Very fair point. I hadn't thought of that. I was focusing on punioshing the milkers, but I didn't think of the deliberate act of targeting someone to injure them.
I guess the only other incentive would be if an injury is caused by something that is avoidable (so not an accidental head knock, for example) the offending player should be removed as well, but via an interchange rather than via a free interchange. I guess that also creates an issue of teams acting hurt to have players removed....
The milking issue in sport, particularly for injury, always comes down to which side do you want to get the benefit of the doubt.
Here it's the hurt player vs the guy "guilty" of technical foul play.
The control over their situation still seems miles better with the foul play than the hurt player.
My honest opinion is your deliberately rewarding foul play. Don't dress this up as protecting players as they already get an injury assessed on field.
You're rewarding injuring players. People tend to behave how they are rewarded. Just look at all of the malicious techniques in the modern game.
I'd assumed there atleast wasn't an interchange used.
Now you've further incentivised causing injury. Plus you add to fatigue which then adds to injury.
You've basically put a giant target on every play maker in their own half. Keep them down for 5 seconds and they're off.
And you're openly discouraging them to seek treatment.
Yes there's the Keary injury, a red herring. He asked to go back on, eventually staff over ruled him. This rule would have done nothing to avoid that situation as a HIA presumably doesn't do much on the ribs.
I just look forward to the day in 4-5 years time when that rule is in place and then he starts railing against the rule and how it is the "worst thing in modern rugby league".
Honest opinion, if you cop a high shot, or are injured enough that you need time to recover, you shouldn't be on the field.
I look back at Keary a few weeks back with the rib injury. He was allowed to stay on the field, pretty sure he was in the hospital later that night.
Worst case, you take a guy off who doesn't need it, and use an interchange to get him back on. To me thats worthwhile to get rid of milking, and the added precaution of taking injured players off.
Brendon
Roar Rookie
Very fair point. I hadn't thought of that. I was focusing on punioshing the milkers, but I didn't think of the deliberate act of targeting someone to injure them. I guess the only other incentive would be if an injury is caused by something that is avoidable (so not an accidental head knock, for example) the offending player should be removed as well, but via an interchange rather than via a free interchange. I guess that also creates an issue of teams acting hurt to have players removed....
Nick
Roar Guru
We'd certainly have seen the ending of Kalyn Ponga's career this year, that's for sure.
mushi
Roar Guru
Would JT have seen the age of 30 if opponents knew he had to come off if you could put him down for 5 seconds.
mushi
Roar Guru
The milking issue in sport, particularly for injury, always comes down to which side do you want to get the benefit of the doubt. Here it's the hurt player vs the guy "guilty" of technical foul play. The control over their situation still seems miles better with the foul play than the hurt player.
mushi
Roar Guru
My honest opinion is your deliberately rewarding foul play. Don't dress this up as protecting players as they already get an injury assessed on field. You're rewarding injuring players. People tend to behave how they are rewarded. Just look at all of the malicious techniques in the modern game. I'd assumed there atleast wasn't an interchange used. Now you've further incentivised causing injury. Plus you add to fatigue which then adds to injury. You've basically put a giant target on every play maker in their own half. Keep them down for 5 seconds and they're off. And you're openly discouraging them to seek treatment. Yes there's the Keary injury, a red herring. He asked to go back on, eventually staff over ruled him. This rule would have done nothing to avoid that situation as a HIA presumably doesn't do much on the ribs.
Nick
Roar Guru
I just look forward to the day in 4-5 years time when that rule is in place and then he starts railing against the rule and how it is the "worst thing in modern rugby league".
Brendon
Roar Rookie
Honest opinion, if you cop a high shot, or are injured enough that you need time to recover, you shouldn't be on the field. I look back at Keary a few weeks back with the rib injury. He was allowed to stay on the field, pretty sure he was in the hospital later that night. Worst case, you take a guy off who doesn't need it, and use an interchange to get him back on. To me thats worthwhile to get rid of milking, and the added precaution of taking injured players off.
mushi
Roar Guru
Yep stop milking... but hen you penalising teams that were fouled. What do you think happens after that
mushi
Roar Guru
Dr Gal - The head bone's connected to the neck bone...
Brendon
Roar Rookie
100%, would stop milking for sure. If you get penalty, HIA.