New measures for contact with the head

[didds]

A friend on another forum who is not a rugby fan suggested all players be made to wear padded helmets. Surely this would be a good mitigating factor in minimising head injuries?

If they're really serious.

external padding does not AIUI prevent nconcussion, which can (is?) caused by the brain wobbling around inside the cranium?

didds

 

[Pegleg]

Many's a true word spoken in jest BFG.

Given that across the Big Pond they wear helmets that'd protect a scooter rider from head injury, yet the sport of Americian Football has far more serious problems with concussion and serious head/neck injuries than Rugby Union has.

That might be because helments do not help with concussion

 

[L'irlandais]

There is a lot of opposition to wearing helmets amongst cyclists (motor and pedal varieties.). Yet medical opinion suggests the benefits outweigh the inconveniences. RTA study.
Crushable cycle helmets are shown to absorb the shock and prevent concussion. It's not the padding in itself that disparates the force, but the physical destruction of the hard and soft elements of the pedal cycle helmet. So the fact that Americian Football helmets are virtually indestructible probably does little to dissipate the forces at work. (Hardly rocket science, yet nobody thought about it hard enough.). Little evidence that wearing a motor cycle helmet increases the risk of neck injury. But much to show it prevents deaths when neck injuries are occurred.

Since none on these forums is a medical expert I suggest a serious study into head injury in our own sport is long overdue. Not that the WR Blazers have the slightest intention of ever conducting such a Global study.

- - - Updated - - -

 

[Pegleg]

A proper study is indeed needed. Knee jerk and partial "answers" are not what is required. We are lucky in having a head surgeoun amongst our referees. A female ref in the Blues region. She has given talks on concussion and it is clear that there is a lot of missunderstanding in the WRU in respect of concussion. We need to remove the causes, as far as possible, not pick on tacklers, who studies show are more likely to be subject to concussion than the tackled player!

It would be so much better if WR asked the experts and then listened to their advise. rather than the half cocked fudges we tend to get. Top front row forwards (BCM, Topo etc have told them how to improve the scrum do they listen? No. I think you're right L'irlandais a global study (worthwhile) is highly unlikely.

A few web sources that indicate the cycle helmets and others are not concussion preventers:

http://teenshealth.org/en/teens/helmets-concussion.html?WT.ac=ctg
http://weillcornellconcussion.org/does-helmet-protect-me-against-concussion
http://www.helmets.org/general.htm

 

[Ian_Cook]

external padding does not AIUI prevent nconcussion, which can (is?) caused by the brain wobbling around inside the cranium?

didds

100% didds

Helmets and head protectors protect from scratches and cuts and other superficial damage to the head, but they offer no protection from concussion. Worse yet, there are some schools of thought among the medical community that they actually make the situation worse through giving the wearer a false sense of security, and making them more likely to take risks they might not otherwise take if they weren't wearing one.

"Researchers at the University of New Hampshire found that regular helmetless-tackling drills reduced the number of overall head impacts suffered by the participating players by 28 percent. This reduction was the result of removing helmets only for five minutes of drills after a few select practices — in this case, twice a week during the three-week preseason and once a week during the regular season."

https://thinkprogress.org/could-get...y-make-football-safer-75393ffe5c32#.i83cqdnb7

http://www.npr.org/sections/health-...s-concussion-problem-practice-without-helmets

 

[L'irlandais]

I had an RTA twenty years ago. Some dickhead drove into the back of my bicycle at 70 km an hour. My cycle-helmet shattered his windshield and protected me from a serious head injury by its self-destructing makeup, the hard outer shell fixed to a polystyrene inner shell dissipates all the force of the impact. How is a pedestrian collision any different, except that the forces involved are much, much smaller. (500kg x 70kmph - *63kg x 20 kmph) compared to (85kg x 24kmph + 118kg x 14 kmph)

As was pointed out by your good self, one can be concussed without being knocked unconscious, it isn't entirely clear if the reverse is possible. I rather wear a helmet and not have my skull cracked open, than have my skull cracked open by not wearing one.

People only hear (read) what they want to hear (read), i already pointed out that solid helmets transmit the outside forces. To reduce impacts and risk of concussion Americian football helmets would have to break on impact, and be replace each time the outer shell was damaged. Otherwise they don't dissipate the forces involved.

 

[Ian_Cook]

I had an RTA twenty years ago. Some dickhead drove into the back of my bicycle at 70 km an hour. My cycle-helmet shattered his windshield and protected me from a serious head injury by its self-destructing makeup, the hard outer shell fixed to a polystyrene inner shell dissipates all the force of the impact. How is a pedestrian collision any different, expect that the forces involved are much, much smaller.

Because your helmet protected you from getting your skull cracked open. This is NOT the same as protecting you from concussion.

http://weillcornellconcussion.org/does-helmet-protect-me-against-concussion


Concussion is caused by your brain smashing against the inside of your brain case., and no helmet can prevent that from happening. Some forms of concussions, such as "Shaken Baby Syndrome" occur without impact on the outside of the skull.

The following is a very interesting talk from 2016 TED Talks. Its about 15 minutes long and if you have any interest at all in concussion prevention, its worth every minute you spend watching.

https://www.ted.com/talks/david_camarillo_why_helmets_don_t_prevent_concussions_and_what_might

 

[L'irlandais]

Fair enough. Much of this we already covered in this other thread A not so "secret" email

 

[The Fat]

Anyone watch Newcastle v Bath today?
Only 1 PK in the 1st half for a high tackle and it was a lazy arm put out there with minor contact. Wondering how the 2nd half went as players started to fatigue?
It was noticeable that players were aware of the new guidelines and it probably took a bit of aggression out of the tackles

 

[Ian_Cook]

Anyone watch Newcastle v Bath today?
Only 1 PK in the 1st half for a high tackle and it was a lazy arm put out there with minor contact. Wondering how the 2nd half went as players started to fatigue?
It was noticeable that players were aware of the new guidelines and it probably took a bit of aggression out of the tackles

Just watched the full replay. There was only one PK for a high tackle in the second half (Bath player defending a pick and drive), and one other that I saw by a Falcons player (which was not penalised) in the lead-up to Rokoduguni's 2nd try for Bath.

It was quite noticeable that the tacklers were targeting ball carriers lower than usual, so hopefully the message got through.

It's worth noting that Greg Garner had an excellent game; spot on decision making and great communication with his TO4 throughout. A class act IMO

 

[Dan_A]

Scarlets vs Ulster last night featured a penalty try and yellow card for a high tackle on the try line. Last week I'm not sure this would have even been penalised!

Video is here:-
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/38514314

 

[didds]

which rather begs the question... how could white legally stop him from scoring? go low and his momentum and free arms sees him score.

I'm not condoning arms round the neck here.

didds

 

[OB..]

which rather begs the question... how could white legally stop him from scoring?

Sometimes you just can't.

 

[SimonSmith]

That, I think, would have been a similar decision last season.

 

[didds]

Sometimes you just can't.

to be totally honest, I concur OB. Get underneath the player and try and trap the ball between the bodies is about it!

any other suggestions?

didds

 

[peperami]

which rather begs the question... how could white legally stop him from scoring? go low and his momentum and free arms sees him score.

I'm not condoning arms round the neck here.

didds

Interestingly in my game today, we had just that situation, a maul ended close to the line and an attacking player broke and drove for the line and scored. No tackle came in, despite a player being in position to make one. Whilst at an injury break a short while later I spoke to the player and said did you deliberately pull out and he said yes, based on the new laws he felt that he would run the risk of a "Reckless" tackle and as such decided that it was better to allow a try on the touch line and stay off than face a yellow card.

I didnt like how it looked real time and I dont like it, given how the player legally drove for the line it would be difficult to make a tackle as he was bent forward so taking his legs out of reach.


Ben

 

[crossref]

So. Who else gave a YC today for a high tackle that last week might have been a PK only?

 

[Pinky]

Scarlets vs Ulster last night featured a penalty try and yellow card for a high tackle on the try line. Last week I'm not sure this would have even been penalised!

Video is here:-
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/38514314

I would have been thinking about carding white 5 for what looked like a punch!

 

[Camquin]

I agree there is a punch, and that should be a card.
But I think the punch is after the ball is held up - so assuming there is no previous penalty is that card but no PT?

 

[talbazar]

In my humble opinion, for that Scarlets vs Ulster incident, the new guideline should mainly apply to white 14:

He comes in with no chance to make a successful tackle, swing his arm in the face of Red ball-carrier

If WR wants that guideline to stay and be useful in any way, he's gotta go :norc:

Just trying to be factual and coherent here, nothing more...