Concussion Subs

[Greenbeard]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/53432796

Allowing the opposition also to make an additional sub will not prevent abuse of this. Very easy to fake a head injury. No-one, not ref, opposition doc, even neutral doc, can challenge a player who says he is a bit dizzy and force him to continue. So fire away, use all your subs, then if you need to make another one for tactical reasons you just get a message on that the player you want off is getting high balls fired at him so he can go into an aerial challenge and can cry wolf with a "head knock".

[Oscar T Grouch]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/53432796

Allowing the opposition also to make an additional sub will not prevent abuse of this. Very easy to fake a head injury. No-one, not ref, opposition doc, even neutral doc, can challenge a player who says he is a bit dizzy and force him to continue. So fire away, use all your subs, then if you need to make another one for tactical reasons you just get a message on that the player you want off is getting high balls fired at him so he can go into an aerial challenge and can cry wolf with a "head knock".

Player safety must come before everything. This initiative is well overdue. I think you're being very cynical thinking this will be abused, but in rugby I think you automatically miss the next match if you were concussed in your match, so that would stop any abuse. Also at top level there are cameras pointing at everything, you think if a team did abuse the rule the authorities wouldn't come down on them like a ton of bricks?

[Peevemor]

Player safety must come before everything. This initiative is well overdue. I think you're being very cynical thinking this will be abused, but in rugby I think you automatically miss the next match if you were concussed in your match, so that would stop any abuse. Also at top level there are cameras pointing at everything, you think if a team did abuse the rule the authorities wouldn't come down on them like a ton of bricks?Also with now 5 substitutions allowed, I'm not sur there'll be much cheating to get a 6th.

[Sergio sledge]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/53432796

Allowing the opposition also to make an additional sub will not prevent abuse of this. Very easy to fake a head injury. No-one, not ref, opposition doc, even neutral doc, can challenge a player who says he is a bit dizzy and force him to continue. So fire away, use all your subs, then if you need to make another one for tactical reasons you just get a message on that the player you want off is getting high balls fired at him so he can go into an aerial challenge and can cry wolf with a "head knock".

So you'd be happy for players with concussion to continue just in case some teams abuse the concussion sub?

Anything is better than nothing in this case. I think it'll be refined further in the next few years. I think they should do something like the cognitive tests they use in the NFL, where you are assessed regularly to get a baseline level and then when you have a suspected concussion you are assessed against this baseline to see if you actually have one, it seems like it would be less open to abuse if the concussion sub was temporary until an independent doctor assessed against the baseline. No sign of concussion and the sub is reversed.

[Greenbeard]

Player safety must come before everything. This initiative is well overdue. I think you're being very cynical thinking this will be abused, but in rugby I think you automatically miss the next match if you were concussed in your match, so that would stop any abuse. Also at top level there are cameras pointing at everything, you think if a team did abuse the rule the authorities wouldn't come down on them like a ton of bricks?
I actually agree that it is overdue and necessary. Just saying it will be open to some abuse. In rugby at international level they have a neutral match doctor but even a neutral doc will not go against someone saying they feel a bit dizzy. The player subsequently has to either sit out a mandatory period OR pass cognitive tests. Clearly if he has faked the dizziness he will (or "should" in the case of some intellectually challenged players) pass the test and be clear to play again next match.

[The dalmeny]

So you'd be happy for players with concussion to continue just in case some teams abuse the concussion sub?

Anything is better than nothing in this case. I think it'll be refined further in the next few years. I think they should do something like the cognitive tests they use in the NFL, where you are assessed regularly to get a baseline level and then when you have a suspected concussion you are assessed against this baseline to see if you actually have one, it seems like it would be less open to abuse if the concussion sub was temporary until an independent doctor assessed against the baseline. No sign of concussion and the sub is reversed.

aye let’s no worry about player health

[The dalmeny]

I actually agree that it is overdue and necessary. Just saying it will be open to some abuse. In rugby at international level they have a neutral match doctor but even a neutral doc will not go against someone saying they feel a bit dizzy. The player subsequently has to either sit out a mandatory period OR pass cognitive tests. Clearly if he has faked the dizziness he will (or "should" in the case of some intellectually challenged players) pass the test and be clear to play again next match.

he should be put back on in the game with the sub reversed.

[superfurryhibby]

The simple way to avoid any nonsense will be to ensure that any player who has been concussed has a mandatory rest period following the head knock.

Just checked that. For elite rugby the following applies.


"Following a concussion, every player must go through the graduated return to play (GRTP) process, whereby the participant undertakes a phased return to exercise and contact before being cleared to play again. While a player is technically able to play within six days of suffering a concussion, they can only start the GRTP steps when they are symptom-free"

[gbhibby]

I think that subs should also be allowed for blood injuries where a player requires further treatment. Temporary subs should also be allowed when a player is injured and needs further treatment especially when it has been due to foul play by an opposition player.

[Bristolhibby]

I actually agree that it is overdue and necessary. Just saying it will be open to some abuse. In rugby at international level they have a neutral match doctor but even a neutral doc will not go against someone saying they feel a bit dizzy. The player subsequently has to either sit out a mandatory period OR pass cognitive tests. Clearly if he has faked the dizziness he will (or "should" in the case of some intellectually challenged players) pass the test and be clear to play again next match.

Also don’t underestimate the players willingness to play.

Mahomes got clattered to the ground last week playing for the Kansas City Chiefs, could barley walk, but would be raring to go.

Thankfully the NFL have independent doctors now who have no skin in the game. Also it was bloody obvious he was concussed.

I’m more sceptical about the fact he’s fine to play tomorrow. The lad was knocked clean out.

J

[The dalmeny]

Also don’t underestimate the players willingness to play.

Mahomes got clattered to the ground last week playing for the Kansas City Chiefs, could barley walk, but would be raring to go.

Thankfully the NFL have independent doctors now who have no skin in the game. Also it was bloody obvious he was concussed.

I’m more sceptical about the fact he’s fine to play tomorrow. The lad was knocked clean out.

J

Closer to home Gavin Hasting in the 1991 World Cup semi was clearly concussed leading to him missing that kick in front of the posts. Would never have been on the pitch if today’s rules applied then.

[CapitalGreen]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/53432796

Allowing the opposition also to make an additional sub will not prevent abuse of this. Very easy to fake a head injury. No-one, not ref, opposition doc, even neutral doc, can challenge a player who says he is a bit dizzy and force him to continue. So fire away, use all your subs, then if you need to make another one for tactical reasons you just get a message on that the player you want off is getting high balls fired at him so he can go into an aerial challenge and can cry wolf with a "head knock".

What a weird take.

[Greenbeard]

What a weird take.
A disappointing take I'll accept, but not weird. Just being realistic in this day and age of coaches and players being "streetwise", seeing what they can get away with, and bending the rules to their advantage for marginal gains. Mark my words, it will be abused. But abuse will be nigh impossible to prove.

One possible measure to reduce abuse, but not eliminate it, would be to do as rugby do in allowing a previously subbed player to return to play from the bench in place of a player with a head injury, rather than a totally new additional sub. This means you have to be clear to the No.4 when making a change whether a player coming off is being substituted (tactical) or replaced (injury). (A replaced player cannot go back on.)

But that is still abused in rugby. Sub one of your starting players (usually a forward) after 50 mins. Give him a rest on the bench for 15mins. On 65 mins, another starting player fakes a head knock (or any injury in the case of front row). The previously subbed player, refreshed from his break, goes back on. Believe me, this happens.

[Greenbeard]

Interesting research on an instant pitchside saliva test to assess concussion.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/56494264
Not sure if this would work in football though. Most players will have left all their gob out on the pitch, covid or no covid.