive/show their flair. The light weights have increasingly been smashed out/eliminated from RU & RL by the ever larger behemoths eg.

. the NRL is considering lowering the interchange to 6 per game per team, where once the nos. were far higher- to reduce the impact (literally & figuratively) of the big forwards/other heavyweights, who would become fatigued.

. RU wants a much more freeflowing game, with less long breaks/stoppages. Make scrums resets & line-outs much quicker. Less rests or the behemoths.

. soccer, for decades, has had many soccer fans complain about nil-all draws & other very low scoring games. Many fans have also complained about teams "parking the bus" & endless passing backwards etc.


Of course, I never said otherwise.


Correct- it is the interchange cancer that allows the current players to constantly run up & down the ground, at much higher average speeds, cf the pre-interchange era. When they start to feel tired, they sprint to the bench- then later return, more ballistic, to continue to run far & hard.


You obviously don't know your AF history. You have no idea.

It was the gun full forwards, kicking bags regularly, who caused an explosion in AF's popularity (starting with Collingwood's Dick Lee from 1907- who came from the Rose Of Northcote FC, where he was already a goal kicking sensation, as a 15 y.o.).

Throughout history, the gun full forwards have, arguably, given AF its greatest boost in popularity- bordering sometimes on fan hysteria.
The other 2 claims of AF changes that gave it the most popularity were the emergence in the:-

. late 1870's of long accurate kicking (with the 1877 compulsory use in the VFA of the rubber bladder, symmetrical Rugby Ball No.2).
. 1880's (with the more predictible Rugby ball trajectory), of overhead marking, & occasionally screamers (many females would scream when a player jumped high, some would occasionally feint, at their death-defying leaps).

Both long kicking & high marking are, shamefully, in decline in the recent era.

GWS' President T. Shepherd ("Ugly congested style impacting on AFL's northern sell") agrees with me (He was aware of the huge impact- & huge benefits for AF in Sydney- that W. Capper, T. Lockett, B. Hall, & L. Franklin have had on the "rugby stoppages & rugby maul accustomed" Sydney crowds).

GWS chief: 'Ugly' congested style impacting on AFL's northern sell

Greater Western Sydney chairman Tony Shepherd has raised concerns about the on-field look of the game.

www.theage.com.au

The diagnosis of CTE in a modern player, S. Tuck, is a tragedy- & a massive warning for the AFL, all players, & future prosperity. S. Tuck, however, was an amateur & professional boxer, & I don't know if it is known how many times he was punched in the head (including in sparring).





I disagree (not only because the bump is an integral part of the game for 162 years)- for reasons outlined in my rely above, re the need to abolish the interchange, & revert to 2 subs. only. This will create much less ugly tackleball, forceful hits etc., & the record no. of collision injuries in recent times.



In junior AF until U11-13, I would prefer that a "bear-hug " tackle be the only tackle permitted ie don't tackle the player to the ground. I have seen to many sling tackles at all levels of jnr & snr GR AF- should be an automatic send-off & suspension, which would soon eradicate it.



Some jnr Clubs in Melb. make it compulsory for their players to wear a helmet.
According to preliminary studies (Dr P. Larkins), however, payers in other teams (who don't wear helmets) have higher rates of injury when playing these teams. It has been hypothesised that the helmet-wearing players go in harder.

"Their (helmeted) opponents seemed harder at the ball...a false sense of security").

To helmet or not? Junior footy is divided on a vexed question

Two weeks ago, one of St Kilda City's three under-nines junior football teams played St Paul's McKinnon. It was just another Melbourne weekend morning; parents in warm clothes on the sidelines, takeaway coffees, dogs on leads.

www.theage.com.au

"When they put on a helmet, athletes gain a false sense of security".

Helmets don't eliminate concussions. It's time for the NFL to ditch them

The league’s brain trauma epidemic needs radical solutions. If recent changes aren’t protecting players then we need to rethink the game’s fundamentals

www.theguardian.com

I know in RU, most head injuries are caused to the tackler, not the tacklee (RU players tackle around the waist, leading with their heads!).

I have never heard your claim in AF- can you provide a link?



I agree- but finding enough volunteer coaches has alwys been a problem.

In Auskick however, where I was once heavily involved, there are many parent coaches, & insrtructions on tackling technique was always given priority.
In jnr AF, I suspect many coaches are nonchalant if their players are tackling roughly their opponents (as long as their own players don't give away free kicks).
It is common for boys to quit the game from c. 15 upwards- for the more light weight boys, the game becomes increasingly too physical.


I disagree- anyone, male or female, who trains regularly should improve.
Because AF is such a difficult sport to play (one must use one's hands and feet, fear of contact places pressures on skills), AF requires considerable training & practice to become proficient & accurate under pressure. -probably hundreds of hours

Im gonna have to make a sandwich and a cuppa just to read that.
fk me.
I’ll have a look for a link to collision injuries but I do remember it was when focusing on female participation.
But for a for instance take a look at the Sydney Stack Viney bump and see who’s head you think took more of a jolt

 

[Carringbush2010]

Someone doesnnt watch american football.

Someone didn't read the op.

 

[Carringbush2010]

Incorrect- & I'm discussing the AFL only, what other sports do in their sports, to make them more attractive, is for them to determine.
Many non-American sports oppose interchange (cf simple subs).

It should be noted that in RL & RU, in recent times, there has been much discussion (& Rule changes) by Officials & MSM experts to make their games more exciting & freeflowing ie reintroduce fatigue into their games, & make their games more freeflowing & less stoppages. Many experts etc. want to see the light weight (under 80 kgs) skilful players be brought back, & allowed to thrive/show their flair. The light weights have increasingly been smashed out/eliminated from RU & RL by the ever larger behemoths eg.

. the NRL is considering lowering the interchange to 6 per game per team, where once the nos. were far higher- to reduce the impact (literally & figuratively) of the big forwards/other heavyweights, who would become fatigued.

. RU wants a much more freeflowing game, with less long breaks/stoppages. Make scrums resets & line-outs much quicker. Less rests or the behemoths.

. soccer, for decades, has had many soccer fans complain about nil-all draws & other very low scoring games. Many fans have also complained about teams "parking the bus" & endless passing backwards etc.


Of course, I never said otherwise.


Correct- it is the interchange cancer that allows the current players to constantly run up & down the ground, at much higher average speeds, cf the pre-interchange era. When they start to feel tired, they sprint to the bench- then later return, more ballistic, to continue to run far & hard.


You obviously don't know your AF history. You have no idea.

It was the gun full forwards, kicking bags regularly, who caused an explosion in AF's popularity (starting with Collingwood's Dick Lee from 1907- who came from the Rose Of Northcote FC, where he was already a goal kicking sensation, as a 15 y.o.).

Throughout history, the gun full forwards have, arguably, given AF its greatest boost in popularity- bordering sometimes on fan hysteria.
The other 2 claims of AF changes that gave it the most popularity were the emergence in the:-

. late 1870's of long accurate kicking (with the 1877 compulsory use in the VFA of the rubber bladder, symmetrical Rugby Ball No.2).
. 1880's (with the more predictible Rugby ball trajectory), of overhead marking, & occasionally screamers (many females would scream when a player jumped high, some would occasionally feint, at their death-defying leaps).

Both long kicking & high marking are, shamefully, in decline in the recent era.

GWS' President T. Shepherd ("Ugly congested style impacting on AFL's northern sell") agrees with me (He was aware of the huge impact- & huge benefits for AF in Sydney- that W. Capper, T. Lockett, B. Hall, & L. Franklin have had on the "rugby stoppages & rugby maul accustomed" Sydney crowds).

GWS chief: 'Ugly' congested style impacting on AFL's northern sell

Greater Western Sydney chairman Tony Shepherd has raised concerns about the on-field look of the game.

www.theage.com.au

The diagnosis of CTE in a modern player, S. Tuck, is a tragedy- & a massive warning for the AFL, all players, & future prosperity. S. Tuck, however, was an amateur & professional boxer, & I don't know if it is known how many times he was punched in the head (including in sparring).





I disagree (not only because the bump is an integral part of the game for 162 years)- for reasons outlined in my rely above, re the need to abolish the interchange, & revert to 2 subs. only. This will create much less ugly tackleball, forceful hits etc., & the record no. of collision injuries in recent times.



In junior AF until U11-13, I would prefer that a "bear-hug " tackle be the only tackle permitted ie don't tackle the player to the ground. I have seen to many sling tackles at all levels of jnr & snr GR AF- should be an automatic send-off & suspension, which would soon eradicate it.



Some jnr Clubs in Melb. make it compulsory for their players to wear a helmet.
According to preliminary studies (Dr P. Larkins), however, payers in other teams (who don't wear helmets) have higher rates of injury when playing these teams. It has been hypothesised that the helmet-wearing players go in harder.

"Their (helmeted) opponents seemed harder at the ball...a false sense of security").

To helmet or not? Junior footy is divided on a vexed question

Two weeks ago, one of St Kilda City's three under-nines junior football teams played St Paul's McKinnon. It was just another Melbourne weekend morning; parents in warm clothes on the sidelines, takeaway coffees, dogs on leads.

www.theage.com.au

"When they put on a helmet, athletes gain a false sense of security".

Helmets don't eliminate concussions. It's time for the NFL to ditch them

The league’s brain trauma epidemic needs radical solutions. If recent changes aren’t protecting players then we need to rethink the game’s fundamentals

www.theguardian.com

I know in RU, most head injuries are caused to the tackler, not the tacklee (RU players tackle around the waist, leading with their heads!).

I have never heard your claim in AF- can you provide a link?



I agree- but finding enough volunteer coaches has alwys been a problem.

In Auskick however, where I was once heavily involved, there are many parent coaches, & insrtructions on tackling technique was always given priority.
In jnr AF, I suspect many coaches are nonchalant if their players are tackling roughly their opponents (as long as their own players don't give away free kicks).
It is common for boys to quit the game from c. 15 upwards- for the more light weight boys, the game becomes increasingly too physical.


I disagree- anyone, male or female, who trains regularly should improve.
Because AF is such a difficult sport to play (one must use one's hands and feet, fear of contact places pressures on skills), AF requires considerable training & practice to become proficient & accurate under pressure. -probably hundreds of hours

TLDR but I did skim over it.

I think you've missed the point of the thread, I haven't brought up congestion and or interchange numbers for a reason.

What I'm talking about is collision at speed when you're not aware it's coming from different directions as a result of the game being 360 degrees in nature and the speed of the game and its participants.

The only other code that is 360 degrees in style of play is soccer, but the rules of soccer does not allow the same collision impact.

 

[Cdog71]

We’ve disagreed before and it’s usually about you wanting to tow the company line in regards to the AFL and your eagerness to give them Cart Blanche in regards to the game.
The game is different to any other with the 360 degree aspect to it but still if your talking about medically diagnosed concussions in junior contact sports there was a study done in the US in 2016 and it was 44% Bicycles low 30’s for Football and 19% Basketball.
It doesn’t follow that contact sport is the most unsafe sport.
Just in regards to some of your comments...

1880's (with the more predictible Rugby ball trajectory), of overhead marking, & occasionally screamers (many females would scream when a player jumped high, some would occasionally feint, at their death-defying leaps).

Wtf

I disagree- anyone, male or female, who trains regularly should improve.
Because AF is such a difficult sport to play (one must use one's hands and feet, fear of contact places pressures on skills)

Yeah of course they can improve but the game doesn’t lend itself to small numbers.
It’s not like BBall where you can practice moves by yourself or shooting by yourself or 1v1 or soccer where you can practice by yourself or against a guy as goalie.
Doin kick to kick or markers up that scenario doesn’t really occur in a game.

I can’t find where it was that there’s higher incidence of injury to the player initiating contact. It does make sense to me, they don’t have the ball and are reacting to the play and are eager to shut the player down or disposses.
Aussie Rules is a lot faster than R or RU and it’s not tackling or colliding from the same approach as that game.
In Aussie Rules both players can move in heaps of different combinations of directions with elbows and shoulders going in different directions.

 

[Kappa]

I think it’s only a matter of time before it’s illegal to bump a player with the ball.
RU outlawed the shoulder charge about 15 years ago and League a couple of years after that and MO is they should, especially in junior footy.
I’m encouraging (forcing) my daughter to wear a helmet she’ll turn 13 at the start of the season and I get it that it doesn’t stop concussions but the reason is that it may cause an oppo player to be aware of the head a little more than otherwise. I don’t know for sure that it will but like you might see Hi Vis outve the corner of your eye it may minimise reckless attack on the player with the ball.
Another point..in junior footy in about 70% of collision injuries it’s a player who initiated contact.
Jumping into a marking contest, tackle, bump etc.
One area of junior community football that falls behind alotve other sports is coaching.
20 kids for one or two adults in 45-50 min doesn’t allow for quality one on one teaching. Too many clubs approach it as a numbers game in submitting teams rather than a place to learn the game and I reckon that’s why so many girls leave at 14-16.
They’ve been turning up to training for a couple of years and they don’t really improve.

Doesn't all the research suggest that players who wear helmets are more likely to be concussed because they end up using their head as a battering ram because of the protection?

 

[Cdog71]

Doesn't all the research suggest that players who wear helmets are more likely to be concussed because they end up using their head as a battering ram because of the protection?

I dunno
There’s an article a few posts back from the Age about that, the article is from 2012 and the study they base the article on started in 2000 and yeah thats the view. I’m not trying to discredit the article but I know my view on concussions is a lot different now to 15 years ago or I’m alot more aware of it and to me it seems a good idea to get my kid to wear one.

 

[greatwhiteshark]

The 12 day sit out will lead to less concussions now, club doctors will now try their hardest to say you are not concussed. Coaches and clubs won’t like the 12 day rule even if they say they do.

 

[terrybull]

I think soccer may be a bigger risk for brain injury because the constant heading of the ball both in game and training.
When you get it wrong and the ball hits on the middle top of the head. It hurts like hell.

 

[Dirty Bird]

Someone didn't read the op.

Yes I did.
My point was in regards to the OP.
Yes, the players start face to face. But once players start running their routes. The tackler can come from anywhere.

Justs watch this play
You dont know where that hit is coming from and is the time of hit you're reffering to in the OP
2 TURNOVERS and a HUGE HIT on ONE PLAY! in the Alabama vs Florida SEC Championship Game - YouTube

 

[Carringbush2010]

Yes I did.
My point was in regards to the OP.
Yes, the players start face to face. But once players start running their routes. The tackler can come from anywhere.

Justs watch this play
You dont know where that hit is coming from and is the time of hit you're reffering to in the OP
2 TURNOVERS and a HUGE HIT on ONE PLAY! in the Alabama vs Florida SEC Championship Game - YouTube

So what?

A some points:

• That does not make gridiron a 360 degree game, your example is an excepted circumstance that doesn't happen regularly as it would in a 360 degree game. Not knowing where your contact is coming from is not the norm in gridiron. Did not state in the op that it can't and never happens in gridiron.
• AF by design IS a 360 degree game
• (Not mentioned in the op) Gridiron by deliberation has its participants heavily protected for the purposes of heavy contact, where is in AF you have zero body protection (unless you wear a helmet). Yeah I understand that by and large gridiron players are bigger and heavier but let's not pretend that AF players are your average height lightweights either.