Less than two hours before Sunday’s South Sydney-Sydney Roosters epic, Trent Robinson told us on Triple M: “We want to leave some of them on the ground”.
The previous evening, when questioned about two of his players being placed on report for two challenges on Johnathan Thurston (Beau Scott twice), Newcastle coach Rick Stone said it was “part and parcel” of “competing”.
We have concussion tests and punching bans and no more shoulder charges, but rugby league is still a brutal game. We still have match plans that would make many blush.
The big question is how our cleaner rule interpretations and general squeamishness towards violence intersect with the primal intent that is still there in rugby league, not far from the surface.
It’s the friction that occurs along the invisible plane above the sideline, between an aggressive, tribal, Victorian-era sport and the 21st century that lies on the other side.
It was intriguing to read that the Sydney Roosters doctor, Ameer Ibrahim, often keeps players off the field for concussion without even giving them the standard cognisance test.
You see, the Roosters did leave someone on the ground on Sunday – Rabbitohs halfback Adam Reynolds, who staggered around after trying to bring down a fellow who was just running hard but passed that test and was allowed to return.
Paul Green, the Cowboys coach, argues that because on-field justice can no longer be meted out, we need to be stricter in the judicial process that takes place off the pitch.
The two games, the two apparent instructions to players, have uncompromising aggression in common – but that’s where the similarities mostly end. There is one link – if we’re going to force the victims of head knocks to stay off, we have to impose tougher penalties on the perpetrators as well.
But the solution to punch-drunk players returning to the field is simple – an NRL appointee examines them and stops them doing so. Sorry, but I see the argument that the player’s club doctor knows him best as a smother in circumstances when that player can’t stand up straight.
That’s a concussion to anyone.
I interviewed Reynolds at full time and you could tell he was nervous about saying anything that suggested he was still in any way disoriented when he returned.
The way to legislate for some sort of vigilante justice substitute is altogether more complicated.
You can’t legislate for tougher penalties if the victim is a good player. You can’t admit we have to compensate for violent retribution because violent retribution has always been illegal – even if it occurred anyway.
What we can do is try harder to outlaw lifting, which was a factor in the tackle on Thurston by Scott and Chris Houston. I thought we were going to have a study to show what other dangerous trends would emerge if we banned lifting completely – I’ve not heard the results of that study.
What we can also do is recognise the danger to an attacking player when he has relaxed after passing or kicking the ball. At the moment, it seems when we judge these incidents we look only at the actions of the would-be assailant.
The “part and parcel” and “leave them on the ground” asides from the weekend prove that, despite the denials, part of the aim in rugby league is still to hurt people. One day, the invisible pane around the field will come down – maybe it will be the 22nd century by then – and rugby league will be no more.
In the meantime, more and more holes will pop up in that imaginary glass. The conventions that apply on the street and in society will leak onto the playing field and there’s nothing we can do about it.
If we want the game to remain a participant sport and a community asset, we need fewer people on our TVs looking like Johnathan Thurston and Adam Reynolds did at the weekend.
How do players feel when they are forced to come off for a concussion assessment?
I was in the tunnel when Wests Tigers’ Marty Taupau was escorted off in Monday Night Football and he told anyone listening “This is horse shit, it’s embarrassing”.
But he still used concussion as an excuse to dodge being interviewed afterwards!
Andy Sharpe
Roar Guru
Since when was tackling from behind declared illegal????
Dexter The Hamster
Guest
So hitting someone in the back is not cynical??
Benedict Arnold
Guest
If the players know what questions will be asked it is pretty easy to get them right depending on the level of trauma. These are typical maddocks questions used in a SCAT test. The changing rooms usually have tv's showing the game so being able to answer these simple questions concussed or not would not be too hard. At what venue are we today? Which half is it now? Who scored last in this match? What did you play last week? Did your team win the last game? I just think it is easier to get through a simple concussion test than for a doctor to make an observation based physical movements and nature of the event that happened on the field. For example a mild concussion is still classed as a concussion albeit less severe. So the victim can complete the test and go back out on the field if he passes it. So ultimately: the guy can be concussed but because the test says he isn't he can resume playing footy - currently that is what we are going by. I think the roosters doctor makes a pretty valid argument. I have been concussed before playing footy and felt totally fine, just a headache afterwards. Doesn't mean I should go back out and continue to play just because i am functioning normally and feel okay.
The Barry
Roar Guru
How do you study for a concussion test?
Pot Stirrer
Guest
Its an easy fix. Just have an independent Doctor who's employed by the NRL, not one of the clubs.
Benedict Arnold
Guest
I think with concussion, we need to take the correct measures in order to meet any health and safety requirements an individual should be adhered to meet. I think that impartial officials are necessary after certain instances have been brought to light over the weekend. And I think that is the right way to go about it. Club doctors can often be left in a pressure situation if a player is needed. One thing that sung out about the reynolds test was the initial length of time to bring him off. Usually when a forward is sent for a test they are off quick-smart as they are replaced with another bench forward. It's a free interchange essentially. Losing a half is obviously a much more significant loss. I'm not pointing the finger entirely, it was something I happened to notice. I also noticed the 16 unanswered points laid on by the roosters while he was off. Him being off probably changed the course of the game. As for the rooster's doctor, I would not look at the fact he is on the opposing team's payroll. Doctors have a code of ethics they should work to. He is correct when he says some tests aren't needed as the symptoms from just basic visual observations can verify concussion. The NRL though requires that just the test be done. And like all tests, you can study for them. It would also be nigh on impossible to actually question a doctor anyways, it's hard enough when the AMA will back a doctor if their integrity is questioned. It's a direct reflection on them. Appoint impartial "NRL" doctors for concussion tests, that way we don't need to raise all the hypotheticals. It's a much more accountable system. We can't have a whole swag of guys ending up like Ian Roberts 20 years down track blaming rugby league for mental and brain issues. Especially if they played during a time of concussion testing. It will open a pandora's box to the testing records (if they're any) and whether or not they were actually right. Let's avoid that and do the right thing by the players.
Andy Sharpe
Roar Guru
I must be on honest and say that when I saw that lift on Thurston my heart was in my mouth and what made it worse was that it was by a Newcastle player with, as 'Spiritfree' said 'Rise for Alex' very prominently across their shoulders. If the players of any club know the dangers of a tackle lift and drive it is the Knights - I would have thought that the club would have sent out an edict to their own players NEVER to lift a player in a tackle. I know that this is a tough sport and I want it to continue to be a tough sport played by a mixture of clever and tough guys but you should never lift a player - it is an intentional move to injure a player and should be punished.
Andy Sharpe
Roar Guru
RayCee, Sorry mate but that tackle by Junior Sau on Carney was neither late nor cynical. Sau was committed to the tackle before Carney released the ball - the injury occurred because Carney had his back to Sau and did not see him coming - therefore, he could not brace himself for the tackle.
Spiritfree
Guest
Great that this whole subject is being raised. Thank you, Steve Mascord. The decision to be relentlessly, ruthlessly brutal, taken by South's coach, got them their Premiership. It was not an admirable decision. Roadkill (of players) is disgraceful. In the first weekend's matches, we have the Knughts running around with 'Rise for Alex' on their backs. They are hypocrites. Beau Scott up on a lifting tackle and has escaped suspension. How so? There is something seriously wrong with the NRL's attitude to base violence. Beau Scott and his ilk should be hung out to dry.
Mervyn
Guest
http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-league/penrith-panthers/penrith-panthers-fiveeighth-jamie-soward-undergoes-back-surgery-and-will-miss-up-to-six-weeks-20150318-1m18ra.html
Mervyn
Guest
Your newspaper seems to have buried the Titans reinstated story as an aside...
pjm
Roar Rookie
It's like whats been happening after Hughes died. They'll bowl a bouncer in cricket and then break into tears when it hits someone. Same thing here, they'll lift a leg even though they know the consequences and then act concern when it goes wrong.
Jason Hosken
Roar Guru
I seem to remember Steve making a comment the other year on ABC radio along the lines of - be thankful we live in this century, league probably won't be around for the next. All this concussion guff is part of the sterilisation process. Right or wrong it won't go away, but it does go against the grain in heat of the moment contact when instinct is in control.
RayCee Smith
Guest
What happened to Thurston was a disgrace. A disgrace to the game and to the Newcastle side (especially the coach). Hitting guys late is so dangerous. Todd Carney in the UK SL is off with broken ribs after a cynical late tackle. There wasn't even a penalty.
George W
Guest
Protect the smaller skillful guys. The look at JWH's face when he going into a collision is pretty disgusting (i.e. murderous), although if I was a Roosters supporter, I'd love it. It's OK for him, at 110kgs or so, to bash others but I'd have more respect if the guys he was attacking were of the same size and weight, and assuming that they are looking at him and that they didn't pass the ball some time ago. Bullying isn't a good look, so maybe some consideration should be given to being more lenient on collisions that are between players of similar weights, as long as said tackles aren't late or high etc. I love watching the quick little guys, wouldn't it be sad if there were no Sandows, Tomkins, Johnsons, Cornishs etc.
Midfielder
Guest
Steve Insightful and astute article... I have no idea on the solutions but what you argue is critical ... For me and having played foe a number of years I can see how difficult what i say next is ... but I will offer the slide tackle in Football as a possible example... the slide tackle was a very common tackle in Football and if a studs up tackle was made it often resulted in career ending injuries... so they introduced a rule on the slide tackle ... all slide tackles were wrong... and in essence were graded ... if a total accident and the ball was hit by the defender first then simply a free... if accidental with no malice and the attacker was hit a yellow card... if deemed careless or on purpose a red card with 3 to 5 weeks suspension... Why not ban and as I said very hard to say how... but what about all head contact banned ...
pjm
Roar Rookie
Until they charge players for leading with the head then what's the point. Legal head highs written off as accidental head knocks when they're anything but.
Con Cushion
Guest
Or perhaps he claimed concussion to avoid having to have a discussion with probing media people not accepting always second guessing players coaches and now medical staff
djcooper
Roar Guru
There are penalties awarded when a player is tackled on suspicion but no remifications for hitting a player well and truly after he has passed the ball which is completely absurd. Slater did his AC in last years origin through (common denominator) Scott hitting him late and nothing was done or said then and he will continue to do it because he can get away with it. The NRL have seriously dropped the ball on this one because whilst I'm all for pressuring the playmakers within the rules, you simply can't just hit someone late which is what occurred.
The Barry
Roar Guru
Do the results of the concussion test get released to the NRL and reviewed by an independent medical? My understanding is that the test is made up of questions that the player has already submitted answers to. His responses are checked against the answers and there are thresholds for whether the player should go back on the field or not. I don't know why an independent doctor couldn't administer these tests and take the grey out of this area. But even if that doesn't work for whatever reason, the tests should be able to be easily verified and checked by an NRL medic. Does anyone know if the players pre-answers or test results are provided to the NRL? The souths trainer did the right thing and brought Reynolds from the field. Is there anything (other than the roosters doctor who didn't observe the tests) to suggest the souths doctor did anything wrong?