Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="BroncsFan, post: 2929243, member: 9052"] Is there a reason why MRC have avoided all criticism... I can't recall a charge coming out from it and it turns out it caused serious damage. The NRL is extremely reactive with almost everything they seem to do. If Gillett had taken a dive the player would've been charged by the MRC and maybe the seriousness gets a little more scrutiny. Gillett gets up game keeps going nothing to see here. The NRL introduce the HIA for free interchanges because of the seriousness of concussions whereas for years previous it was considered a badge of honour to play on despite not being able to stand up. This rule now gets exploited for all injuries (Matthews went off for a poke to the eye FFS) so why not be proactive and just make it an injury assessment. Had the option been available for Gillett to leave the field for assessment maybe it gets better diagnosis by a doctor in the heat of the moment instead of trainer getting told to "**** off I'm fine". This would of course require the NRL to admit their rule is being wrongfully exploited and require them to clamp down on it. FWIW a simple rule would just be having the guy who was interchanged on for injury be the same one who has to go off for the returning player... and the player who goes off has to return after no more than say 15mins otherwise they have to be ruled out for the game or class it as a substitution. They basically had this for the blood bin didn't they??? Teams found to be exploiting the rule are to be fined heavily for bringing the game into disrepute and potentially lose points (wouldn't be hard to see trends given they monitor all interchanges that occur). If they notice something suss get the club to provide justification. Would also need the NRL to grow a spine and publicly shame clubs for cheating [/QUOTE]

Verification

Active Now

No members online now.

Total: 4 (members: 0, guests: 4)

Reply to thread

Log in

Active Now