Roast Port Adelaide's failure to do a HIA assessment on Aliir - [AFL confirms both players FAILED concussion tests on Monday]

[Mattrox]

Lack of vision from the bench? That.is.hilarious.

Did a flock of seagulls perhaps block their view of the big replay screen in the stadium? Or was their view of two players not moving on the ground 30 metres away obstructed by a poorly-timed yawn from the waterboy?

Any difficulty in assessing what happened should've resulted in spending a longer time making the assessment. Or at worst might've resulted in them calling Allir back to do a proper test once they had seen the vision.

Your club doesn't have an excuse, and they have history, and that's why you'll get a huge fine.

You make a good point.

The protocol also demands the use of vision. The replay was on the big screen, and every person at the gound saw a minimum of 2 points from "clear diagnosis of concussion without return to play" section. Even a cursory view of a replay gives the required evidence.

There is no excuse. Several points of the protocol were violated.

On SM-G781B using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[PenfoldsFan]

Don't be upset guys, at least you'll be able to point to us for years to come and say 'remember that time you did...' like all the other trolling.

 

[PenfoldsFan]

If it’s a time or resource issue for Port they should have kept him benched until they could properly review the footage and conduct the appropriate tests. That’s just plain old negligence of duty of care.

Can’t palm this off to the AFL arc for such a monumental mistake.

We dont have to palm it off, the AFL has accepted the entire process needs refining and are not dwelling on the past like Bigfooty nufties..

 

[Coasters7]

So Barrett says less than 100k fine, says mitigating circumstance is lack of vision from the bench and having to deal with 2 players, which is exactly what I've been saying for 2 days.
He also says the ARC reviewers to be given additional powers to overrule Drs as I also suggested should have happened If they we're indeed there.

Save the apologies, I dont rate you anyway.

Lack of vision from the bench? So those monitors are just for show then? Millions of viewers, the blokes on commentary, the coaches in the box, all saw it happen live and then saw the subsequent replays and I’d say 100% of the neutral people that saw it thought they were instantly done for the night.

So the fact the medical professional on the bench saw that same vision and decided there was nothing to see here is mind boggling. It was either incompetent or deliberate. Both involve the doctor being sacked and depending on who else was involved I’d say there should be more jobs on the line.

If the AFL are serious they need to come down hard on this otherwise it’ll be exploited again. If Petracca gets a knock in a tight prelim final and the punishment for sending him back out is 80k? I’d be paying that for sure.

Not to mention the message it sends after going hard at fairly benign tackles all year and then the moment a serious breach actually happens they fold like a pack of cards.

 

[Rich01]

Lack of vision from the bench? So those monitors are just for show then? Millions of viewers, the blokes on commentary, the coaches in the box, all saw it happen live and then saw the subsequent replays and I’d say 100% of people that saw it thought they were done for the night.

So the fact the medical professional on the bench saw that same vision and decided there was nothing to see here is mind boggling.

If the AFL are serious they need to come down hard on this otherwise it’ll be exploited again. If Petracca gets a knock in a tight prelim final and the punishment for sending him back out is 80k? I’d be paying that for sure.

Not to mention the message it sends after going hard at fairly benign tackles all year and then the moment a serious breach actually happens they fold like a pack of cards.

Sounds like excuses for incompetence.
Cornes reckons the doc is a good bloke so we all just need to move on ffs.

 

[Coasters7]

The problem with the hysteria over the past 4 days is the ability to slow down, isolate and judge each aspect, it works for nufties kickin back in the stands or at home but in the heat of battle it doesnt work like that.
Aliir falls to the ground with his back to the bench, they dont see his initial response in real time and with 2 players down, Jones obviously KO'd and visible, go out with their main focus on him.
By the time they assess Aliir on the ground he's come to and is grimacing in pain from what looks like a shoulder/collarbone hit.
Both are taken to the bench where both DR's attend Jones whilst Aliir watches the game.
By the time they get around to Aliir he's able to pass the HIA and returns to the field.
Should they have looked more closely at the hit to Aliir, yes.
Did the Doc get it wrong, yes.
Has the club put its hand up for that oversight, yes, and will cop a fine, I'll go 80k with 40k suspended.

Now, from the moment Aliir goes back on it becomes a wider problem because the AFL's ARC reviewers SHOULD have had him removed, if not immediately, then at the half.
They didnt for 1 of 2 reasons, negligence or no one present reviewing.
Rather than admit to either they've now wrapped it up by saying they'll give them more power next time which is the rug and broom treatment for their own part.

Now you can all rage to no avail.

This has got to be a troll. No way you’re blaming the ARC reviewers for not intervening. The bench has access to whatever replays they like and they both collided with each other so it’s the same f*cking incident. Even if they were looking at Jones first they would have had to watch the vision to see what happened to him, at which point they’d have also seen Aliir crumpled on the floor right next to him (that’s assuming they didn’t see them both lying on the floor live given it was 20 metres away)

 

[Purple Suit]

This has got to be a troll. No way you’re blaming the ARC reviewers for not intervening. The bench has access to whatever replays they like and they both collided with each other so it’s the same f*cking incident. Even if they were looking at Jones first they would have had to watch the vision to see what happened to him, at which point they’d have also seen Aliir crumpled on the floor right next to him (that’s assuming they didn’t see them both lying on the floor live given it was 20 metres away)

He is a Troll, trying to blame someone else for Port cheating with the health of their player.

Fyfe was knocked out in 2021 and got shown the vision on the bench a few minutes later. They have vision coming out of their arse these days and it’s all at the bench with Ken sitting on it.

2 players getting KO’d is 100% why they sent Aliir back out but it has nothing to do with vision or the medical staff being overwhelmed. It’s to do with winning.

 

[naysayer]

The problem with the hysteria over the past 4 days is the ability to slow down, isolate and judge each aspect, it works for nufties kickin back in the stands or at home but in the heat of battle it doesnt work like that.
Aliir falls to the ground with his back to the bench, they dont see his initial response in real time and with 2 players down, Jones obviously KO'd and visible, go out with their main focus on him.
By the time they assess Aliir on the ground he's come to and is grimacing in pain from what looks like a shoulder/collarbone hit.
Both are taken to the bench where both DR's attend Jones whilst Aliir watches the game.
By the time they get around to Aliir he's able to pass the HIA and returns to the field.
Should they have looked more closely at the hit to Aliir, yes.
Did the Doc get it wrong, yes.
Has the club put its hand up for that oversight, yes, and will cop a fine, I'll go 80k with 40k suspended.

Now, from the moment Aliir goes back on it becomes a wider problem because the AFL's ARC reviewers SHOULD have had him removed, if not immediately, then at the half.
They didnt for 1 of 2 reasons, negligence or no one present reviewing.
Rather than admit to either they've now wrapped it up by saying they'll give them more power next time which is the rug and broom treatment for their own part.

Now you can all rage to no avail.

Or you could look at the more compelling scenario that Port simply didn't want to lose two defenders for the whole match and the following week, and so they fudged everything to avoid it. Their doctor's history with mishandling concussed players, and the extreme unlikelihood that their entire coaching staff didn't see the replay of Allir collapsing makes this a pretty easy judgement for anyone without a bias towards Port.

This is one of those times where you just have to admit that you club is full of crap, and you'll get rightly belted with a huge fine. Trying to say the AFL should've overruled your doctor's decision is quite reminiscent of a drunk driver blaming everyone at the pub who didn't stop him.

 

[Sentinel]

The problem with the hysteria over the past 4 days is the ability to slow down, isolate and judge each aspect, it works for nufties kickin back in the stands or at home but in the heat of battle it doesnt work like that.
Aliir falls to the ground with his back to the bench, they dont see his initial response in real time and with 2 players down, Jones obviously KO'd and visible, go out with their main focus on him.
By the time they assess Aliir on the ground he's come to and is grimacing in pain from what looks like a shoulder/collarbone hit.
Both are taken to the bench where both DR's attend Jones whilst Aliir watches the game.
By the time they get around to Aliir he's able to pass the HIA and returns to the field.
Should they have looked more closely at the hit to Aliir, yes.
Did the Doc get it wrong, yes.
Has the club put its hand up for that oversight, yes, and will cop a fine, I'll go 80k with 40k suspended.

Now, from the moment Aliir goes back on it becomes a wider problem because the AFL's ARC reviewers SHOULD have had him removed, if not immediately, then at the half.
They didnt for 1 of 2 reasons, negligence or no one present reviewing.
Rather than admit to either they've now wrapped it up by saying they'll give them more power next time which is the rug and broom treatment for their own part.

Now you can all rage to no avail.

"By the time they get around to Aliir he's able to pass the HIA and returns to the field."

Aliir at no time was able to pass the HIA. The HIA includes mandatory video review including assessment of points such as, but not only:

• loss of consciousness
• no protective action in fall to ground
• lying motionless (>2 seconds)

Failing the assessment points within the HIA results in either immediate removal from play without returning, or immediate removal for further assessment (SCAT15/concussion test) depending on the specific point.

The doctor simply could not have completed the HIA in the correct manner, or at all, based on the clear video evidence which showed him failing a number of assessment points within it.

It's damning on the doctor and potentially the entire organisation that Aliir was allowed back out onto the field. Your excuses are complete bullshit.

 

[Pure_Ownage]

They shouldn't be. The doctor is blind, stupid, negligent or evil.

Thats not the world we live in.

 

[Mattrox]

"By the time they get around to Aliir he's able to pass the HIA and returns to the field."

Aliir at no time was able to pass the HIA. The HIA includes mandatory video review including assessment of points such as, but not only:

• loss of consciousness
• no protective action in fall to ground
• lying motionless (>2 seconds)

Failing the assessment points within the HIA results in either immediate removal from play without returning, or immediate removal for further assessment (SCAT15/concussion test).

The doctor simply could not have completed the HIA in the correct manner, or at all, based on the clear video evidence which showed him failing a number of assessment points within it.

It's damning on the doctor and potentially the entire organisation that Aliir was allowed back out onto the field. Your excuses are complete bullshit.

I do not know why every Port Adelaide fan has not downloaded the Concussion Protocol and read it. It would take 15 minutes max and is clear enough that a year 9 English comprehension level is all that is required to understand it.

It would mean that the "Are you questioning a Dr" spin can be completely disregarded. And it would show all the areas Port displayed negligence and/or incompetence. After the 3 points you have described, it would not matter if Aliir passed a scat5, he still would have "a clear diagnosis of concussion without return to play"

There are simply no excuses. Protocol wasn't followed out of either incompetence, negligence, or on purpose.

On SM-G781B using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Checksider]

Lack of vision from the bench? That.is.hilarious.

Did a flock of seagulls perhaps block their view of the big replay screen in the stadium? Or was their view of two players not moving on the ground 30 metres away obstructed by a poorly-timed yawn from the waterboy?

Any difficulty in assessing what happened should've resulted in spending a longer time making the assessment. Or at worst might've resulted in them calling Allir back to do a proper test once they had seen the vision.

Your club doesn't have an excuse, and they have history, and that's why you'll get a huge fine.

It was Aurora Borealis appearing at the exact time the replay was played, and it occurred at the exact location between his face and the big screen (and the little screen they have on the bench).

 

[Purple Suit]

I’ve got an idea, if a knocked out player that is motionless for more than 2 seconds is put back on the ground, they become an unrestricted free agent and their contract can be torn up at the end of the year if they choose. No compo.

The ARC can confirm they have met this requirement or not if the incident is close but it’s on the club to check rather than the ARC to inform the team.

 

[PenfoldsFan]

Youre all still looking backwards people, Barrett clearly said there were mitigating circumstances according to the AFL who have obviously agreed.
The AFL doesnt want you to look backwards people so they are fining us and suggesting the ARK intervene in future.
Its about getting better through experience people and will form a large part of their defence in any future lawsuits im sure...we cant change the past but are striving together to do better.

Just unfortunate that it doesnt appease the pitchfork brigade I guess.

 

[Biggy_Boy]

So youre saying the AFL have no need to enforce a duty of care via their reviewers, having seen the same damning footage as everyone else, if the Doc has already given the all clear?

Thats turning a blind eye and about as negligent as what the Doc did, if not worse.

No, you're misunderstanding the process as outlined in the document.

The document gives no provision for such reviewers overturning or further reporting on incidents that have already clearly been assessed by the doctor. The role, as outlined in the document, is not for them to be quality control officers or validators. What they do is watch for incidents that occur during the course of play that could result in head trauma that club officials may not be immediately aware of. These would be things that may look more innocuous than big heavy clashes.

This was not that. It was a clear collision, and they were taken off the field for concussion assessment. At that point, it's the club doctor's responsibility, and he's the one who is there to assess them. Why would he need to be alerted to players who have already been taken off for concussion testing? Again, their job is not to analyze what result the doctor gives.

Maybe there should be independent reviewers who do that, but if so you might as well remove club doctors from the process. Just have AFL-sanctioned doctors there independent of the clubs. They can pull up and assess any head knock. That's not the rules as they are now, however.

 

[naysayer]

Just unfortunate that it doesnt appease the pitchfork brigade I guess.

We are not the pitchfork brigade. There is a very real pitchfork threatening to bankrupt the league over their inadequate dealings with concussion. Your club has just emboldened their claims and provided a touchstone for more people to speak out.

You've committed the cardinal sin of making the AFL look bad. Expect more than a slap on the wrist.

 

[PenfoldsFan]

We are not the pitchfork brigade. There is a very real pitchfork threatening to bankrupt the league over their inadequate dealings with concussion. Your club has just emboldened their claims and provided a touchstone for more people to speak out.

You've committed the cardinal sin of making the AFL look bad. Expect more than a slap on the wrist.

No, the AFL's flawed process in not having put in place the power to intervene has made the AFL look bad and are currently attempting to distance itself from it.
Were learning, we all make mistakes..

Keep an eye on the FF/FA ledger though..

If the AFL wanted to reduce its risk exposure the tackle would go altogether and there'd be no knees in the back of a defenders scone in the name of spekkies, but the same outraged fans arent ready for that...yet, go figure.

 

[naysayer]

No, the AFL's flawed process in not having put in place the power to intervene has made the AFL look bad and are currently attempting to distance itself from it.
Were learning, we all make mistakes..

Keep an eye on the FF/FA ledger though..

Your club is responsible for its own actions and nobody had prerogative to override your club doctor, nor should it be needed. It's not too much to ask that clubs look after their players.

 

[PenfoldsFan]

Your club is responsible for its own actions and nobody had prerogative to override your club doctor, nor should it be needed. It's not too much to ask that clubs look after their players.

NEWS FLASH...The AFL doesnt care what you or I think, it cares only to move on.

Dont confuse the incident with the outcome.

 

[Purple7x08_24]

Your club is responsible for its own actions and nobody had prerogative to override your club doctor, nor should it be needed. It's not too much to ask that clubs look after their players.

Yes but from a legal standpoint. The AFL has a duty of care. Legally it could be argued they saw the potential for serious injury short and or long term and didnt have the mrchanisms in place to handle it. they have a responsibility

 

[PenfoldsFan]

Yes but from a legal standpoint. The AFL has a duty of care. Legally it could be argued they saw the potential for serious injury short and or long term and didnt have the mrchanisms in place to handle it. they have a responsibility

Now were cookin'

This one gets it.

Belt us and it goes to court where they lose control of the narrative.

 

[PenfoldsFan]

I suggest some of you read the recent article by Professor Peter Brukner, its a tough gig being an club Doctor.
Imagine an AFL if they downed tools in support...

 

[naysayer]

Yes but from a legal standpoint. The AFL has a duty of care. Legally it could be argued they saw the potential for serious injury short and or long term and didnt have the mrchanisms in place to handle it. they have a responsibility

The AFL has rules in place that weren't followed. What mechanisms were missing? Should there be a doctor in the ARC who has the ability to override the club doctor? The AFL has a duty of care to make sure there are adequate rules in place and that they are adhered to.

This one gets it.

Belt us and it goes to court where they lose control of the narrative.

Your president went on TV to say they got it wrong and to plea for mercy. You're not taking anyone to court.

 

[Aristotle Pickett]

I suggest some of you read the recent article by Professor Peter Brukner, its a tough gig being an club Doctor.
Imagine an AFL if they downed tools in support...

Sack the doctor, he's incompetent and putting players at risk, all for 4 points.

 

[PenfoldsFan]

Sack the doctor, he's incompetent and putting players at risk, all for 4 points.

Overworked and underpaid I'd have said, which the latter ironically enough is a direct result of reduced AFL soft caps..