Notifications
Clear all

RFL's Duty of Care?

(@sandgroper)
Noble Member

The choice of venues for big games must be an ongoing problem for the RFL/SL but surely using a pitch that has a ditch at its ends must be seen as a dangerous gamble?

If a player catches an opponent 'high' he can, quite realistically, be dismissed from the field. But he could break his neck if he over-ran the dead ball line and that would just be unfortunate!

All clubs and the game's rulers have a duty of care for our players, who will make them exercise it?

 

 

Quote
Topic starter Posted : 16/10/2023 8:02 am
Hans Moleman
(@hans-moleman)
Estimable Member

I think the same as you. Every year serious injury is risked by playing the GF at OT. It's not suitable for rugby league with those drop offs at each end of the pitch. I don't understand why they persist with it or how it passes a risk assessment. Madness 

This post was modified 4 months ago by Hans Moleman
ReplyQuote
Posted : 16/10/2023 9:52 am
sandgroper reacted
(@sandgroper)
Noble Member

I just wonder if RL/SL could stand the damages from a serious claim tbh!! Or what would happen if a club refused to risk its players because their player insurance might have to carry the cost!?

This post was modified 4 months ago by sandgroper
ReplyQuote
Topic starter Posted : 16/10/2023 10:23 am
(@widnes77)
Estimable Member

@sandgroper fair points SG, and if memory serves me someone a few years ago was injured  from sliding down the incline and slamming into the pitch side.

ReplyQuote
Posted : 16/10/2023 7:49 pm
(@griffin1)
Estimable Member

Indeed, was it not in the world cup final , a player suffered quite a serious injury ,I can not remember who, but it caused him to both miss the rest of the final and some domestic rugby afterwards.

The RFL have rather shot themselves in the foot by promoting Old Trafford so heavily as the home of big match RL.

ReplyQuote
Posted : 17/10/2023 8:11 am
Robbo
(@robbo)
Estimable Member

I think St.James park is a better venue.  In the middle of the city, and makes a great weekend out.

ReplyQuote
Posted : 20/10/2023 8:17 am
(@widnes77)
Estimable Member

Glad to see the new high tackle rules are to be introduced at the start of 2025.

ReplyQuote
Posted : 09/12/2023 12:49 pm
(@spelly)
Noble Member

Posted by: @widnes77

Glad to see the new high tackle rules are to be introduced at the start of 2025.

Yours is one of the few pro comments I've seen about the impending change.  Comments like "There'll be no biff any more!" and "Might as well well play touch not tackle!" have been made, but..............

I too see it as a potential to benefit our game, because..............

Head injuries could (and have) mean(t) long term suffering for those on the receiving end of 'em, so if this change helps to reduce this, it must be a positive move.

Also with the upper body now being "freer" I envisage that there'll be more offloads in the tackle, resulting in more open, free-flowing football.

Bring it on!

Spelly.

 

ReplyQuote
Posted : 10/12/2023 6:20 pm
Widnes77 reacted
(@gpo1971)
Honorable Member

I guess it's where sport is going but, in the short-term at least, it will mean players getting sent off left, right and centre for (mostly) fairly innocuous tackles; like in RU who has also gone down this road.

When it comes to stuff like this, how come the UFC is exempt? Every other sport is attempting to protect it's participants and here is a sport where you can legally continue to punch a bloke who's unconscious on the floor. Weird.

ReplyQuote
Posted : 10/12/2023 10:31 pm
(@widnes77)
Estimable Member

I just can't see why smashing someone in the head would be acceptable. I know there's accidental contacts with arms bouncing off chests and balls, but I fully support rules to protect players welfare.

ReplyQuote
Posted : 10/12/2023 11:53 pm
(@spelly)
Noble Member

Posted by: @gpo1971

1) I guess it's where sport is going but, in the short-term at least, it will mean players getting sent off left, right and centre for (mostly) fairly innocuous tackles; like in RU who has also gone down this road.

When it comes to stuff like this, how come the UFC is exempt? 2) Every other sport is attempting to protect it's participants and here is a sport where you can legally continue to punch a bloke who's unconscious on the floor. Weird. 

1) I would imagine / hope that the refs will use discretion here. It's gonna make their job even more difficult, and I don't envy them at all!

2) Whether UFC can be called a sport is (in my opinion) open to debate.

Spelly.

 

ReplyQuote
Posted : 11/12/2023 8:34 am
(@prisoner)
Estimable Member

It won't stop the high shots one iota and it won't make the game more open with off loads, it will be a miracle if there are any off loads. Players will simply clamp the ball and the game as we know it will not exist anymore. Why didn't they revert to 5 yards in defence to lessen the impact which would also revert back to more skillful ball playing tactics.

ReplyQuote
Posted : 11/12/2023 2:04 pm
(@widnes77)
Estimable Member

@prisoner Of course it won't stop them, crusher tackles are illegal, yet we see them on a weekly basis. It will greatly reduce them.

I cant see why players will just clamp the ball and I can't see why punishing head high tackles more forcibly will completely change the game as we know it.

Seems like a very Luddite view to me.

ReplyQuote
Posted : 11/12/2023 9:26 pm
Share: