Yep.
And if this weekend is the line in the sand, let’s see that maintained through Origin and Finals...
I bet it doesn’t and Papalli was just scapegoated because V’landys shot from the hip ..again.
Moderator: GH Moderators
Yep.
I'm staggered by the number of NRL fans who seem to enjoy concussion as a design feature of the sport.raiderskater wrote: ↑May 15, 2021, 9:38 pmNo, I'm really not. And I know what you were referencing, but Azza's post was absolutely sexist.
But also, if you want to talk about toxic masculinity, this idea that our sport isn't tough or worth watching if men aren't having their brains scrambled like eggs is absolutely it.
Just waiting for Nickman, gangers, and GE to jump in with a “Stop attacking raiderskater the only female in the room. She has a different perspective you may not have considered. It’s clear (no matter what you say) that you intended to be offensive. Stop being so defensive and just apologise already.”Botman wrote: ↑May 15, 2021, 9:45 pmNo. You really are.raiderskater wrote: ↑May 15, 2021, 9:38 pmNo, I'm really not. And I know what you were referencing, but Azza's post was absolutely sexist.
But also, if you want to talk about toxic masculinity, this idea that our sport isn't tough or worth watching if men aren't having their brains scrambled like eggs is absolutely it.
I’m very squarely on a side of this fence on this. You’ve misread it dreadfully, Dubs
There are plenty of non contact sports for you to follow.raiderskater wrote: ↑May 15, 2021, 9:38 pmNo, I'm really not. And I know what you were referencing, but Azza's post was absolutely sexist.
But also, if you want to talk about toxic masculinity, this idea that our sport isn't tough or worth watching if men aren't having their brains scrambled like eggs is absolutely it.
Union. Grew up with it. Played it. Used to understand it. Don't any more, and pretty much couldn't care less about it.
Not predominantly a woman's 'sport'. Nijinsky, Nureyev, Baryshnikov, Hines - the biggest names from ballet in the last 100 years. All male. You are even more guilty of projecting your prejudice on another.raiderskater wrote: ↑May 15, 2021, 9:58 pmI'm holding my ground on this.Botman wrote: ↑May 15, 2021, 9:45 pmNo. You really are.raiderskater wrote: ↑May 15, 2021, 9:38 pmNo, I'm really not. And I know what you were referencing, but Azza's post was absolutely sexist.
But also, if you want to talk about toxic masculinity, this idea that our sport isn't tough or worth watching if men aren't having their brains scrambled like eggs is absolutely it.
I’m very squarely on a side of this fence on this. You’ve misread it dreadfully, Dubs
This is the sort of casual sexism that happens every day that is more harmful than you realise.
Do you know how tough you have to be to be a professional ballet dancer? How strong? How many hours and years of work it takes? Azza is stating that ballet dancers are not strong and not tough. And why did he pick ballet? Because it's predominantly a woman's sport. Azza stopped short of saying that the players have to "play like girls now", but that's absolutely what he meant, and that's absolutely harmful as an attitude.
Not predominantly a woman's 'sport'. Nijinsky, Nureyev, Baryshnikov, Hines - the biggest names from ballet in the last 100 years. All male. You are even more guilty of projecting your prejudice on another.raiderskater wrote: ↑May 15, 2021, 9:58 pmI'm holding my ground on this.Botman wrote: ↑May 15, 2021, 9:45 pmNo. You really are.raiderskater wrote: ↑May 15, 2021, 9:38 pmNo, I'm really not. And I know what you were referencing, but Azza's post was absolutely sexist.
But also, if you want to talk about toxic masculinity, this idea that our sport isn't tough or worth watching if men aren't having their brains scrambled like eggs is absolutely it.
I’m very squarely on a side of this fence on this. You’ve misread it dreadfully, Dubs
This is the sort of casual sexism that happens every day that is more harmful than you realise.
Do you know how tough you have to be to be a professional ballet dancer? How strong? How many hours and years of work it takes? Azza is stating that ballet dancers are not strong and not tough. And why did he pick ballet? Because it's predominantly a woman's sport. Azza stopped short of saying that the players have to "play like girls now", but that's absolutely what he meant, and that's absolutely harmful as an attitude.
I was at Magic Round. Been a Raiders member on and off for 25 years.RedRaider wrote: ↑May 15, 2021, 11:50 pm Rugby League is a collision sport, but while we see every player wearing a mouth guard to protect their teeth there are only a few who wear head gear to protect their heads. I don't have a problem with the rules to reduce contact with the head. The long term effects of multiple concussions can not be denied. I don't understand why this is only changing in May 2021. Was it not also a problem in March 2021 when this competition began?? Has someone threatened a class action on the League which has made for the changes?
The six again rule is baffling in that there is zero consistency even within games, let alone between different Refs decision making. The desire to bring more fatigue into the game comes with an increase in actual playing time. This means there are more collisions between fewer rest periods and this in itself is likely to increase the possibility of injury (accidental or foul play) whether to the head or other parts of the body. For me the lack of consistency with the six again rule is the biggest turn off in the game. I sat with an Eels fan during our match against Parramatta. Neither of us could figure out why the six again was being applied in some circumstances but not others. There seems to be no accountability from the Refs as to why the calls are being made. Eventually fans will turn away from a game they can no longer understand.
Yes.I’ve wondered why headgear isn’t mandatory in RL.RedRaider wrote: ↑May 15, 2021, 11:50 pm Rugby League is a collision sport, but while we see every player wearing a mouth guard to protect their teeth there are only a few who wear head gear to protect their heads. I don't have a problem with the rules to reduce contact with the head. The long term effects of multiple concussions can not be denied. I don't understand why this is only changing in May 2021. Was it not also a problem in March 2021 when this competition began?? Has someone threatened a class action on the League which has made for the changes?
The six again rule is baffling in that there is zero consistency even within games, let alone between different Refs decision making. The desire to bring more fatigue into the game comes with an increase in actual playing time. This means there are more collisions between fewer rest periods and this in itself is likely to increase the possibility of injury (accidental or foul play) whether to the head or other parts of the body. For me the lack of consistency with the six again rule is the biggest turn off in the game. I sat with an Eels fan during our match against Parramatta. Neither of us could figure out why the six again was being applied in some circumstances but not others. There seems to be no accountability from the Refs as to why the calls are being made. Eventually fans will turn away from a game they can no longer understand.
V8’s are getting there. The last few seasons have seen rule changes if one manufacturer / team seems to have an advantage. They’ve changed qualifying formats mid season. To top it off, they’ve just announced Gen III will be getting rolled out MID 2022. Mid…. So they’ll be running one car at the start of the season, and changing cars for the second half.T_R wrote:Can anyone think of a sport that consistently changes rules midseason other than the NRL? It's bloody weird.
Headgear does zero against concussion. All it does it lesser the chance of head cuts.mick63 wrote: ↑May 16, 2021, 2:00 amYes.I’ve wondered why headgear isn’t mandatory in RL.RedRaider wrote: ↑May 15, 2021, 11:50 pm Rugby League is a collision sport, but while we see every player wearing a mouth guard to protect their teeth there are only a few who wear head gear to protect their heads. I don't have a problem with the rules to reduce contact with the head. The long term effects of multiple concussions can not be denied. I don't understand why this is only changing in May 2021. Was it not also a problem in March 2021 when this competition began?? Has someone threatened a class action on the League which has made for the changes?
The six again rule is baffling in that there is zero consistency even within games, let alone between different Refs decision making. The desire to bring more fatigue into the game comes with an increase in actual playing time. This means there are more collisions between fewer rest periods and this in itself is likely to increase the possibility of injury (accidental or foul play) whether to the head or other parts of the body. For me the lack of consistency with the six again rule is the biggest turn off in the game. I sat with an Eels fan during our match against Parramatta. Neither of us could figure out why the six again was being applied in some circumstances but not others. There seems to be no accountability from the Refs as to why the calls are being made. Eventually fans will turn away from a game they can no longer understand.
It seems like it’s a last resort move for all concerned and it does seem hard to imagine but if they want to truly make players safe it has to be considered.
Chances are that if the RL doesn’t implement headgear a court will in the future
Correctjulian87 wrote: ↑May 16, 2021, 8:03 amHeadgear does zero against concussion. All it does it lesser the chance of head cuts.mick63 wrote: ↑May 16, 2021, 2:00 amYes.I’ve wondered why headgear isn’t mandatory in RL.RedRaider wrote: ↑May 15, 2021, 11:50 pm Rugby League is a collision sport, but while we see every player wearing a mouth guard to protect their teeth there are only a few who wear head gear to protect their heads. I don't have a problem with the rules to reduce contact with the head. The long term effects of multiple concussions can not be denied. I don't understand why this is only changing in May 2021. Was it not also a problem in March 2021 when this competition began?? Has someone threatened a class action on the League which has made for the changes?
The six again rule is baffling in that there is zero consistency even within games, let alone between different Refs decision making. The desire to bring more fatigue into the game comes with an increase in actual playing time. This means there are more collisions between fewer rest periods and this in itself is likely to increase the possibility of injury (accidental or foul play) whether to the head or other parts of the body. For me the lack of consistency with the six again rule is the biggest turn off in the game. I sat with an Eels fan during our match against Parramatta. Neither of us could figure out why the six again was being applied in some circumstances but not others. There seems to be no accountability from the Refs as to why the calls are being made. Eventually fans will turn away from a game they can no longer understand.
It seems like it’s a last resort move for all concerned and it does seem hard to imagine but if they want to truly make players safe it has to be considered.
Chances are that if the RL doesn’t implement headgear a court will in the future
Many people don’t realise but Mouth guards actually play a greater role in decreasing concussion then headgear do. If your goal was to reduce concussion and you could only pick one then you would wear a mouth guard.mick63 wrote:Yes.I’ve wondered why headgear isn’t mandatory in RL.RedRaider wrote: ↑May 15, 2021, 11:50 pm Rugby League is a collision sport, but while we see every player wearing a mouth guard to protect their teeth there are only a few who wear head gear to protect their heads. I don't have a problem with the rules to reduce contact with the head. The long term effects of multiple concussions can not be denied. I don't understand why this is only changing in May 2021. Was it not also a problem in March 2021 when this competition began?? Has someone threatened a class action on the League which has made for the changes?
The six again rule is baffling in that there is zero consistency even within games, let alone between different Refs decision making. The desire to bring more fatigue into the game comes with an increase in actual playing time. This means there are more collisions between fewer rest periods and this in itself is likely to increase the possibility of injury (accidental or foul play) whether to the head or other parts of the body. For me the lack of consistency with the six again rule is the biggest turn off in the game. I sat with an Eels fan during our match against Parramatta. Neither of us could figure out why the six again was being applied in some circumstances but not others. There seems to be no accountability from the Refs as to why the calls are being made. Eventually fans will turn away from a game they can no longer understand.
It seems like it’s a last resort move for all concerned and it does seem hard to imagine but if they want to truly make players safe it has to be considered.
Chances are that if the RL doesn’t implement headgear a court will in the future
7s and 9s yes, that's exactly the direction it's gone actually. Not to that extent obviously but has moved in that directionVintagecrop wrote: ↑May 16, 2021, 12:39 amUnion. Grew up with it. Played it. Used to understand it. Don't any more, and pretty much couldn't care less about it.
NRL is heading the same way IMHO. It's starting to remind me of Sevens - fast and boring.
Concussion isn’t caused by impact to the head
Looks up the principle of volenti non fit injuria. It’s unlikely any CTE case would even be attempted for a current player.kiwi raider wrote: ↑May 16, 2021, 8:12 am They've got to be seen to be protecting the head of players going forward. otherwise 10 years down the track they'll have 100's of players lining up court cases for CTE.
It would be marginal at best with the headgears used in the NRL I believe.mick63 wrote: ↑May 16, 2021, 9:17 am So a helmet wouldn’t lessen the impact on the brain when a players head bounced off the turf after being tackled?
With the coming litigation regarding player welfare the technology will only improve regarding the efficacy of PPE .
These rules have all been in the book and havent been acted upon so that leaves the NRL in a tricky situation regarding their complicity in a legal action due to CTE.
The way this directive is being handled,ham fistedly and without due consultation,you have to consider that V’Landys has been given some advice to act immediately.
Yep. Helmeted headgear are more protection from tissue injury i.e. cuts and fractures. Doesn't help with concussion.
Exactly. This is all about V'landy's clamoring for the approval of inner city soccer mums, and has nothing to do with risk management.Crash Ball wrote: ↑May 16, 2021, 9:23 amLooks up the principle of volenti non fit injuria. It’s unlikely any CTE case would even be attempted for a current player.kiwi raider wrote: ↑May 16, 2021, 8:12 am They've got to be seen to be protecting the head of players going forward. otherwise 10 years down the track they'll have 100's of players lining up court cases for CTE.
For the record, I suspect he truly believes that he needs to make these changes as he believes it will attract more and new fans.Boomercm wrote: ↑May 16, 2021, 9:48 amExactly. This is all about V'landy's clamoring for the approval of inner city soccer mums, and has nothing to do with risk management.Crash Ball wrote: ↑May 16, 2021, 9:23 amLooks up the principle of volenti non fit injuria. It’s unlikely any CTE case would even be attempted for a current player.kiwi raider wrote: ↑May 16, 2021, 8:12 am They've got to be seen to be protecting the head of players going forward. otherwise 10 years down the track they'll have 100's of players lining up court cases for CTE.
And how many of those names, apart from Baryshnikov, do you think the average joe knows?Vintagecrop wrote: ↑May 16, 2021, 12:50 amNot predominantly a woman's 'sport'. Nijinsky, Nureyev, Baryshnikov, Hines - the biggest names from ballet in the last 100 years. All male. You are even more guilty of projecting your prejudice on another.raiderskater wrote: ↑May 15, 2021, 9:58 pmI'm holding my ground on this.Botman wrote: ↑May 15, 2021, 9:45 pmNo. You really are.raiderskater wrote: ↑May 15, 2021, 9:38 pmNo, I'm really not. And I know what you were referencing, but Azza's post was absolutely sexist.
But also, if you want to talk about toxic masculinity, this idea that our sport isn't tough or worth watching if men aren't having their brains scrambled like eggs is absolutely it.
I’m very squarely on a side of this fence on this. You’ve misread it dreadfully, Dubs
This is the sort of casual sexism that happens every day that is more harmful than you realise.
Do you know how tough you have to be to be a professional ballet dancer? How strong? How many hours and years of work it takes? Azza is stating that ballet dancers are not strong and not tough. And why did he pick ballet? Because it's predominantly a woman's sport. Azza stopped short of saying that the players have to "play like girls now", but that's absolutely what he meant, and that's absolutely harmful as an attitude.
Stick to the main discussion and stop pointing fingers, please.