Re: Saints v Catalans : Fri Nov 20, 2020 10:30 pm  

Grimmy wrote:

Then that ref, who the RFL have bagged, has to take charge of 34 players, who have just read that even his own employer think he's bad. How would that go for him? I don't recall a disgraceful performance in the 19 CC Final. I recall one bad costly decision not to send a decision to the video ref.

So they should lie and protect him instead? Imagine if you used that principle for anyone in power. A judge gets a case wrong and it's reversed by a higher court - that first judge (if he doesn't lose his job) still has to work on further trials.

It's the very definition of a whitewash isn't it?

Re: Saints v Catalans : Fri Nov 20, 2020 10:51 pm  

sergeant pepper wrote:

So they should lie and protect him instead? Imagine if you used that principle for anyone in power. A judge gets a case wrong and it's reversed by a higher court - that first judge (if he doesn't lose his job) still has to work on further trials.

It's the very definition of a whitewash isn't it?

They deal with it in-house and select based on performance. It's pretty much the same as clubs do. Coaches generally don't single out players to the media but obviously they will deal with poor performance in-house and drop them as necessary. The referee already has a big target on his back without getting shots fired from his own bosses.

Re: Saints v Catalans : Sat Nov 21, 2020 9:23 am  

Pie_Eyter wrote:

I can't believe Saints have sent LMS back out there. Something very sinister has gone on there and forced the medical teams decision after originally failing him. Clearly knocked clean out. Concussion potential. No medic in the world would have passed him.

Given that LMS cognitive baseline is lower than a goldfish the bar for his test will be set low to zero

Re: Saints v Catalans : Sat Nov 21, 2020 9:37 am  

Grimmy wrote:

It's complicated and based on passing certain stages. The minimum time it takes is a week, but if you don't pass a certain stage then you stay at that stage so obviously it takes longer. I can't remember it exactly but it's things like 0 activity tomorrow. Walking about Sunday, light training Monday etc until day 7 is playing rugby. But if you get dizzy or whatever when you're walking about on Sunday then Monday would be walking about again and return to rugby would be Saturday.

I learned it years ago from a presentation so I'm sure I've grossly over simplified but that's the basics. It's a minimum of seven days but could be longer based on how he reacts during the week.

we must have different rules to the NRL, LMS was knocked out, if it is this back no matter what the HIA says you must stay off or something like that. I think it was pretty reckless from saints

Re: Saints v Catalans : Sat Nov 21, 2020 9:45 am  

MadDogg wrote:

Is Sam Tomkins still the best fullback in SL after this shocker Brian?

Even better after his post match comments.

Re: Saints v Catalans : Sat Nov 21, 2020 9:49 am  

Pieman wrote:

we must have different rules to the NRL, LMS was knocked out, if it is this back no matter what the HIA says you must stay off or something like that. I think it was pretty reckless from saints

Possibly different rules. Not sure whether he was knocked out to be honest though clearly very unsteady afterwards. Yeah as a non-expert I didn't think he should have been allowed to return after that.

Re: Saints v Catalans : Sat Nov 21, 2020 10:32 am  

Grimmy wrote:

Possibly different rules. Not sure whether he was knocked out to be honest though clearly very unsteady afterwards. Yeah as a non-expert I didn't think he should have been allowed to return after that.

the way he went down I think he was knocked out briefly as he tensed up and didnt move from that motion for a second

Re: Saints v Catalans : Sat Nov 21, 2020 10:40 am  

Seeing as the club twitter announced he had failed an HIA and wouldn't be back, it would be interesting to see a report of what happened

If they have put him back on with any issues then they need to be made an example of by the RFL/SL.

Re: Saints v Catalans : Sat Nov 21, 2020 10:47 am  

Egg Chasing wrote:

Seeing as the club twitter announced he had failed an HIA and wouldn't be back, it would be interesting to see a report of what happened

If they have put him back on with any issues then they need to be made an example of by the RFL/SL.

I worry about the clubs in general with incidents like this when it comes to 30/40 years down the track and players are suffering the after effects of incidents like that last night. I thought the game had really cleaned up it’s act regarding head injuries but then you see that and it’s a dreadful look.

Failed head tests, passed head tests, whatever his result may have been, I have not seen a player in that bad a shape being allowed back on the field of play in a few years now. It felt like a throwback to something Michael Maguire would’ve done, telling players to get back out there at almost any costs.

Re: Saints v Catalans : Sat Nov 21, 2020 10:52 am  

Their reply to him coming back on was "LMS is a superhero"

No explanation that he had actually passed and they got it wrong, they just made a joke about it.

I'm not sure he is that influential of a player that it had any say in the matter on the field, but it took away the threat of saints having 1 sub left