Adam_P wrote:Couple of thing come to mind from Ribbans' red. Now there is no disputing that the tackle was a red under the current framework - however, as the officials rightly pointed out there was contact was a high degree of force directly to the head. Surely then, the result of that should be a HIA for Cowan-Dickie to ensure player welfare - after all that is the whole point of the framework. No HIA took place.
Following on from that - a bit later Sleightholme is cleared out from a ruck by Slade. Its not clear from the broadcast camera angle exactly how it goes, but Sleightholme isn't happy with it and goes for Slade afterwards. Sleightholme is then taken for a HIA and fails, but there is no review of the clear out. Surely that has to be looked at?
Longheld pet peeve of mine - any and all significant contacts with the head should result in an HIA. The whole point of them is that you can't tell if someone is concussed from a quick pitchside examination and yet we're still only employing them if somebody "doesn't seem right".
Would it be disruptive to have 10 players go off for HIAs every match? Yes, of course. Is it better than the inevitable cavalcade of lawsuits that will bankrupt the game, as well as the pesky minor moral issues? Yes, of course.
Puja
I thought all HIAs were supposed to be reviewed by the TMO? Now how good the TMO is well that's open to speculation because we've seen some shocking performances this season.
I was surprised LCD don't go for a head check. I think the medics have him the once over on the pitch but I'd like to see a bit more than that especially when someone the size of Ribbans has just hit you in the head with his shoulder.
Would Saints be able to get the England matches counted as part of his sanction given he was reasonably likely to play? Might not make much difference when they'll surely have some pre-season friendlies to utilise, but just wondering
Digby wrote:Would Saints be able to get the England matches counted as part of his sanction given he was reasonably likely to play? Might not make much difference when they'll surely have some pre-season friendlies to utilise, but just wondering
Can't see that ever being allowed. It's an incentive for players to go head hunting just before international windows and then claim that they would have played so that's where their ban should count.
Digby wrote:Would Saints be able to get the England matches counted as part of his sanction given he was reasonably likely to play? Might not make much difference when they'll surely have some pre-season friendlies to utilise, but just wondering
Can't see that ever being allowed. It's an incentive for players to go head hunting just before international windows and then claim that they would have played so that's where their ban should count.
And if you'd need testimony being submitted by the selecting coach in question to be able to make the claim? I mean okay a coach could write up everyone, but then at some point they stop being a credible witness
Digby wrote:Would Saints be able to get the England matches counted as part of his sanction given he was reasonably likely to play? Might not make much difference when they'll surely have some pre-season friendlies to utilise, but just wondering
I'd imagine so. Otherwise he's getting punished twice by missing England and then missing his club games.
He will miss this week's game against Bath and 2 pre season games so will be back for Saints at the start of next season. But undoubtedly also missing England fixtures.
