• Help Support The Rugby Forum :

General Concussion thread

******* hell, that's such sad news
When my interest in rugby went from beyond just watching 6N/RWC to being a full fan he was the new big thing on the scene, the next generation of rugby player

Chewed up, spat out, life ruined.

Devastating.
 
This is horrible. I only hope that because the physical shocks to the brain end after they finish playing that the progress of the dementia may be much slower than in more standard cases when it is causes by repeated mini-strokes etc. I've zero to back that up though.
 
I remember they tried 'armpit-or-lower' tackle height in 2019 and had to end the trial early: whilst it lowered upright tackle concussions it significantly increased concussions in other types of tackle.
 
This generation could be witnessing the death of rugby
I don't think too many of the "game's gone soft" brigade are capable of the joined-up thinking required to realise that giving people brain damage for their entertainment has implications. Namely that with every high-profile case of early onset dementia or MND, insurance costs are going to climb, until they reach the point at which the game is either practically or literally uninsurable. Then you've got the financial damage that will come from any successful law suits from those who successfully demonstrate negligence on the part of unions or clubs.
 

BJSM said:
Results A total of 171 distinct studies with human participants were cited by these three consensus and position papers and included in the female athlete analyses (93 NATA; 13 ICCS; 65 AMSSM). All three statements documented a significant under-representation of female athletes in their cited literature, relying on samples that were overall 80.1% male (NATA: 79.9%, ICCS: 87.8 %, AMSSM: 79.4%). Moreover, 40.4% of these studies include no female participants at all.

Conclusion Female athletes are significantly under-represented in the studies guiding clinical care for sport-related concussion for a broad array of sports and exercise medicine clinicians. We recommend intentional recruitment and funding of gender diverse participants in concussion studies, suggest authorship teams reflect diverse perspectives, and encourage consensus statements note when cited data under-represent non-male athletes.
 
Last edited:
The governing bodies have acted, are acting, and will most likely continue to act.

Ultimately, there's only so much that can be done to make any contact sport safe; and beyond that, it's about consenting adults chosing to accept the risk.

20 years ago, we weren't doing enough, but we also didn't know what to do, because the risks weren't known, and there was no research to suggest what we SHOULD do - just opinions. Best available evidence was essentially non-existent for longer-term health implications.

Now we have reasonably good, early-stage evidence, and the laws, rues and guidelines reflect that, as does the educational outreach at all levels.
We'll know more in another 5 years, and do more accordingly. But to pretend that the sport is burying its head in the sand and ignoring the risk is either clickbait, or argument designed to bias a judgement.

This thread alone is 5 years old, and was more a catch-all for the seemingly dozens of previous threads on specific incidents or findings.
I've been having these discussions on fan forums like this for at least 15 years (I remember vehement arguments over Michale Lipman's repeated concussions and lengthy recovery, and Justin Harrison having to be pushed back towards the Bath team as he didn't know who he was playing for, and players from both teams shielding him from the medical staff - both left the club in 2009, before the cocaine incidents, Harrison was considered a hero for playing on, and Lipman was considered uncommitted for not returning sooner, much to my chagrin).
Bear in mind, the first case report of CTE was published in 2005, and was the first hard implication of chronic, long-term consequences of concussion.
 
Last edited:
The governing bodies have acted, are acting, and will most likely continue to act.

Ultimately, there's only so much that can be done to make any contact sport safe; and beyond that, it's about consenting adults chosing to accept the risk.

20 years ago, we weren't doing enough, but we also didn't know what to do, because the risks weren't known, and there was no research to suggest what we SHOULD do - just opinions. Best available evidence was essentially non-existent for longer-term health implications.

Now we have reasonably good, early-stage evidence, and the laws, rues and guidelines reflect that, as does the educational outreach at all levels.
We'll know more in another 5 years, and do more accordingly. But to pretend that the sport is burying its head in the sand and ignoring the risk is either clickbait, or argument designed to bias a judgement.

This thread alone is 5 years old, and was more a catch-all for the seemingly dozens of previous threads on specific incidents or findings.
I've been having these discussions on fan forums like this for at least 15 years (I remember vehement arguments over Michale Lipman's repeated concussions and lengthy recovery, and Justin Harrison having to be pushed back towards the Bath team as he didn't know who he was playing for, and players from both teams shielding him from the medical staff - both left the club in 2009, before the cocaine incidents, Harrison was considered a hero for playing on, and Lipman was considered uncommitted for not returning sooner, much to my chagrin).
Bear in mind, the first case report of CTE was published in 2005, and was the first hard implication of chronic, long-term consequences of concussion.
Yeh don't disagree with what you have written. I do think Aylwin has written that piece based on emotion of what has happened to his wife and diagnosis of Alzheimer's. He does admit that wasn't caused by rugby but his experience of subsequent the care for her is relevant.

That is what is facing a number of rugby players past and also current players, who go onto be diagnosed and will need care in later life.

There is no magic bullet for this - you look at the 1966 winning team and how many of them went onto develop dementia- arguably caused by heading heavy leather balls.
 
Ultimately, there's only so much that can be done to make any contact sport safe; and beyond that, it's about consenting adults chosing to accept the risk.

This is the incontrovertible bottom line. There is no way around it. The sport is inherently dangerous.

Every now and then, I feel conflicted for watching it, knowing what I know now. However, as long as every reasonable precaution is taken, spearheaded by comprehensive information campaigns to make sure that aspirings players, parents/guardians, and organisations are wholly aware of the risks, I will keep watching.

Try as I might, I just don't get the same buzz from sports like tennis or *gag* football.
 
This is going to get interesting especially based on the NFL settlement. I'm also not sure where it fits under the health and safety at work act. Duty of care by an employer (club) to employee (player). This legislation has been kicking about since 1974. As far as I'm aware cases are still being lost in England and Wales even when the employer isn't aware of the risks.

Surely the NFL has found away to continue. Still it cost them a f@#@ ton of money to settle the case.
 

Latest posts

Top