Menu
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Help Support The Rugby Forum :
Forums
Rugby Union
Premiership Rugby / Premiership Cup
Premiership Rugby 20/21 - Semi-Finals
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Reiser99" data-source="post: 1042411" data-attributes="member: 72977"><p>I don't think he really has a point. His bit about the inconsistency is not his main point. He feels that players like Ewers who have never been carded should be treated differently. That is inconsistent. While some refs are inconsistent (and will always be to some degree), everyone knows the rules now and they should know if they tackle upright like that, they run the risk of making contact to the head. It's also clear that it is being driven for player safety. Saying that it's just because older players are suing is misleading. Yes rugby wants to avoid law suits, but they also do have player welfare in mind. If they were just worried about lawsuits they could get the players to sign a contract saying they are aware of the risks and are happy to take them (I'm sure there are issues with this, but hopefully you get my point). The game has a huge issue and it has been shown that older players are suffering long term effects from repeated head injuries. Saying that players now should be allowed to get away with tackling like that because they are playing now is a joke. That's not putting player safety first. It's been said before you can't listen to players now who want to play on even if they've got a concussion, because they aren't objective and they can't fully appreciate the damage they will do to themselves when they are older. If rugby puts players first now, then it will only lead to more injuries based on Baxter's view.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Reiser99, post: 1042411, member: 72977"] I don't think he really has a point. His bit about the inconsistency is not his main point. He feels that players like Ewers who have never been carded should be treated differently. That is inconsistent. While some refs are inconsistent (and will always be to some degree), everyone knows the rules now and they should know if they tackle upright like that, they run the risk of making contact to the head. It's also clear that it is being driven for player safety. Saying that it's just because older players are suing is misleading. Yes rugby wants to avoid law suits, but they also do have player welfare in mind. If they were just worried about lawsuits they could get the players to sign a contract saying they are aware of the risks and are happy to take them (I'm sure there are issues with this, but hopefully you get my point). The game has a huge issue and it has been shown that older players are suffering long term effects from repeated head injuries. Saying that players now should be allowed to get away with tackling like that because they are playing now is a joke. That's not putting player safety first. It's been said before you can't listen to players now who want to play on even if they've got a concussion, because they aren't objective and they can't fully appreciate the damage they will do to themselves when they are older. If rugby puts players first now, then it will only lead to more injuries based on Baxter's view. [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rugby Union
Premiership Rugby / Premiership Cup
Premiership Rugby 20/21 - Semi-Finals
Top