Re: So when does this nuke drop in RL? : Mon May 04, 2015 4:29 pm  

Don't mix up the normal collisions that go with the game, with a single act of thuggishness that ends a players career. This is a very different case

Re: So when does this nuke drop in RL? : Mon May 04, 2015 8:04 pm  

Danny Jones: Concussion first suspected before he collapsed http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-league/32584463

Danny Jones: Concussion first suspected before he collapsed http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-league/32584463

Re: : Mon May 04, 2015 11:32 pm  

i hate pies wrote:

All you have to do is look at the collisions of either sport and it doesn't take a genius to work out that the speed and force of the collisions will have some sort of effect. It's not like the nfl are hiding this fact from the players, they choose to play the game knowing the force of collisions.

Actually, it IS like the NFL is hiding this fact.

Re: So when does this nuke drop in RL? : Tue May 05, 2015 3:15 am  

Outside the US though I think a court is likely to take into account the generally physical nature of a sport in terms of assessing risk (outside the US I think this would end up in court - in the US the main aim of the claimants will probably be an out of court settlement). An RL player - just like a boxer - could not sensibly claim that they thought they were playing a sport that had no potentially serious physical risks associated with it. I can't imagine a UK court not taking that into serious account.

I think all the RFL/NRL have to do is what they have - stop the OTT stuff (particularly shoulder charges) and crack down on players with concussion returning to play. The problem with the shoulder charge in RL was that head shots were positively encouraged - no penalty, no suspension and even heaps of praise for hits which clearly hit opponents in the head.

BTW I think boxing isn't threatened at all. There's simply too much money at the top end for it to stop.

Re: So when does this nuke drop in RL? : Tue May 05, 2015 8:09 am  

BrisbaneRhino wrote:

Outside the US though I think a court is likely to take into account the generally physical nature of a sport in terms of assessing risk (outside the US I think this would end up in court - in the US the main aim of the claimants will probably be an out of court settlement). An RL player - just like a boxer - could not sensibly claim that they thought they were playing a sport that had no potentially serious physical risks associated with it. I can't imagine a UK court not taking that into serious account.

It'll certainly get to the US courts. And the NFL will likely be forced to concede in spades. At that point the starting pistol is fired. You'd think the British legal system would be an impermeable membrane to such claims (what this suggests about the merits of the British legal system is another question entirely). I equate the ever-expanding scope of liability claims to rain falling on a house. Even though quality of materials and methods of construction ostensibly preclude even the possibility of water getting inside, good ol' H20 will patiently go about its business of testing each and every seal in a dogged war of attrition until one of them fails. It could be tomorrow. It could be in twenty years. Eventually a gutter becomes blocked with leaves, a torrent of water gushes onto the second floor brickwork and three weeks later you've got damp in the bedroom.

I think all the RFL/NRL have to do is what they have - stop the OTT stuff (particularly shoulder charges) and crack down on players with concussion returning to play. The problem with the shoulder charge in RL was that head shots were positively encouraged - no penalty, no suspension and even heaps of praise for hits which clearly hit opponents in the head.

I don't think that will be enough. Remember, one of the most shocking results of these studies is that tests carried out on kids found that a frightening number showed early symptoms of brain damage. These weren't the result of vicious head shots but rather an accumulation of thousands of small bangs and knocks picked up in everyday rough-and-tumble. Worse still - given that nearly 98% of players tested in one study manifested symptoms you can't really fall back on the "bad luck" argument. It's a near certainty that playing NFL will give you brain damage of some description. That's a very tough position to defend.

BTW I think boxing isn't threatened at all. There's simply too much money at the top end for it to stop.

Don't let the silly money thrown at that joke of a fight between Mayweather and Pacquiao fool you. Boxing through wholesale corruption and criminal mismanagement is practically on its knees as a professional sport and of all those listed it is undoubtedly in the weakest position to survive intact from any kind of legal challenge.

Re: So when does this nuke drop in RL? : Wed May 06, 2015 10:35 pm  

Mugwump wrote:

It'll certainly get to the US courts. And the NFL will likely be forced to concede in spades. At that point the starting pistol is fired. You'd think the British legal system would be an impermeable membrane to such claims (what this suggests about the merits of the British legal system is another question entirely). I equate the ever-expanding scope of liability claims to rain falling on a house. Even though quality of materials and methods of construction ostensibly preclude even the possibility of water getting inside, good ol' H20 will patiently go about its business of testing each and every seal in a dogged war of attrition until one of them fails. It could be tomorrow. It could be in twenty years. Eventually a gutter becomes blocked with leaves, a torrent of water gushes onto the second floor brickwork and three weeks later you've got damp in the bedroom.

I don't think that will be enough. Remember, one of the most shocking results of these studies is that tests carried out on kids found that a frightening number showed early symptoms of brain damage. These weren't the result of vicious head shots but rather an accumulation of thousands of small bangs and knocks picked up in everyday rough-and-tumble. Worse still - given that nearly 98% of players tested in one study manifested symptoms you can't really fall back on the "bad luck" argument. It's a near certainty that playing NFL will give you brain damage of some description. That's a very tough position to defend.

Don't let the silly money thrown at that joke of a fight between Mayweather and Pacquiao fool you. Boxing through wholesale corruption and criminal mismanagement is practically on its knees as a professional sport and of all those listed it is undoubtedly in the weakest position to survive intact from any kind of legal challenge.

Boxing on its knees? You taking the pi**. Boxing just had the biggest fight of the decade and possibly all time. British boxing just had its biggest fight of all time in froch v groves 2.

British boxing is as good as its been for many years. Kell brook is world champion alongside Carl Froch, Scott Quigg Andy lee , McDonnell, and Carl Frampton. We have groves, Degale, Paul smith, kal yafai, tyson fury, ricky burns, kevin Mitchell all in world title fights this year. Paul smith who part of the smith brothers has a title against pound for pound one the best boxers about in Andre Ward. Amir Khan at welterwieght looks truly world class and looks set for mid September fight with floyd "money" mayweather. Moving up to 147lbs has been great move for Khan. Our own Martin murray will be looking to bounce back from his world title shot with GGG who is the deadliest puncher in world boxing.

The yanks have just had their first heavyweight champ in ten years with wilder sweeping thru the ranks with 32 fights and 32 wins and 31 by ko.

The is some massive massive fights to me made. Boxing is booming over the last two years and British boxing has some big fights that can be made.

Groves v Degale
Frampton v Quigg
Price v Joshua.
Khan v brook
Murray v Andy lee
Callum smith v rocky fielding
St Pete v mugwamp

Re: So when does this nuke drop in RL? : Wed May 06, 2015 11:40 pm  

St pete wrote:

Boxing on its knees? You taking the pi**. Boxing just had the biggest fight of the decade and possibly all time. British boxing just had its biggest fight of all time in froch v groves 2.

Oh for god's sake shut up you silly fool. I won't even begin to go into the decline in viewing figures over the last ten years, the paucity of talent at heavyweight, the terminal decline of American boxing at both professional and amateur levels, the proliferation of ABC belts, meaningless titles, ridiculously over-protected fighters who'd rather preserve their unbeaten records against a succession of tin cans than take on quality opposition, the elevation of "fitness conditioners" over (quality) ex-pros as cornermen (see Adam Booth and David Haye), the depressing slide in skills this has resulted in (I can't remember the last fighter I saw who possessed a quality jab and knew how to use it), atrocious undercards, bad fight timing (Mayweather vs Pacquiao came SEVEN YEARS TOO LATE) - all of which has encouraged long-term fans to drift away from the sport whilst kids are far more attracted to better promoted (if entirely crap) "sports" such as UFC etc. etc.

I like Carl Froch. He's a true warrior and one of the few fighters in boxing who will genuinely take on all-comers. But as a fighter he's so technically flawed one might wonder whether he's boxing at all. His "defence" consists of his chin. That's it. His "attack" is so telegraphed his opponent could easily exit the ring for a pee and make it back between the moment Carl decides to throw a punch and the time that it lands.

The "biggest fight of the decade" was nothing short of a joke. To sum up - Mayweather cynically waited until Pacquiao's skills had all but gone before pouncing. In the ring Manny looked a SHOT FIGHTER from the first minute. You can't even begin to compare him to the guy who blasted Marco Antonio Barrera into retirement. To be honest I didn't think much of Mayweather, either. As usual he threw just enough scoring punches to steal the rounds. Like Manny he's a long, long way from his prime. And as for the undercard ...

Groves v Degale

Highly overrated vs Highly unprofessional. Doesn't interest me.

Frampton v Quigg

I like Frampton. I don't rate Quigg at all.

Price v Joshua.

PRICE??? You're kidding me. I hope Joshua works out but I can't say that I'm all that enamoured with his fighting style. How anyone so young can be so flat-footed I don't know.

Khan v brook

Khan is as thick as a brick and has lost at least two fights because of it. Indeed, his stupidity irreparably damaged his own career picking some truly atrocious cornermen who taught him terrible habits. This is a guy who figured it was a good idea to hire a coach who seriously believed Breidis Prescott was a good match-up for a young kid with a suspect chin still learning the ropes.

Kell Brook is a throwback to the bad old days of British fighters hamstrung by British promoters who seek to squeeze ever last drop of money out of the paying audience before moving up to the next level. He should have been fighting at this level FOUR YEARS AGO.

Murray v Andy lee

Is this fight supposed to capture the imagination of viewers or lobotomise them?

St Pete v mugwamp

Stick to watching Rocky, champ.

Re: So when does this nuke drop in RL? : Thu May 07, 2015 3:53 am  

If Hohaia sues anyone, I'd imagine it would be Flower himself. If he claims that punch caused the damage how exactly could he sue Wigan (or the RFL) for Flower's moment of lunacy? Wane ranting before another game is hardly evidence of a plan to punch an unconscious man on the floor.

If OTOH he sues on the basis of repetitive issues, then Flower would be off the hook, but I Hohaiha would have a hard time convincing a court of negligence on the part of the game itself, which I personally think has/is reacting quite well to the issue (especially given its very limited resources compared to the NFL). Banning the shoulder charge to the head caused no end of wailing amongst fans, but IMO was a huge positive for the game generally.

As an aside I also suspect you could dig up a fair amount of footage of Lance himself hitting players around the head (mainly accidentally but there isn't a long-serving player around who hasn't done it quite often). No idea what that would mean if went to court though.

Re: So when does this nuke drop in RL? : Thu May 07, 2015 7:37 am  

BrisbaneRhino wrote:

If Hohaia sues anyone, I'd imagine it would be Flower himself. If he claims that punch caused the damage how exactly could he sue Wigan (or the RFL) for Flower's moment of lunacy? Wane ranting before another game is hardly evidence of a plan to punch an unconscious man on the floor.

If OTOH he sues on the basis of repetitive issues, then Flower would be off the hook, but I Hohaiha would have a hard time convincing a court of negligence on the part of the game itself, which I personally think has/is reacting quite well to the issue (especially given its very limited y resources compared to the NFL). Banning the shoulder charge to the head caused no end of wailing amongst fans, but IMO was a huge positive for the game generally.

As an aside I also suspect you could dig up a fair amount of footage of Lance himself hitting players around the head (mainly accidentally but there isn't a long-serving player around who hasn't done it quite often). No idea what that would mean if went to court though.

I'm not sure why you are conflating Lance Hohaia's situation with the systemic predicament all collision sports will likely face at some in the future - especially since neither the thread title nor the initial post makes any mention of Lance Hohaia.

Re: So when does this nuke drop in RL? : Thu May 07, 2015 11:02 am  

Mugwump wrote:

Oh for god's sake shut up you silly fool. I won't even begin to go into the decline in viewing figures over the last ten years, the paucity of talent at heavyweight, the terminal decline of American boxing at both professional and amateur levels, the proliferation of ABC belts, meaningless titles, ridiculously over-protected fighters who'd rather preserve their unbeaten records against a succession of tin cans than take on quality opposition, the elevation of "fitness conditioners" over (quality) ex-pros as cornermen (see Adam Booth and David Haye), the depressing slide in skills this has resulted in (I can't remember the last fighter I saw who possessed a quality jab and knew how to use it), atrocious undercards, bad fight timing (Mayweather vs Pacquiao came SEVEN YEARS TOO LATE) - all of which has encouraged long-term fans to drift away from the sport whilst kids are far more attracted to better promoted (if entirely crap) "sports" such as UFC etc. etc.

I like Carl Froch. He's a true warrior and one of the few fighters in boxing who will genuinely take on all-comers. But as a fighter he's so technically flawed one might wonder whether he's boxing at all. His "defence" consists of his chin. That's it. His "attack" is so telegraphed his opponent could easily exit the ring for a pee and make it back between the moment Carl decides to throw a punch and the time that it lands.

The "biggest fight of the decade" was nothing short of a joke. To sum up - Mayweather cynically waited until Pacquiao's skills had all but gone before pouncing. In the ring Manny looked a SHOT FIGHTER from the first minute. You can't even begin to compare him to the guy who blasted Marco Antonio Barrera into retirement. To be honest I didn't think much of Mayweather, either. As usual he threw just enough scoring punches to steal the rounds. Like Manny he's a long, long way from his prime. And as for the undercard ...

Highly overrated vs Highly unprofessional. Doesn't interest me.

I like Frampton. I don't rate Quigg at all.

PRICE??? You're kidding me. I hope Joshua works out but I can't say that I'm all that enamoured with his fighting style. How anyone so young can be so flat-footed I don't know.

Khan is as thick as a brick and has lost at least two fights because of it. Indeed, his stupidity irreparably damaged his own career picking some truly atrocious cornermen who taught him terrible habits. This is a guy who figured it was a good idea to hire a coach who seriously believed Breidis Prescott was a good match-up for a young kid with a suspect chin still learning the ropes.

Kell Brook is a throwback to the bad old days of British fighters hamstrung by British promoters who seek to squeeze ever last drop of money out of the paying audience before moving up to the next level. He should have been fighting at this level FOUR YEARS AGO.

Is this fight supposed to capture the imagination of viewers or lobotomise them?

Stick to watching Rocky, champ.

Watching rocky lol

I'm massive fight fan. I've been more boxing matches than you've had hot dinners.

When was the last time you went a fight? I've just been Vegas for thst small fight too.

I go every big fight I can get tickets too. You don't even know boxers unless they been on tv lol

You taking up the charity fight idea Sado mentioned ?