Injury Medical Sub - the first integrity check

[Bald]

I think that is exactly what happened.

I'm aware that's what you think. I didn't comment on what you thought.

What happened was an accident on the field. Neither Adams nor Weightman had any wrongdoing in it, it was a collision.

Now if you want to jump to conclusions and be a sheep, by all means, go ahead, but I think you are capable of a little bit more maturity than that. A hard loss tonight mate, it happens. Better luck next year.

 

[Big Sauce 21]

There's been a few head knocks throughout the season that resulted in a substitution, with the players playing the following week after it was determined not to be concussion. Thus the precedent says that it won't be an issue, and that dilemma here is being overstated.

Which ones ?

 

[Big Sauce 21]

I'm aware that's what you think. I didn't comment on what you thought.

What happened was an accident on the field. Neither Adams nor Weightman had any wrongdoing in it, it was a collision.

Now if you want to jump to conclusions and be a sheep, by all means, go ahead, but I think you are capable of a little bit more maturity than that. A hard loss tonight mate, it happens. Better luck next year.

Cost himself a prelim flopping.

 

[Bald]

Cost himself a prelim flopping.

Yes - Corey definitely did that.

 

[Big Sauce 21]

Yes - Corey definitely did that.

You're as fast as the umps were to blow the whistle

 

[Bald]

You're as fast as the umps were to blow the whistle

And that's how it should be. Umpires waiting too long could play funny buggers with the time keeping and result in teams finishing in positions they perhaps shouldn't have.

 

[Kwality]

One thing you cant question is the medical team at the dogs. Drs Zimmerman et al in no way will cross the line when it comes to the players health. As i would expect from all clubs.

The question is whether the AFL uphold their rules?

 

[1970crow]

Honestly I just don’t see how it can possibly be ticked off unless they bend the rule because it’s a prelim.

Subbed out because they thought he'd fail the test and be out for 12 days and therefore won't have broken the rules. He didn't fail the test, like getting a good scan result, so now back in business.

AFL's stupid rules cause this. Once a concussion test is activated, the sub should be able to be activated and then deactivated if it's negative. Dogs couldn't afford to be down a rotation awaiting concussion protocol to play out.

 

[It Just Is]

There's been a few head knocks throughout the season that resulted in a substitution, with the players playing the following week after it was determined not to be concussion. Thus the precedent says that it won't be an issue, and that dilemma here is being overstated.

I don’t think this is true.

Also, Weightman is a dangerous player and not a guy who would be tactically subbed at half time. I think this is all channel 7 spin and the Dogs won’t even be pushing for him to play next week.

 

[Sentinel]

Cost himself a prelim flopping.

As opposed to Brisbane's entire 22 who cost themselves a prelim by choking

Weightman would/will have undertaken a concussion test, which would automatically rule him out for the 12 days. It sounds like he hasn't failed one yet but the doctor took him off due to concerns he might have issues. Given the Collingwood precedent I doubt he'll be allowed to play even if he never failed a concussion test but it's laughable to suggest the Bulldogs are somehow gaming the system here. (Why would we need to when we have the umpires on our payroll?)

 

[a_fighting_fury]

As it has been left to roll along “loosely” all season, nothing will occur from tonight’s game.

Reinforcing what we already suspect of the AFL and their integrity.

 

[TiAn_]

I think that is exactly what happened.

Jealous. Fapping to the glass muscle man is way better than winning finals.

 

[Ron The Bear]

Dogs couldn't afford to be down a rotation awaiting concussion protocol to play out.

Think the knock happened shortly before half time and the substitution was announced just before play resumed. Appears that he did undergo the 20 minutes.

 

[lewdogs]

Port have subbed out players that played the next week.

 

[MF]

There's been a few head knocks throughout the season that resulted in a substitution, with the players playing the following week after it was determined not to be concussion. Thus the precedent says that it won't be an issue, and that dilemma here is being overstated.

Which players played the week after being subbed out with a head knock?

 

[Northernsoul74]

This has already been done hasn't it - players returning the next week after being subbed out?

Bevo is known for pulling some bizarre selection moves but instructing the doctors to take our best forward out of the game would be a new level for him.

Not for suspected concussion. A test isn’t definitive.

 

[Northernsoul74]

There's been a few head knocks throughout the season that resulted in a substitution, with the players playing the following week after it was determined not to be concussion. Thus the precedent says that it won't be an issue, and that dilemma here is being overstated.

Don’t think so for head knocks.

 

[Ambrosia]

Will be a joke if he plays

 

[Ambrosia]

There's been a few head knocks throughout the season that resulted in a substitution, with the players playing the following week after it was determined not to be concussion. Thus the precedent says that it won't be an issue, and that dilemma here is being overstated.

Name one incident

 

[Dazb86]

Think he misses right?

 

[Strahany]

I don’t see any way that Weightman could play next week without serious questions being raised.

The AFL has an in-game concussion protocol (to which others have alluded) which requires at least 20 minutes of time out of the game to be performed. Clubs will use the standardised ImPACT test +/- any additional measures of their own that they perceive to be necessary. When it comes to concussion, the stance is one of “guilty until proven innocent” - we never want to send a concussed player back into an environment with any risk of impact, let alone a significant risk such as football. So, with that being said, the process is as follows:

Suspected concussion > perform tests > no concussion identified > back onto the field

Or

Suspected concussion > perform tests > confirm concussion or unable to confirm lack of concussion > ruled out of game > subbed out of game


So the only time a player should be removed from the game, with the sub rule, is with a suspected or actual concussion.

Now this is where the AFL’s “12-day rule” comes in. There is the commonly held misconception that this is merely a mandated 12 day absence from games. The 12 day rule is actually based on the minimum amount of time required for set protocols to be performed for any concussed (or suspected concussed) player. This process cannot be expedited. Players may take longer than 12 days to prove fitness to play, but the minimum hurdles require the full 12 days.

Therefore, for any player to be subbed out of the game for a head knock, they must have ended the 20 minute in-game protocol period with sufficient suspicion of a concussion, or an actual concussion. Any player that meets this criteria is considered guilty until proven innocent, as far as the concussion diagnosis, and therefore must go through the full return to play criteria which requires the aforementioned minimum of 12 days.

So what does this mean?

This means the only way he plays is if the club directly violates the AFL’s post-match concussion protocol, and tries to clear him to play too early, or if he never had a concussion (or suspected concussion) in the first place. If it’s the former, then that’s a horrifying thought. If it’s the latter, then that would mean the club directly exploited the medical substitute rule against Brisbane, since this means he would have been substituted off despite passing the in-game concussion testing protocols.

 

[kickazz]

The rule is cooked. In our R1 match against North, Noble flat out said the guy who they subbed could've kept playing and it has burried since.

I'm amazed (actually no I am not, I've followed the AFL long enough to realise they don't think things through) this rule hasn't been sorted out properly.

At the very least, once one team makes an injury sub, bringing on fresh legs - the opposition must be allowed to to the same.

Dare I use the tired "what if in a Grand Final scenario" - well, what if in a Grand Final, one team makes a legit medical sub at 3/4 time, and the sub absolutely dominated due to fresh legs - whilst the other team's are all tired?

The reality will be that the second team if need be will conjure up something.

But the fact that technically, one team could be allowed a substitute and the other not is just really, really dumb.

 

[Northernsoul74]

Think he misses right?

I believe so if the Collingwood case is the precedent.

 

[lewdogs]

I'm amazed (actually no I am not, I've followed the AFL long enough to realise they don't think things through) this rule hasn't been sorted out properly.

At the very least, once one team makes an injury sub, bringing on fresh legs - the opposition must be allowed to to the same.

Dare I use the tired "what if in a Grand Final scenario" - well, what if in a Grand Final, one team makes a legit medical sub at 3/4 time, and the sub absolutely dominated due to fresh legs - whilst the other team's are all tired?

The reality will be that the second team if need be will conjure up something.

But the fact that technically, one team could be allowed a substitute and the other not is just really, really dumb.

Teams are basically using it whenever they like.

 

[Mr north man]

It's the Bulldogs

The AFL will do anything for a Bulldogs flag

I think your wrong there the AFL will do anything to help Geelong win the especially for the mate of Gils
Danger.
But it really doesn't matter it’s Ports flag to lose