Preventing high risk concussive head injuries ..?What more can the AFL do.

[speedpeck23]

AD stated earlier this year that the head was "sacrosanct" and AFL policy would aim to minimize head high contact. Unfortunately suspending players who "deliberately" or "recklessly" make forceful head high contact to an opposition player does nothing to minimize the alarmingly increasing rate of accidental and unintentional concussive head injuries.

Apart from the obvious concern to the welfare of players, unless the AFL does more to reduce the risk of head injuries promotion and expansion of the game will be significantly compromised. But what else can be done??

 

[CarnThePiesfor09]

It's part of the game and it's the risk you take stepping onto the field.

Grow a set princess

 

[soho]

award a free kick every time the ball touches the ground...
similar to ultimate frisbee, you must catch the ball to continue the play...
once the ball touches the ground, the other team is awarded a free kick...

i expect this rule to come into play in the next 2-4 years...
then the ball will be changed to a frisbee, and the conversion will be complete...

[YOUTUBE]aAyEti-_lR8[/YOUTUBE]

 

[JHF1870]

its upto the player if they wear a helmet or not. I've said it before and I'll say it again. If a helmet could prevent being taken off on a stretcher. Why wouldn't a club look at it as a tactical advantage. So that injury rates decrease.

 

[Wallaby]

How about this:

1. The AFL announces that helmets protect the head in the event of incidental contact.
2. Players can choose to wear a helmet or not.
3. Incidental contact to the head will no longer be a free kick provided the first contact was not made to the head, and contact was not made with a free arm.
4. Targetting the head remains a reportable offence.

Aim is to bring back the bump, which sometimes accidentally gets a playter in the head after bouncing of hips, shoulders, backs etc. But if you legitimately try to bump, but accidentally get the head first that remains a free.

 

[Luvs2Slash]

That's like trying to prevent punches to the head in boxing. Players get hit, provided eyes are on the ball it's part of the game & a great part of it.

 

[Scotland]

They could put the rules back to what they were for the first 100 years and tell players that they are actually responsible for their own safety.

If Demetriou and Co. were running cricket we'd have bowlers being suspended when batsmen attempting to play short pitched bowling are hit in the head.

 

[Peter P]

Did any of you see Catalyst on ABC TV last week - about repeated concussion in American NFL players - and all autopsied brains so far of NFL players (11 brains in all) had quite severe brain damage of the boxer "punch drunk" syndrome.

The program showed that the NFL has done a U-turn on concussion in the last season and brought in rules to stop head contact by linesmen during training sessions and enforce a mandatory 3 week no game period on any player suffering concussion.

The medical basis of the permanent brain damage seems to be to do with repeated concussions. Particularly repeated before full brain recovery. I am not an expert but the situation seems to be that one or a small number of concussions that are separated by many weeks to full recovery do not or are of low risk of leading to permanent brain damage. However the opposite is true of numerous concussions and concussions before full recovery from the last one.

The AFL will have to act like the NFL - players should not come back on the field after concussion, they should stand out from contact training and matches for 3 weeks and pass stringent testing before playing again. That rule in and of itself would probably lead to a different culture whereby not only deliberate or careless head contact was minimised (The result of recent law changes) but also players try to avoid accidental head contact.

The game would be less gladiatorial, but I for one don't want to get my kicks from seeing people putting themselves at risk of permanent brain damage.

This problem is worse for the Rugby codes where there is more frequent head contact. It is also an issue for Soccer because of the 10,000s of headers that professional players do over a career. The NFL disastrous story was mainly for linemen who run frequently helmet to helmet at eachother. Such concussions don't have to be severe - feeling woosy, seeing stars is apparently enough when it keeps happening too often.

 

[refresh]

They could put the rules back to what they were for the first 100 years and tell players that they are actually responsible for their own safety.

QUOTE]

agree completely. The new rules have moved the responsibility of head protection from the individual to the tackler. A free kick is the prize for leading with your head. Destined for disaster

 

[THRILLHO]

Ever since the inception of football players have turned their body when collecting a ground ball to protect their head. The AFL, in their infinite wisdom, declare the head 'sacrosanct' and launch a crackdown on head-high contact. Cue a number of players now leading into a ground-ball contest with their head.

What rule will the AFL have to introduce to counter the rule they have now?

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

There are more head-to-head clashes now and these are the most lethal of all.

This is happening because now when you deliver a bump you are judged very harshly if you jump in the air. "He left the ground" is a sign of guilt and it signals that your intention was to hit the player high. This couldn't be further from the truth.

Jumping in the air when you deliver a bump is a natural protective mechanism as it gets your head above the impact area. Players now have to stay on the ground when they deliver a bump, everyone is roughly the same height, shoulder hits shoulder and a clash of heads is the inevitable result.

In cleaning up the bump, the cure was worse than the disease.

 

[lloydy_loinchop]

Exactly right, by protecting the head, the player push it further by doing stupid things. If they changed the rule back to what it was, players wouldn't be so naive in diving head first at the ball.

 

[P.A.F.C]

You can't prevent players getting hit in the head.

Do what the NFL are doing. No coming back after a concussion, no playing a week after. Injury management and harm minimisation is the key, you'll never prevent them from occuring in the first place.

 

[Hodgepodge]

If you wanted to stop it you would give the player going back with the flight ultimate protection the same way the player with his head over the ball gets protected.

I'm sure the AFL will end up doing this.

 

[Gizza]

Stop paying free kicks for guys tunnelling their heads into contests so players stop doing it just to get free kicks.

 

[J_Moore]

Yeah, people who run the "it's part of the game harden up" arguments are pretty callous and ignorant, I think.

Equally, though, I don't think concussions will ever disappear entirely.

But it does seem like players readily and needlessly lead head first into loose balls/tackles now in the hope of getting frees. Much like the introduction of the very hard helmets into American Football resulted in linebackers deliberately hitting contestants head on.

I think it's mostly about education, to be honest, and proper recovery. Most people think that a concussion is something you recover from pretty quickly, and aren't aware of these severe long term consequences. Once players are fully aware that repeatedly getting concussed has the potential to completely ruin their lives as early as five years after leaving the game, I imagine they'll be less willing to dive head first at contested balls to draw free kicks. And hopefully the culture that lionises players who return to the field after being completely knocked out disappears, too.

 

[Peter P]

You can't prevent players getting hit in the head.

Do what the NFL are doing. No coming back after a concussion, no playing a week after. Injury management and harm minimisation is the key, you'll never prevent them from occuring in the first place.

I'm not sure if in American Football there is frees awarded for high tackles and whether players sometimes duck to get hit high. What would be interesting if this is the case - is if knowing you're out of action for minimum 3 weeks if you get concussed causes players to be more cautious. If not thinking about long term welfare they at least think about their next few match payments and desire to play next week.

Also good comment by HodgePodge - the player running back with flight of ball needs more protection. But..interesting how umpires could interpret that though. A pack with eyes for the ball, a player running back into it with eyes on same ball.

The charging players whose heads are over the ball with hip and shoulder (and the high risk hip at speed hits someones head/neck) has gone out of the game with the new rules - and that is good. Head clashes from players charging in together with less caution are now the problem. It isn't clear how to police this except to make players more aware of the consequences of repeated head injury - in other words back to the 3 week mandatory lay off.

 

[Peter P]

3 articles in The Age today, Chad Rintoul's is the most sobering http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/concussion-victim-calls-for-week-off-20100419-spcs.html .
Also the Adelaide board has a thread - http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/showthread.php?t=694109

I'm no expert but googling around the issue throws up a lot of concern:

The Catalyst program - http://www.abc.net.au/catalyst/stories/2873539.htm

Rugby Union has IRB rule 10 - http://www.caprugby.com/PDFs/concussionMgt.pdf = a "3 week" period out of the game.

The NFL has gone for major rule changes which sound like they will soften the game, but they know they have no choice given the findings highlighted in Catalyst and American media. See - http://www.tonic.com/article/nfl-combine-concussion-testing/ http://blogs.nfl.com/2009/12/02/league-announces-stricter-concussion-guidelines/ Has anyone who watches NFL games on TV noticed any difference yet?

Soccer has high rates of concussion due to heading http://bjsm.bmj.com/content/42/2/110.abstract .
The "jury is still out" as to whether subconcussive headers are damaging in their own right - again the issue is frequency and lack of time between the blows. http://faculty.washington.edu/chudler/soccer.html http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/content~content=a714014761&db=all http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/news/fullstory_94541.html http://lib.bioinfo.pl/meid:69403

On the reassuring side there are articles suggesting single or a few isolated concussions do NOT increase long term dementia risks - http://mtbifacts.com/dementiaconcussions.html

The message is reduce the risk of concussion but above all allow for full recovery time after a concussion. The AFL seems to be doing about all it can to outlaw high contact, but if players take that as a licence to run head first into packs - only a strict rule of a 1 but preferably 3 week standout from matches and contact training - may change the culture of foolhardy courage.

As the above shows it is not just the AFL that is having to catch up with modern neuroscience.

Perhaps the metaphor should be hamstring strains - players get adequate rest usually because everyone knows you play with a strain and the chances of a more long term hamstring tear are high. Allow it to fully heal and your risk of injury is not really any greater than someone with no hamstring strain. If the same consideration was given to a body part ultimately far more important...

 

[Ant_]

It's part of the game and it's the risk you take stepping onto the field.

This.

 

[Pie eyed]

Soccer has high rates of concussion due to heading http://bjsm.bmj.com/content/42/2/110.abstract .
The "jury is still out" as to whether subconcussive headers are damaging in their own right - again the issue is frequency and lack of time between the blows. http://faculty.washington.edu/chudler/soccer.html http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/content~content=a714014761&db=all http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/news/fullstory_94541.html http://lib.bioinfo.pl/meid:69403

Sorry but I'm seriously laughing my head off at soccer......WTF...the biggest cause of head injuries in soccer is slamming the coke straw up your nose when you pass out on the coffee table.
Soccer has no place in discussions about contact sport. Pansy shit.

I agree with the school of thought that you take the risk when you run out on the field.
The Rintoul article is about players already concussed being "out" for the game and given the next week off as a precaution which is sensible.

 

[THRILLHO]

I've always found it odd that doctors and trainers are always so careful with soft-tissue injuries and take no precautions (see Mitchell on the weekend), but with concussion often dont take the same precautions.

Maybe now there will be a change in the air

 

[shintemaster]

Ever since the inception of football players have turned their body when collecting a ground ball to protect their head. The AFL, in their infinite wisdom, declare the head 'sacrosanct' and launch a crackdown on head-high contact. Cue a number of players now leading into a ground-ball contest with their head.

What rule will the AFL have to introduce to counter the rule they have now?

I agree with this. The AFL have encouraged reckless behaviour and it will end with bad injuries and some poor b*stard feeling responsible for something that they haven't necessarily contributed a great deal to.

Players need to be encouraged not to drop their heads into oncoming traffic and to use their bodies to protect themselves. If a player is trying their hardest to protect themselves and someone recklessly or viciously causes them harm then throw the book at them.

The present 'head is sacrosanct' system IMO is a failure.