Concussion a ticking time bomb for ex-players as NRL and AFL try to protect current generation from themselves

The NRL and AFL seem to be in constant competition about plenty of topics; diversity and inclusion, crowd sizes, international marketability of the game.

But at the moment the AFL has something that the NRL does not and that’s a lawsuit specifically related to concussion.

Griffins Lawyers is representing Darren Jarman, Jay Schulz and the family of the late Shane Tuck. The allegation is that the AFL and four clubs, the Richmond Tigers, Port Adelaide Power, Hawthorn Hawks and Adelaide Crows failed to put in place proper concussion managements.

Earlier this week court documents revealed that Jarman and Schulz have either been diagnosed with or are showing signs of long-term brain injury as a result of their footy careers.

CLICK HERE for a seven-day free trial for your favourite sport on KAYO

There is also ongoing speculation that wives and partners of former players impacted by concussion and head trauma may also begin court action shortly following the start of the other lawsuit. This lawsuit is not the first of its kind.

In the United States in 2013, the NFL reached a $765 million agreement with former players. These former players sued over head injuries they sustained whilst playing in the NFL.

A key differentiator in relation to this lawsuit is that it was alleged that the NFL wilfully misled its players about the long-term impact of head injuries. So it was not just about the impact of the head injuries or what the NFL failed to do, but also the intentional behaviour of the NFL.

There were several pieces of information the players used to mount this argument that they were misled, including that members of an NFL established committee called the Mild Traumatic Brain Injury Committee had rejected key information which linked brain trauma to chronic traumatic encephalopathy (CTE).

Kalyn Ponga leaves the field. (Photo by Cameron Spencer/Getty Images)

After seeing the news in relation to the AFL lawsuit, many are speculating that it is only a matter of time before the NRL faces a similar challenge.

Concussion is a very real issue that the NRL needs to continue to confront and it is not helped by media commentators speculating about whether headgear can do anything to reduce the impact of concussion or when coaches challenge the need for an independent doctor.

The NRL needs to consider this issue not just for the benefit of current players, but also for the next generation of parents and children who may begin to consider the impact of playing contact sports.

Whilst there are protocols in place to manage concussion, including limiting the level of contact for younger players, some parents may deem it safer to avoid the risk altogether and encourage their children to participate in a non-contact sport.

I applaud the NRL for the steps taken in recent years in this space. The latest change was only announced two weeks ago whereby players who have been diagnosed with a concussion being automatically stood down from contact training or playing for an 11-day period.

This change has already come into effect, with Jack Murchie not playing for the Parramatta Eels on Thursday night after suffering a concussion in the loss to the Manly Sea Eagles.

Perhaps this is in direct response to what is alleged in the AFL lawsuit, whereby the players are claiming that the AFL did not take steps to ensure appropriately qualified people examined players for concussion and where any concussion symptoms were found, a failure to ensure those players did not resume normal play until appropriately cleared.

By taking steps like this, the NRL appears to be mitigating the risk of ensuring proper assessment and a appropriate stand down period.

Jackson Macrae of the Bulldogs remonstrates with Kysaiah Pickett of the Demons. (Photo by Quinn Rooney/Getty Images)

Given the emphasis in recent lawsuits about the steps (or lack thereof) by leagues to address concussion, these changes are crucial for the NRL.

However, the steps introduced in recent years likely only impact our current crop of players. Where the real risk lies and will continue to lie is with former players. It’s extremely difficult to see how this risk can be mitigated.

Separately, to date, the conversation has also been very male-centric. This is not surprising given that for the majority of the history of the AFL and the NRL, it was only males playing at the elite level. This of course has changed with the introduction of the NRLW and AFLW.

Whilst similar concussion protocols exist in the women’s game, there has been limited research into the differences between the male and female body and how this may impact concussion.

For example, whether women change their tackle technique because of their breasts is something that may need to be considered. Other areas which require more research are the impact that the menstrual cycle has on elite athletes and potentially whether there is any link to concussion.

This is an area which will also require further research to ensure our female players are appropriately supported as they continue to move toward full-time professional status.

No doubt the NRL is watching closely what is taking place in the AFL right now. Whilst we can take steps to protect the current players, is the risk in relation to former players a ticking time bomb waiting to explode?