Concussion Legacy Foundation Australian launch ups the ante for football codes

By Geoff Parkes / Expert

Concerns around head injury in contact sports are becoming increasingly visible. The Australian launch of the Concussion Legacy Foundation (CLF) at events held in Melbourne on Monday, and Sydney today, takes things to another level.

Founded in the USA in 2007 by Robert Cantu MD, and Chris Nowinski PHD, the foundation now has chapters in the UK, Canada and Australia. Its stated goal is to support athletes, veterans and others affected by concussions and Chronic Traumatic Encephalopathy (CTE), to promote smarter sports and safer athletes through education and innovation, and end CTE through prevention and research.

The launch featured some of Australia’s leading figures in concussion research, including Australian Sports Brain Bank founder, Associate Professor Michael Buckland and Associate Professor Alan Pearce; GM Head Trauma Shine Lawyers, Jamie Shine; plus athletes Joey Didulica (Football), Joe Williams (NRL), Steve Alessio and Lance Picioane (AFL).

Other presenters included Annitta Siliato, sister of Australian rules player Paul Wheatley, and Anita, Chelsea and Danielle Frawley, widow and children of AFL great Danny Frawley, found post-mortem to have been suffering from CTE.

Increasingly, stories of players suffering conditions like early onset dementia and Alzheimers, loss of neurological and motor function, personality disorders and other neurodegenerative diseases, are making their way into the Australian sporting landscape.

Always distressing, these personal accounts and the increasing frequency at which football players from all codes are reporting serious health issues – some of them at worryingly young ages – are helping shift the dial with respect to public understanding.

They are also a wake-up call for all sports and every sports participant.

Ex-Gridiron player and professional wrestler, turned global authority on concussion in sport, Nowinski cuts an imposing, warm presence, whilst demonstrating an ability to cut to the chase; “I’m concerned about what is being said to the Australian public about the long-term effects of head knocks, especially CTE. We’ve proven CTE is here in the Australian codes, we know it’s caused by repetitive head impacts, and now it’s time to act to save the lives of people we care about, from our sports heroes to our kids,” he said.

By raising awareness – and it is evident that more people are jumping on the bandwagon – the Foundation aims to attract more money to fund important research, and broaden education amongst participants in professional and amateur sports.

In a breakthrough of sorts, recently retired Canterbury Bulldogs NRL player James Graham, has been appointed to the board of CLF Australia. Previously a proponent of league players accepting whatever came their way as a cost of signing up to play the game, Graham, in retirement, having suffered in excess of 100 concussions in his career, has since adopted a stance that more can be done to make players safe.

(Photo by Mark Kolbe/Getty Images)

It will be interesting to see what impact, if any, Graham’s role with the CLF has in changing Australian rugby league’s hitherto impenetrable culture, when it comes to understanding and acting on head injuries.

This will be tested again this week, with the Sydney Roosters and South Sydney set to square off in the first round of finals, with the Roosters’ Victor Radley and Souths Cameron Murray both potential starters despite recent concussion events.

Last weekend, Murray suffered his second concussion within seven weeks, exhibiting Cat#1 symptoms on the field, yet within 24 hours Souths coach Jason Demetriou was telling reporters; “He’s woken up with zero symptoms so we’re not concerned, he’s not concerned.”

For the Roosters, anyone who saw Radley – a player who has suffered multiple head injuries in his career – concussed and convulsing on the AAMI turf less than two weeks ago, could be excused for wondering how he could even come under consideration for selection again this year.

As Radley’s own father Nigel explained the day after the incident; “A rest will do him good. It was a pretty severe one. I spoke to him this morning and he said he came around while he was on the medi-cab.”

With the two sides yet to be announced, Radley has resumed contact training and, barring any late mishaps, looks set to play.

More telling were other comments made by Radley Snr, about his son; “It didn’t look good but he’s not going to stop playing the way he plays. If you play rugby league, you’ve got to accept it’s always a risk. Head knocks are part of the game.”

They are, and that’s part of the problem the CLF is trying to fix.

Victor Radley (Photo by Matt King/Getty Images)

In his presentation, Buckland was at pains to talk about how concussion and CTE are related, but one does not necessarily follow from the other.

One-off, high impact head trauma is always a major concern. There is a strong visual component for the viewer and, invariably, a brain injury for the recipient. But as Buckland explained, CTE occurs, not where there is exposure to concussion, but where there is exposure to long-term, repetitive head injury.

Nowinski also noted how language is shifting and becoming more precise, and how, “when it comes to the disease of CTE, repetitive head impacts are a better indicator than concussions.”

Because the determination of concussion is imprecise and can be easily clouded, and because not every hit to the head results in concussion, with respect to CTE, it is the accumulation of hits – small, medium and large – that are a more precise indicator, and that matter.

So, what does this mean for Australia’s football codes?

Forget well-publicised “crackdowns” that are at best haphazardly applied or are never sustained. Sports who approach the matter seriously should be engaging in rigorous debate on matters such as minimum age of participation in contact play, amount of contact in training, and modifications to the way games are played, to improve techniques, and to minimise the instances of contact.

Forget also about attempts to obfuscate or deny the science. As ex-NRL player Williams stated; “I’m not interested in debating whether this is a thing or not. Come and live a day in our shoes.”

There was also a powerful and emotional element to the stories told by suffering players and the Frawley and Wheatley families, that sports administrators ignore at their peril.

Anita Frawley is appreciative of the respect shown by the AFL, and for their support for the Danny Frawley Centre, which focuses on early intervention and help for footballers suffering mental health problems. But she remains frustrated that little is being done to minimize incidences of head injuries occurring in the first place.

Speaking of the need for “white noise”, Frawley demonstrated the determination of all connected with the CLF to force the hand of sports administrations to properly address concerns.

One cohort that has the potential to drive change is the respective player’s associations.

Ex-Essendon ruckman Alessio recounted his time on the AFL Players Association and detailed some of the improved support services to players with respect to education and awareness around depression, and mental and physical health.

But when it comes to the prevention of head injuries, nowhere, in any of Australia’s four main football codes, are players advocating with any strength or passion for change.

In what other workplace would employees accept routine incidences of brain injury and rates of neurodegenerative disease and CTE well above the norm? What worker’s union would elect not to take this fight up to management?

The answer is three-fold; amateur and community sports having no leverage, the culture of contact football sports still being dominated by the need for players to be seen to be uncomplaining and tough, and the fact that the players associations are financially joined at the hip with their parent administrations, not willing to bite the hand that feeds.

Head injuries are a concern in several sporting codes. (Photo by Cameron Spencer/Getty Images)

One day in the future, as increasingly definitive research is undertaken and publicised, as increasing numbers of afflicted players come forward to tell their stories, and administrators are finally brought to the table courtesy of concerned parents feeding into declining junior participation rates, the balance will tip in favour of player safety.

Look for the CLF to play an important role in accelerating that process, beginning with a new ‘Stop hitting kids in the head’ campaign, designed to eliminate repetitive head impacts in youth sports by asking sports to ban contact before age 14.

Given the mounting medical evidence, it’s an approach that makes perfect sense. Sports which have been reluctant or tardy to address player safety at the elite level, might find it more difficult to rebuff measures aimed at enhancing the safety of children.

Of course, a matter so fundamental and serious shouldn’t be the subject of conflict and dispute. Sports should not feel like they are under attack.

But to varying degrees, through their own inaction, Australia’s contact football sports have created a battleground of sorts. It’s a war they must know they cannot win.

Sports opinion delivered daily 

   

CLICK HERE for a seven-day free trial to watch the NRL on KAYO

The Crowd Says:

2022-09-14T17:43:23+00:00

adam smith

Roar Rookie


Hi Geoff, I have come across an article I thought you may like to read. It’s about the NFL & a 50% reduction of concussions during preseason training, to those who choose to wear the “guardian cap”…link is only for apple.news unfortunately. I did try to google the article on the “Bleacher Report” website but couldn’t find it…hopefully you have an iPhone…it’s very “interesting” reading. Might see you at the game tonight?! https://apple.news/AwmDfuf7sQAWO-8auUhX-lg

2022-09-09T02:48:05+00:00

Dusty10

Roar Rookie


Hi Cugel, it's a tough one. There are really only 3 outcomes, I think: 1) we have very tight rules re: informed consent and have players sign away their rights if they want to play; 2) we outlaw heavy contact sports, or; 3) we start measuring the effects of collisions on cognitive function (somehow, I don't presume to have all the answers), and make a good fist of managing player exposure to trauma through INFORMED policy (as opposed to the subjective, made-up stuff we currently apply). If we take route number 3, there's still no guarantee collision sports like rugby can survive (potential for legal culpability etc.), but then again combat sports have, haven't they?

2022-09-09T02:37:16+00:00

Dusty10

Roar Rookie


Well, thank you for 'pushing the barrow' and increasing awareness. There's always inertia when it comes to health-related issues, particularly those that require cultural change, but it's very surely coming. Thanks again.

2022-09-09T02:33:52+00:00

Dusty10

Roar Rookie


It absolutely can be said, BF, it's just whether that damage is measurable. Clearly there are many players (possibly even the majority) who show no signs of cognitive decline at all after their careers, but I can almost guarantee that if they played at the top level in Union or League there will be damage. Tiny lesions, or bruises to the brain, with associated 'dead cells' in the cortex. There are so many factors at play though; genetics, position played, age and 'normal' (unrelated) dementia, lifestyle factors including alcohol consumption, diet, and even activity levels post career are all related to cognitive function. The literature tells us that physically active people are less likely to experience cognitive decline and dementia, so this is clearly a protective factor amongst athletes and ex-athletes (who are more likely than the general population to maintain fitness). It's a complex area but yes, with every serious collision, there is potential for damage. Again, it's just a matter of whether it's measurable with our very clumsy cognitive tests. But remember, the effect is cumulative...

AUTHOR

2022-09-09T00:56:17+00:00

Geoff Parkes

Expert


I believe that kind of technology is coming, Dusty, as well as improved technology to diagnose concussion and the effects of head injury, pitch side. But how soon is anyone's guess. I do think you're right though - at some point we will get to having this kind of data measured more quantitatively, which will in turn inform more specific management of players.

AUTHOR

2022-09-09T00:50:59+00:00

Geoff Parkes

Expert


Harry Jones explained it really well on here once, likening it to the different degrees of murder. At the end of the day, if a murder is committed there's a price every perpetrator needs to pay, and also a deterrent element to try to stop others from doing the same. But within that, there is still a difference between a calculated mass-murderer or serial killer, and someone who say carelessly discharges a gun without intent. But yes, I agree that can also be dealt with better, by better defining what constitutes foul play. At the moment, in rugby, the red card covers too broad a range of actions/events.

2022-09-08T16:12:44+00:00

Ad-O

Guest


Easier said than done. Contact sports are dangerous. People need to accept that.

2022-09-08T16:07:47+00:00

Ad-O

Guest


Completely agree. I'm all for increased safety around head injuries but not at the expense changing the sport or banning kids from playing. Contact sports are dangerous. People just need to accept that.

2022-09-08T15:51:35+00:00

bottom feeder

Guest


I dont think thst it can be said that almost every tackle results in brain damage .If so the incidence of CTE would be much higher than it is .

2022-09-08T12:19:18+00:00

Midfielder

Roar Guru


GP """But only up to a point""" Thats why describing what a foul or illegal play is becomes critical....and I say this a former player .... people accuse or argue about how does a person tackle a person that drops their shoulder thereby there head as they go into a tackle... no reason what so ever you can't call the person running has committed a foul and put themselves in a dangerous... meaning players running with the ball cannot charge head first into a line to break it...

2022-09-08T11:40:17+00:00

Dusty10

Roar Rookie


Something for the CLF to think about Geoff, that I've been pondering for a while... We don't have a great deal of data related to CTE, and certainly nothing particularly useful in a real-world sense for sporting codes to apply. Sports science has really lagged behind on this issue. CTE is obviously only confirmed after the individual passes away and the brain can be studied, but there is perhaps something even more useful to focus on: the collection of real world data from both player activity trackers (which are now sewn into the jerseys of all top players) and regularly administered cognitive function tests throughout, and post-, the player's career. Activity trackers just need one new feature; an impact meter, probably utilising something like a sensitive gyro or the technology already employed in movement sensors in mobile phones. If every player wore an impact meter in their trackers, the volume of data would be enormous, and incredibly useful. The aim would be to track the number and severity of collisions, and investigate the relationship between these collisions and cognitive function. This has the potential to inform policy re: the amount of time players spend in the game, when they should consider retirement (e.g., after 'x' number of collisions of 'x' magnitude), when a player should be rested (e.g., after a single collision of 'x' magnitude), and possibly even which players should play in certain positions based on weight, body type, and frequency/severity of collisions in those positions. The potential benefits of this kind of study are enormous. As you say, one real possibility is that contact sport may come to an end. I think Peter V'landys and Hamish McLennan should be desperately pursuing data to inform policy and future-proof their respective sports. Sports I personally happen to love.

2022-09-08T11:35:47+00:00

Cugel

Roar Rookie


"nobody is advocating for this" Except everyone in this thread. 1> Concussion/head knocks/trauma = unacceptable. 2>Playing a contact sport = concussion/head knocks/trauma Can't have it both ways.

2022-09-08T11:32:04+00:00

Cugel

Roar Rookie


Using this logic, when a defender puts his head in the wrong spot, it’s the ball carrier at fault because “the outcome that is most important”

2022-09-08T09:12:46+00:00

Warwick Todd

Guest


The CCP and PLA will probably make everyone play ping pong and badminton by then.

2022-09-08T09:09:12+00:00

adastra32

Roar Rookie


Whatever the outcome, I suspect this is a legal tidal wave that won't stop. Awareness has resulted and adaptations are being made in England as a result in RU - but will they be enough? RL everywhere is still fiddling while Rome burns.

AUTHOR

2022-09-08T07:00:36+00:00

Geoff Parkes

Expert


No offence noted or taken Dusty and apologies if I've overlooked your posts in the past. Elimination of contact sports is undoubtedly a real, potential outcome, depending of course on how the science evolves and how society reacts to that. It's important to note that almost nobody is advocating for this, or wants this to happen. But that's not to say it won't.

AUTHOR

2022-09-08T06:56:53+00:00

Geoff Parkes

Expert


Hers is a horrible case, Thistle, and very raw. As you suggest, everything I’ve read so far indicates that the SRU has handled this poorly. I can’t comment on the specifics, but there should be no excuse for sports administrators not to have this issue well understood by now, and to be acting equally to care appropriately for injured players, and to be working on harm minimisation.

AUTHOR

2022-09-08T06:53:50+00:00

Geoff Parkes

Expert


Thanks for the post Midfielder. I think intent is important to the point where sanctions and judicial suspensions should reflect the degree of intent. A deliberate attack on someone's head is different to an accidental head clash for example. But only up to a point. At the end of the day it is the outcome that is most important - as you say - if something went wrong, it went wrong, and there has to be measure in place that reduce the likelihood of that recurring - accident or not.

AUTHOR

2022-09-08T06:48:58+00:00

Geoff Parkes

Expert


That's exactly the proposal Doctor. The AFL pulls in over $100m per annum from deals with gambling companies. Some of those companies contribute part of their revenue to a fund for the welfare of horses. Why can't the AFL insist, as part of their deal, that some of the revenue goes to a fund for the welfare of players? Not denying that we shouldn't treat horses as well, but there's something horribly out of whack that we can't do the same for injured players.

2022-09-08T05:37:33+00:00

Doctor Rotcod

Roar Rookie


The Peter Jess group... I'll check it out. Maybe the gambling revenues would pay for it?

More Comments on The Roar

Read more at The Roar