Head injury or not

[Paule23]

There has been some press coverage of France' decision to take off Uini Antonio and replace him with Rabat Slimani in those heady extra 20 minutes on Saturday. Slimani had already been substituted (tactical) when Uini seemed to be struggling a little bit. Barnes asked Antonio if he has fit, he replied yes, but had a bit of a sore back. On comes the French doctor who says Antonio needs a head injury assessment.

Not much the referee here can do, a doctor has said the player needs an assessment so the player goes off, but is it sharp practice by the French who knew scrums would be important and wanted to bring back a powerful scrummager? Rob Howley is certainly not amused.

[crossref]

Barnes was brilliant, ensuring that he extracted a crystal clear declaration by the doctor

[Camquin]

I am on record that I think the game would be improved by adopting interchanges as used in RFU National 1 and below.

http://www.englandrugby.com/mm/Docum...17_English.pdf

But I would reduce the bench in Internationals and Premeirship to 6 which would be a maximum of 10 interchanges.
National league has a 5 man bench, so that means one prop on the bench and therefore one of the three props has to be able to play both sides.
With 6 you can have two props, a hooker, another forward and two backs. Which is sufficient for 99% of games.

I believe it is 4 subs at level 4 and 3 below that.

[Balones]

I am on record that I think the game would be improved by adopting interchanges as used in RFU National 1 and below.

http://www.englandrugby.com/mm/Docum...17_English.pdf

But I would reduce the bench in Internationals and Premeirship to 6 which would be a maximum of 10 interchanges.
National league has a 5 man bench, so that means one prop on the bench and therefore one of the three props has to be able to play both sides.
With 6 you can have two props, a hooker, another forward and two backs. Which is sufficient for 99% of games.

I believe it is 4 subs at level 4 and 3 below that.

You have to be careful not to confuse National Leagues with ref levels. NL1 = L3 NL2 = L4 NL3 = L5. Five subs at L's 3+4. (for Refs)

[didds]

Barnes was brilliant, ensuring that he extracted a crystal clear declaration by the doctor

Yup. That nuance was clear to me too CR.

Didds

[Pegleg]

WB did all he could re the "HIA". The idiot says that he should havre ignore the doctor are simply that; idiots.

However, As would happen at my level he should be reporting it to the tournament organisers. It's over to them to deal with any cheating.

[Taff]

.... Barnes asked Antonio if he has fit, he replied yes, but had a bit of a sore back. On comes the French doctor who says Antonio needs a head injury assessment.

And here's the problem right there.

In my opinion, doctors at international level should never be French or Welsh (or whichever country is playing that day) - they should be neutral. In fact after "Bloodgate" I thought all doctors were neutral, with no vested interests.

[Pegleg]

Teams will always have their own medical team. To expect them not to is naive. Ultimately if a team says it;s player is injured it would take a very brave (foolish!?) referee to overrule.

[crossref]

And here's the problem right there.

In my opinion, doctors at international level should never be French or Welsh (or whichever country is playing that day) - they should be neutral. In fact after "Bloodgate" I thought all doctors were neutral, with no vested interests.

doctors have ongoing relationships with patients.

except in an emergency, it's not appropriate for doctors to meet a stranger and provide immediate treatment

[Taff]

Teams will always have their own medical team. To expect them not to is naive. Ultimately if a team says it;s player is injured it would take a very brave (foolish!?) referee to overrule.

Except I'm not suggesting a Referee overrule a qualified doctor. What I'm suggesting (and imagined was already happening) was that Referees got advice from a neutral doctor rather than a doctor with a vested interest.

doctors have ongoing relationships with patients. except in an emergency, it's not appropriate for doctors to meet a stranger and provide immediate treatment

Good, because nobody asked them to give "immediate treatment" just an independent immediate diagnosis.

If team doctors can conjure up imaginary injuries just to get round the laws, it stinks and makes a joke of the system. And I'm not sore because we lost; there was nothing in it for us apart from national pride. If it cost us a few world ranking points, so what?

Barnes was brilliant, ensuring that he extracted a crystal clear declaration by the doctor

I hope somebody checks what made the doctor give such a crystal clear declaration and that there are repurcussions if he turned out to have made it up. To me, the sight of the prop walking down the tunnel to the changing rooms alone says a lot. If he needed a HIA so urgently, wouldn't somebody stay with him?