Sheffield

[JohnM]

Dorothy L Sayers amateur sleuth Lord Peter Wimsey. His butler Bunter says, "My mother always says, my lord, that facts are like cows. If you look them in the face hard enough, they generally run away." 

Don't you believe it, Aston.

[Worzel]

6 hours ago, The Blues Ox said:

Wow, I didn't know that Marsh failed a HIA the following week as well. It totally could be a coincidence but all the evidence just keeps getting worse and worse for Aston. 

Precisely this.

Just because he wasn’t showing symptoms that could be understood by MH and MA as such, is not the same thing as him having recovered. If we know anything as a result of the last few years, surely it’s that. It’s the risk of multiple concussions in a few weeks that were specifically trying to guard against, the research suggests that those are the events that have greatest long term damage.

[Worzel]

5 minutes ago, JohnM said:

Dorothy L Sayers amateur sleuth Lord Peter Wimsey. His butler Bunter says, "My mother always says, my lord, that facts are like cows. If you look them in the face hard enough, they generally run away." 

Don't you believe it, Aston.

I heard that in Peter Jones’ voice. Loved the radio adaptation of those books. 

[RP London]

15 hours ago, M j M said:

So all this stuff about him being fit to play and it just being an admin thing is utterly wrong?

Thats my understanding too.. 

Pull the RFL over the coals for their issues in this, absolutely.. but there seems to be a huge amount of losing sight of the key issue which is that Aston played a player that was unfit to play and in the most serious case of being unfit to play really.. something that could have caused serious lasting damage. 

[OriginalMrC]

Do some people honestly believe this was a simple mistake? It's the head coaches job to know which players are cleared to play. I don't know how all clubs do it but there will be a list of players, their injuries, likely return date, those under concussion protocols and those that need medical clearance to play. To say it's down to an admin error or miscommunication is just nonsense. And even if that was the case it demonstrates a clear lack of governance at the club and quite rightly the RFL has taken action.

 

Edited November 13, 2024 by OriginalMrC

[Expatknight]

6 minutes ago, OriginalMrC said:

Do some people honestly believe this was a simple mistake? It's the head coaches job to know which players are cleared to play. I don't know how all clubs do it but there will be a list of players, their injuries, likely return date, those under concussion protocols and those that need medical clearance to play. To say it's down to an admin error or miscommunication is just nonsense. And even if that was the case it demonstrates a clear lack of governance at the club and quite rightly the RFL has taken action.

 

As I have previously posted, the buck stops with Aston, at best it shows stupidity and naivity at worst arrogance, bloody mindedness and a total disregard for players welfare / safety, I know which I think ,but that is just my opinion. No doubt there will still be people on here who will try and defend the undefendable. T

[The Blues Ox]

4 hours ago, OriginalMrC said:

Do some people honestly believe this was a simple mistake? It's the head coaches job to know which players are cleared to play. I don't know how all clubs do it but there will be a list of players, their injuries, likely return date, those under concussion protocols and those that need medical clearance to play. To say it's down to an admin error or miscommunication is just nonsense. And even if that was the case it demonstrates a clear lack of governance at the club and quite rightly the RFL has taken action.

 

Honestly it could be an admin error given how these things are done although at a semi pro club I would think it is less likely but at the end of the day it all comes down to the head coach like you say, and Aston knew the player was not cleared to play and made the decision to play him anyway.

[Impartial Observer]

3 minutes ago, The Blues Ox said:

Honestly it could be an admin error given how these things are done although at a semi pro club 

No it couldn't 

[The Blues Ox]

21 minutes ago, Impartial Observer said:

No it couldn't 

If you have experience of dealing with things like this you could understand that its possible but like I say, even if there is an error it is still the head coaches responsibility as to who plays in a game and if Aston was unsure then he could have checked. In this case we know that Aston knew Marsh was not cleared to play and decided to play him anyway.

[Impartial Observer]

2 hours ago, The Blues Ox said:

If you have experience of dealing with things like this you could understand that its possible but like I say, even if there is an error it is still the head coaches responsibility as to who plays in a game and if Aston was unsure then he could have checked. In this case we know that Aston knew Marsh was not cleared to play and decided to play him anyway.

I do have an understanding of dealing with things like this, if someone tells me something and I disread that information that is not an admin error. I cannot understand why perople are trying to justify or excuse what happened here. 

Edited November 13, 2024 by Impartial Observer

[JohnM]

Perhaps it's because a guys livelyhood is at stake. 

Perhaps it's an inbuilt dislike of authority.

Perhaps it's because he's being made an example of.

Perhaps it's because some people think it would have been different had it been Wigan or Saints 

In all cases, they'd have been wrong, though, reading the transcript of the hearing, which not everyone has done yet.

[The Blues Ox]

11 hours ago, Impartial Observer said:

I do have an understanding of dealing with things like this, if someone tells me something and I disread that information that is not an admin error. I cannot understand why perople are trying to justify or excuse what happened here. 

Im not sure where you get that I am defending Mark Aston. If you read the thread you will see that certainly is not the case.

[RP London]

19 hours ago, OriginalMrC said:

Do some people honestly believe this was a simple mistake? It's the head coaches job to know which players are cleared to play. I don't know how all clubs do it but there will be a list of players, their injuries, likely return date, those under concussion protocols and those that need medical clearance to play. To say it's down to an admin error or miscommunication is just nonsense. And even if that was the case it demonstrates a clear lack of governance at the club and quite rightly the RFL has taken action.

 

What worries me looking at things like facebook is there does seem to be a select few who dont think he has done anything wrong at all.. they are adamant Marsh was fit and able to play even though the evidence points to the fact he wasnt cleared (obviously their medical qualifications trump the Drs!). Even the League Express article had a letter that says basically that no one said he wasnt fit to play and that that was indisputable, even though the same letter earlier said he had not passed all the protocols and hadnt been passed as fit to play... its mind blowing really!

[Impartial Observer]

2 hours ago, The Blues Ox said:

Im not sure where you get that I am defending Mark Aston. If you read the thread you will see that certainly is not the case.

Where have I said you were defending him?

[Griff]

1 hour ago, Impartial Observer said:

Where have I said you were defending him?

The implication is clear - whether or not intended.

[Wakefield Ram]

Whilst Aston is rightly held to account for one case, exactly who's going to be held to account for not limiting contact training and the thousands of unnecessary sub-concussions suffered in training that's going to lead to hundreds maybe thousands of players with brain damage?

If the RFL are making out that this case somehow demonstrates they are taking concussions seriously, then they are ignoring the herd of elephants in the room. 

Who's going to be held to account for Llachlan Coote retiring at 31 with bleeding on the brain? Or Josh Jones? Or....

[The Blues Ox]

1 hour ago, Wakefield Ram said:

Whilst Aston is rightly held to account for one case, exactly who's going to be held to account for not limiting contact training and the thousands of unnecessary sub-concussions suffered in training that's going to lead to hundreds maybe thousands of players with brain damage?

 

Coaches, which is why this is such a worrying case.  

[gingerjon]

Has the appeal gone in?

[JohnM]

4 hours ago, Wakefield Ram said:

Whilst Aston is rightly held to account for one case, exactly who's going to be held to account for not limiting contact training and the thousands of unnecessary sub-concussions suffered in training that's going to lead to hundreds maybe thousands of players with brain damage?

If the RFL are making out that this case somehow demonstrates they are taking concussions seriously, then they are ignoring the herd of elephants in the room. 

Who's going to be held to account for Llachlan Coote retiring at 31 with bleeding on the brain? Or Josh Jones? Or....

I don't think there is a simple or easy answer to this: Who's going to be held to account for Llachlan Coote retiring at 31 with bleeding on the brain? Or Josh Jones? Or....

It depends upon the state of medical knowlege of the possible consequences of playing our game, especially in relation to head and neck contacts, forces, impacts , injuries.  Of course, if we'd known  then what we know now, then the rules, laws, etc, medical screening etc might have been changed earller. Of course, if the authorites, insurers, clubs, coaches, physios, docs or players had known, and had been too slow to act, or had ignored the evidence, then yes, it needs addressing.

Coming right up to date, if a coach or anyone else failed to follow the procedures put in place to address the issues, then they have to accept responsibilty and suffer the consequences.

Edited November 15, 2024 by JohnM

[Angelic Cynic]

Social media reporting RFL now allowing appeal via Sports Resolution.

Coaches have signed a letter created by John Kear.

Defending the indefensible and need helping from themselves.

Could be some truth to come out...

[Griff]

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2024/nov/15/mark-aston-row-grows-as-rugby-league-coaches-call-for-independent-appeal?fbclid=IwY2xjawGkJUtleHRuA2FlbQIxMQABHf71T3sO12PlmCyp0f2roPw0NwmKzP-7UWZkryJaPhcdPHY9rtGYCZ9gPg_aem_4qGfTPC5XJ8nRTc12Ob31A

[JohnM]

That remindes me. I mean to post this (stolen) reminder of how social ( and other) media work.

 

Edited November 15, 2024 by JohnM

[Archie Gordon]

1 hour ago, Griff said:

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2024/nov/15/mark-aston-row-grows-as-rugby-league-coaches-call-for-independent-appeal?fbclid=IwY2xjawGkJUtleHRuA2FlbQIxMQABHf71T3sO12PlmCyp0f2roPw0NwmKzP-7UWZkryJaPhcdPHY9rtGYCZ9gPg_aem_4qGfTPC5XJ8nRTc12Ob31A

Blimey.

Idiocracy was supposed to be set hundreds of years in the future. 

[Impartial Observer]

The letter says it has the backing of 15 plus coaches but John Kear is the only one whose name is on it, do the others not want to be named in public?

Someone should have proof read it also.

 

[M j M]

I presume not 15 head coaches.

I keep going over this thinking i've missed something but all I can conclude is that there are just quite a few dumb people involved in Rugby League.