Nick Fozzard getting dragged on Twitter

[RP London]

1 hour ago, The Masked Poster said:

It’s almost irrelevant what happened during those past games (ie head shots or just wear and tear on the head) the fact is that a certain referee(s) will have been in charge of those games and players X & Y will claim that he is now suffering due to playing in those matches reffed by those people. (And I’m not saying that they don’t deserve a hearing or deserve sympathy)

Thus, whether we like it or not, the refs *could* potentially be dragged into this. Do I agree? No but legal arguments can lead to unexpected twists. I’m not saying it will btw. 

No the legal cases are not about individuals they have been very clear on that.. its the governing bodies and the duty of care and knowledge of the damgers vs mitigating the risk (be that training or after care or rules etc). 

[RP London]

Again this debate seems to be focused on the 1 80 minute period of the week.. the game itself is one tiny part.. its about the care of the individual during and post the game the "man up" ( awful phrase) of play on with concussion, the training the next day full contact, the 20 contact sessions a week, the medical care (stand down periods being introduced only recently) etc.. if anyone goes at the ref as a fall guy they are very much misreading the room and will lose the argument because they have missed what 90% of the argument is all about. 

Drop the tackle height yes and that will filter into training. But many of what needs to be done may already have been done HIA protocol, return to play protocol, training calming down etc. Have they put all the medical guidance in place that they could reasonably be expected to do. 

The case will hinge on whether this stuff was known about and acted on appropriately at the time these guys were playing, it will not hinge on 1 or 2 headshots let go by refs it really won't. 

But everything this comes up it turns back to the small amount of time the players spend on the pitch and the few headshots thy take compared to the multiple "car crash" collisions every day in training that they used to get and the multiple high hits they would get, the training on afterwards because they don't want to be seen as weak, is there a Dr on the sidelines at training pulling players off with suspected head injuries (like they do in a match) if not why not etc etc.. its everything we don't see with everything we do counting for about 5% of the time they are playing/training. 

 

Edited April 21, 2023 by RP London

[David Dockhouse Host]

We asked Fozzy to come on the show to discuss, no reply as yet.

[Damien]

34 minutes ago, RP London said:

Again this debate seems to be focused on the 1 80 minute period of the week.. the game itself is one tiny part.. its about the care of the individual during and post the game the "man up" ( awful phrase) of play on with concussion, the training the next day full contact, the 20 contact sessions a week, the medical care (stand down periods being introduced only recently) etc.. if anyone goes at the ref as a fall guy they are very much misreading the room and will lose the argument because they have missed what 90% of the argument is all about. 

Drop the tackle height yes and that will filter into training. But many of what needs to be done may already have been done HIA protocol, return to play protocol, training calming down etc. Have they put all the medical guidance in place that they could reasonably be expected to do. 

The case will hinge on whether this stuff was known about and acted on appropriately at the time these guys were playing, it will not hinge on 1 or 2 headsets let go by refs it really won't. 

 

20 contact sessions a week? As far as I know teams don't do anything like this and much of what they do is technique and far from things that cause concussion. Even 2 decades ago there was little heavy contact to prevent injury. Teams are simply not going hell for leather belting each other all week in training as its very poor preparation for gameday.

[Dunbar]

39 minutes ago, RP London said:

20 contact sessions a week

Is this true?

[The Masked Poster]

2 hours ago, RP London said:

No the legal cases are not about individuals they have been very clear on that.. its the governing bodies and the duty of care and knowledge of the damgers vs mitigating the risk (be that training or after care or rules etc). 

That may very well be the case *at the moment*. But these things have a habit of twisting and turning into things not foreseen. When backs are against the wall, honour can very quickly disappear. 
 

And just to be clear, I aren’t blaming the refs, either individually or collectively. 

Edited April 21, 2023 by The Masked Poster

[DI Keith Fowler]

2 hours ago, Dunbar said:

Is this true?

I mean what does contact session even mean? Does it include wrestling which the players do a lot of? The chances of getting a brain injury from that seems negligible. 

[RP London]

2 hours ago, Damien said:

20 contact sessions a week? As far as I know teams don't do anything like this and much of what they do is technique and far from things that cause concussion. Even 2 decades ago there was little heavy contact to prevent injury. Teams are simply not going hell for leather belting each other all week in training as its very poor preparation for gameday.

20 was a deliberate exaggeration. While what you say may be the case now you inky need to listen to Alix poppham who talks about punishment contact sessions to know they did do heavy contact a lot.. listen to the complainents and the reasoning and argument arr quite worrying. 

[RP London]

1 hour ago, The Masked Poster said:

That may very well be the case *at the moment*. But these things have a habit of twisting and turning into things not foreseen. When backs are against the wall, honour can very quickly disappear. 
 

And just to be clear, I aren’t blaming the refs, either individually or collectively. 

No this case won't go to the refs etc its all about the governing bodies.  It cannot come to the refs due it being about loads of issues with the match being one tiny part. 

[RP London]

2 hours ago, Dunbar said:

Is this true?

Deliberate over exaggeration to show how little ot has to do with the 80 minutes of game time..

[Damien]

10 minutes ago, RP London said:

20 was a deliberate exaggeration. While what you say may be the case now you inky need to listen to Alix poppham who talks about punishment contact sessions to know they did do heavy contact a lot.. listen to the complainents and the reasoning and argument arr quite worrying. 

He's a Rugby Union player, this is about Rugby League. Union training, especially for forwards is vastly different.

[RP London]

1 minute ago, Damien said:

He's a Rugby Union player, this is about Rugby League. Union training, especially for forwards is vastly different.

Nope this is a class action lawsuit involving ru and rl players against the governing bodies.. therefore there must be correlations between training etc and the knowledge of the governing bodies. 

Read what is said across the board.. the league players talk in very similar terms. 

[Dunbar]

3 minutes ago, RP London said:

Nope this is a class action lawsuit involving ru and rl players against the governing bodies.. therefore there must be correlations between training etc and the knowledge of the governing bodies. 

Read what is said across the board.. the league players talk in very similar terms. 

It is not a single class action lawsuit though is it, I thought the League one and the Union one were separate suits?

[Barley Mow]

5 minutes ago, Dunbar said:

It is not a single class action lawsuit though is it, I thought the League one and the Union one were separate suits?

They surely must be. You wouldn't want the RFL to be found to be negligent because of the (lack of) action from the RFU, or vice versa.

Edited April 21, 2023 by Barley Mow

[Damien]

20 minutes ago, RP London said:

Nope this is a class action lawsuit involving ru and rl players against the governing bodies.. therefore there must be correlations between training etc and the knowledge of the governing bodies. 

Read what is said across the board.. the league players talk in very similar terms. 

This discussion is focussed on Rugby League, not Rugby Union. RL training is fundamentally different to RU, especially for forwards. Procedures and rules are different between the sport too. Its stupid to try and lump them in together.

[RP London]

27 minutes ago, Dunbar said:

It is not a single class action lawsuit though is it, I thought the League one and the Union one were separate suits?

Not as I understand it.. also has football players.. all the articles talk of players joining the suit (singular) from different sports.  

[Dunbar]

3 minutes ago, RP London said:

Not as I understand it.. also has football players.. all the articles talk of players joining the suit (singular) from different sports.  

This article says two separate suits:

https://www.independent.co.uk/sport/rugby/rugby-union/world-rugby-brain-injury-lawsuit-concussion-b2300336.html

Rylands Garth represents over 250 rugby union players with brain damage in total, including England World Cup winner Steve Thompson and former Wales captain Ryan Jones, as well as 100 rugby league players, as part of a separate but similar potential claim against the RFL.

[RP London]

8 minutes ago, Damien said:

This discussion is focussed on Rugby League, not Rugby Union. RL training is fundamentally different to RU, especially for forwards. Procedures and rules are different between the sport too. Its stupid to try and lump them in together.

League training has tackling in it right?

It has collisions yes?

Did it sit out players who had potential head injuries. Did it have the doctor pulling players when they has suspected head injuries in training (does it now) etc etc

It's all in there, the level may be different but it's still the same in that the emphasis is not on the game itself (80 minutes, 15-20 of direct involvment, out of a whole week) but the training and the medical care. 

Things may be different now but this isn't about now it's about how they trained etc 20 years ago. 

[RP London]

1 minute ago, Dunbar said:

This article says two separate suits:

https://www.independent.co.uk/sport/rugby/rugby-union/world-rugby-brain-injury-lawsuit-concussion-b2300336.html

Rylands Garth represents over 250 rugby union players with brain damage in total, including England World Cup winner Steve Thompson and former Wales captain Ryan Jones, as well as 100 rugby league players, as part of a separate but similar potential claim against the RFL.

Fair enough.. everything I have read was joint.. maybe that's to do with the lawyers. 

[The Masked Poster]

1 hour ago, RP London said:

No this case won't go to the refs etc its all about the governing bodies.  It cannot come to the refs due it being about loads of issues with the match being one tiny part. 

How can you be so sure though? The refs are an integral part of the game. They aren't just spectators, they have had a very real influence on how the game has been played and who has remained on the pitch etc etc. I am in no way saying that this is how I think, it's just how these things often develop when a lawsuit is in the offing. 

[RP London]

5 minutes ago, The Masked Poster said:

How can you be so sure though? The refs are an integral part of the game. They aren't just spectators, they have had a very real influence on how the game has been played and who has remained on the pitch etc etc. I am in no way saying that this is how I think, it's just how these things often develop when a lawsuit is in the offing. 

Because it has been said so many times its not about the match its about the care, training etc 

Over and over its said that way.

[Damien]

25 minutes ago, RP London said:

League training has tackling in it right?

It has collisions yes?

Did it sit out players who had potential head injuries. Did it have the doctor pulling players when they has suspected head injuries in training (does it now) etc etc

It's all in there, the level may be different but it's still the same in that the emphasis is not on the game itself (80 minutes, 15-20 of direct involvment, out of a whole week) but the training and the medical care. 

Things may be different now but this isn't about now it's about how they trained etc 20 years ago. 

You seem to be making an awful lot of assumptions based on your knowledge of RU and bizarrely conflating that with what happens in RL to backup your 20 contact sessions a week claim.

I know that RL training is more focussed on technique and defensive systems, and has been for a long time, with lots of shield and bags used. Players at professional level generally know how to tackle and I think you'd be surprised how little full on game like tacking there is. Players are always nursing knocks too and clubs don't want more injuries. Doing full contact is simply not conductive to performing well in the next game and is detrimental for little benefit. Even at amateur level I very rarely recall doing any tackling on anything other than bags and shields in u18s and open age and that was 20+ years ago.

This is one area where RU has been way behind RL in my experience. Again, especially for forwards, in RU there is a strong emphasis on scrums, the breakdown and competing for the ball. This is inherently far more dangerous and repetitive in terms of head clashes than anything I have ever seen in RL training. And it is several times a week, all season long.

[RP London]

1 hour ago, Damien said:

You seem to be making an awful lot of assumptions based on your knowledge of RU and bizarrely conflating that with what happens in RL to backup your 20 contact sessions a week claim.

I know that RL training is more focussed on technique and defensive systems, and has been for a long time, with lots of shield and bags used. Players at professional level generally know how to tackle and I think you'd be surprised how little full on game like tacking there is. Players are always nursing knocks too and clubs don't want more injuries. Doing full contact is simply not conductive to performing well in the next game and is detrimental for little benefit. Even at amateur level I very rarely recall doing any tackling on anything other than bags and shields in u18s and open age and that was 20+ years ago.

This is one area where RU has been way behind RL in my experience. Again, especially for forwards, in RU there is a strong emphasis on scrums, the breakdown and competing for the ball. This is inherently far more dangerous and repetitive in terms of head clashes than anything I have ever seen in RL training. And it is several times a week, all season long.

I've already admitted the 20 contact sessions was an over exaggeration..  I have played RL for over 20 years and played RU for about 5 when I was a teenager.. other than that great first paragraph!

As a none professional I am not using my amateur experience but going by what I have read, watched and listened to about these cases as I feel that is more important as, you know, that's what it's all about rather than me as I'm not taking the rfl to court. 

Edited April 21, 2023 by RP London

[Damien]

8 minutes ago, RP London said:

I've already admitted the 20 contact sessions was an over exaggeration..  I have played RL for over 20 years and played RU for about 5 when I was a teenager.. other than that great first paragraph!

As a none professional I am not using my amateur experience but going by what I have read, watched and listened to about these cases as I feel that is more important as, you know, that's what it's all about rather than me as I'm not taking the rfl to court. 

You made a claim, obviously based on RU, and proceeded to quote an RU player based on training in a completely different sport. Absolutely pointless.

I have known various professional players and that is what I am basing my comments on. They are people I trust and I believe them when they tell me what training sessions are like. You continue to base your opinion of how much contact there is in Rugby League training on RU and RU players though.

[Damien]

3 hours ago, DI Keith Fowler said:

I mean what does contact session even mean? Does it include wrestling which the players do a lot of? The chances of getting a brain injury from that seems negligible. 

Indeed. So much of RL training is technique based, not smashing each other to bits.