Lynch seeks glove exemption

[Mitchell Madness]

Sure, he can wear it, but he cannot remove it whilst on the field

Same should go for all players, that was the issue to start with, not the issue of glove use itself

 

[greennick]

The AFL have a set of gloves that are allowed, anything outside this would obviously need approval by the AFL, perhaps Lynch would need a doctors confirmation that he requires the glove to play, if it's not nessasary, and more of a comfort thing, then it's bad luck, but if the Doc says he NEEDS it, then fair enough.

I disagree with this. If the gloves were deemed performance enhancing, which is the reason they are banned, why should one person be allowed them for medical reasons? This could lead to an unfair advantage for that person.

This isn't just in regards to the gloves, but any other device used for medical reasons.

 

[greennick]

Sure, he can wear it, but he cannot remove it whilst on the field

Same should go for all players, that was the issue to start with, not the issue of glove use itself

The issues was the extra stickiness and grip provided the gloves. Not taking them off.

 

[Lets Roar like '44]

I disagree with this. If the gloves were deemed performance enhancing, which is the reason they are banned, why should one person be allowed them for medical reasons? This could lead to an unfair advantage for that person.

This isn't just in regards to the gloves, but any other device used for medical reasons.

Is strapping your thumb performance enhancing too, would have to be? Plenty of people strap them so they don't jar their thumb, should this not be allowed any more?

 

[Ice-Wolf]

I'd say that the injury has to be fairly recent as there would be no way he would be taking the glove off for every set shot if it was taped up etc.

When did he stop taking the glove off?

Surely he should get some surgery to at least fix the angle it is at even if he still needs to tape it up.

 

[estibador]

The issues was the extra stickiness and grip provided the gloves. Not taking them off.

I thought he was implying the situation would sort itself out naturally if you just made a rule that the glove had to stay on. Players would soon ditch the extra sticky gloves if they were affecting their ball drop.

That's the issue I always had with the old rule. You shouldn't be allowed to wear something that gives you an advantage over other players if you're not willing to cop the downside it may bring in other areas.

 

[Pie eyed]

Screw that, I'd seriously consider getting that cut off if it was going to be like that for the rest of my life.

It's going to ache like a bitch when he gets older too.

ROFL. Know several blokes with fingers worse than that. Comes from not having dislocations probably aligned at the time of dislocationor repeated dislocations of the same joint..

 

[rustyg70]

Has anyone actually seen Lynches glove up close?
Maybe its been modified so that the ring finger and the little finger go in the same slot?
Maybe he has more padding in his little finger?
Maybe he has a personal sponorship with a certain glove maker, hence not being able to wear a different glove?
Or maybe its just the 'Placibo Effect'?
I know when I ripped the tendon from the bone on one of my hands I used a glove until it healed because it bought your finger into a more upright position.
Any how, I'd put my money on the placibo effect though.

 

[Tas]

Yeah, placebo...

 

[estibador]

^I've got a gridiron ball and I just tried that then. Couldn't even hold it for longer than 2 seconds using all my fingers, let alone just two.

Mine is quite old though and those little bumps have worn down a bit.

 

[greennick]

Is strapping your thumb performance enhancing too, would have to be? Plenty of people strap them so they don't jar their thumb, should this not be allowed any more?

Does strapping your thumb improve grip? No. Therefore it is not performance enhancing.

If all it does is help prevent injury, that is not performance enhancing. However, in the case of this glove, an independent study ruled it was performance enhancing as it statistically significantly increased grip.

 

[Ochre]

Yeah, placebo...

Lynch looks a lot different these days.

Or you know, that just might not be the glove he uses.

 

[Old Spice]

If you're injured, you're injured. Either play through that injury and remain impeded, or take time off/get surgery to rectify your issues. If Lynch is to be allowed to keep using a banned glove, we may as well allow players with ruined AC joints/broken bones to play and tell the opposition they aren't allowed to tackle them.

Head of strapping?

 

[Old Spice]

Do casts provide any sort of advantage to the player wearing one? I'd say not. I would only imagine that they may be useful when spoiling, however if a player is able to spoil with their broken hand/wrist/arm then they should not be allowed the cast as they are readily putting themselves in a situation where injury could be aggravated, despite being granted an exception on the premises that they are attempting everything to prevent further injury.

Why on earth don't they just keep all gloves legal? If it's an advantage to one player, then every other player in the league is entitled to use one if they want to.

I find it an entirely arbitrary decision. Is the philosophy here that players have to suffer medical conditions without some assistance? If that's the case, no knee jabs, no LARS surgery, no strapping, no gel soles, no glue.

Your view that players shouldn't continue playing unless 100% fit would see the Big M Little League playing the game. Lynch has in my view a bone fide reason for wearing the glove, unless we expect every player to go down the Daniel Chick route.

 

[jiphoc]

I would tell Lynch to go "get bent" however that seams redundant...... sorry had to say it

 

[Tas]

Lynch looks a lot different these days.

Or you know, that just might not be the glove he uses.

He uses Ironclad Box Handlers http://www.ironcladgloves.com.au/Ironclad_Gloves/BHG.html

"It features exceptional grip and abrasion resistance in wet and dry conditions."

Banned by the AFL due to the grip. Ironclad make a whole range of gloves which are not banned by the AFL, he can go crazy with one of those.

 

[TheFridge]

From the Herald Sun (http://www.news.com.au/sport/afl/co...e-new-glove-rule/story-fnelctok-1226581391894): "He said playing without a glove would endanger the finger, and gloves acceptable to the AFL were actually more slippery than bare hands and therefore a disadvantage"

So basically, he thinks the approved gloves suck and wearing them is worse than going gloveless, but he feels he needs the glove to help in the taping and protection of the finger and hence the application for a medical exemption. Frankly, I suggest he shouldn't be allowed any unfair advantage based on an injury and the AFL have deemed the banned gloves as providing that. So, too bad, really.

Similar precedent with some arm guards for guys returning from broken arms etc. Examples such as helmets, taping etc not really relevant as the AFL haven't ruled them as providing a specific unfair advantage. Certainly, potential for discussion regarding helmets, but the jury is out on their benefits and hence not being banned (other than certain brands due to advertising logos).

 

[estibador]

From the Herald Sun (http://www.news.com.au/sport/afl/co...e-new-glove-rule/story-fnelctok-1226581391894): "He said playing without a glove would endanger the finger, and gloves acceptable to the AFL were actually more slippery than bare hands and therefore a disadvantage"

Tough shit. If he needs the glove for protection he can live with the disadvantages.

The AFL shouldn't allow performance enhancing safety equipment just because the player doesn't like the regular safety equipment. Is he wearing it to protect his finger or to try gain performance?

 

[pazza]

Has a genuine case for one.

 

[liam_13]

seems a reasonable enough request.

the AFL will have a 4 year investigation and wont be able to make a decision though

They will then fine you $100k for making them investigate.

If you're injured, you're injured. Either play through that injury and remain impeded, or take time off/get surgery to rectify your issues. If Lynch is to be allowed to keep using a banned glove, we may as well allow players with ruined AC joints/broken bones to play and tell the opposition they aren't allowed to tackle them.

Doesn't really work like that. Lynch is fair game to tackle and stuff, he just doesn't want to lose his finger

 

[liam_13]

If the gloves allowed by the AFL are able to adaquately protect his finger - then he should have to wear one of those. It shouldn't matter if it's slippery or what not, because if it wasn't more slippery than a hand then everyone else would be disadvantaged.

Let the man play with a glove for his finger, but not with something recently deemed outside of the rules because he personally doesn't like the secondary aspects to it (primary aspect being - does it protect his finger)

 

[Old Spice]

From the Herald Sun (http://www.news.com.au/sport/afl/co...e-new-glove-rule/story-fnelctok-1226581391894): "He said playing without a glove would endanger the finger, and gloves acceptable to the AFL were actually more slippery than bare hands and therefore a disadvantage"

So basically, he thinks the approved gloves suck and wearing them is worse than going gloveless, but he feels he needs the glove to help in the taping and protection of the finger and hence the application for a medical exemption. Frankly, I suggest he shouldn't be allowed any unfair advantage based on an injury and the AFL have deemed the banned gloves as providing that. So, too bad, really.

Similar precedent with some arm guards for guys returning from broken arms etc. Examples such as helmets, taping etc not really relevant as the AFL haven't ruled them as providing a specific unfair advantage. Certainly, potential for discussion regarding helmets, but the jury is out on their benefits and hence not being banned (other than certain brands due to advertising logos).

Arm guards. Can you think of a reason they may have been ruled out? It couldn't be anything to do with what they are made of could it?

Are you across the concept of a tautology? Stating objects like taping being legal because they are not illegal is not really an argument. What we need to get to is a clear rationalisation of why, for eg, a helmet and arm guard made of hard plastic is illegal (but not a nerf helmet or elbow strap) and why a glove of leather is illegal.

If the AFL are concerned about OH&S, then I can't see how a glove that assists a player to play the game must be deemed illegal. It's certainly no threat to other players and might save a players finger.

I'd take this to Galbally if the AFL become recalcitrant here.

 

[Tulip]

I broke an end toe at that angle. Had the choice to let it mend as it is, or 5 injections and a severe bending technique. Chose the latter, was a wise choice.

 

[partylikeits1990]

Yes he does. The reason a glove is banned is becouse it provides extra grip. If it does not provide extra grip it is nto banned. So the statement "simply because the only difference between being "banned" and "not banned" is the level of grip that the glove provides" is in fact correct.

Now there may well be other differences in individual gloves designs that provide a difference in Lynch's case. It may well be the case that only one brand of glove provides the required level of protection. If this glove is banned due to it also providing extra grip, then tough.

Straight out of yo ass!

 

[partylikeits1990]

If it's ok for a NFL receiver to wear a sticky glove to help him catch the ball why is it not ok for a Key Forward to wear one in the AFL?