I'd love to hear one of these pundits pull their "you've never played at the highest level" card on Wenger, Mourinho or even Villas-Boas. As for the head injury, I accept that the club probably made a mistake, but how many times have players had head injuries in this season alone and no fuss has been made over it? Why has every man and his dog suddenly come out of the woodwork and started acting like one of our medical staff ran on the pitch and battered Lloris about the head personally?
Ahhhh....so it's only a medical necessity if it's a live TV match ...not at you OS but to the stupidity of the argument ...
As i understand it the main issue is that it is a very good idea to get medical attention after any hard bang to the head, particularly if you get knocked out. This is because you can feel fine but there might be hidden damage and if that flares up later while you are alone or driving then you could be in real danger. In practice I expect Lloris was at little risk, because he had a group of highly skilled medics watching his every move and would get care very quickly. However this sort of incident on live TV sends out all the wrong signals to the public about how to behave, so I understand fully why we've been castigated for it.
I agree with Spurf but my view on the incident was shrouded by what happened to Petr Cech, someone that actually wouldn't be with us now but for the help of medical experts. I was under the impression that Lloris was concussed and if that's not the case I retract my criticism of AVB and the Spurs club doctors.
Understandable, was a dreadful incident. Didn't Cudicini get injured in the same match? He didn't, but I guess no one knew that at the time.
Messages to the public? Most of them are too thick to understand a cereal advert never mind picking up nuances of behavour in a football match. Those that have a brain will realise the need for action or not depending on the circumstances anyway.
Wasn't Lukaku himself knocked out only the other week while scoring a goal: [video=dailymotion;x14zta4]http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x14zta4_west-ham-united-v-everton_sport[/video] http://metro.co.uk/2013/09/21/romel...-me-i-scored-winner-against-west-ham-4061926/ http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/fo...West-Ham-United-2-Everton-3-match-report.html He continued playing a minute or so later, this whole media furore reeks of double standards.
please log in to view this image Next idea! Are there more serious injuries in Rugby or North American Football?
"I honestly don't know, anyone?" No. I had bad concussion as a kid, but was not unconscious (though I wish I had been) .
In both instances you're not employed by someone, it changes everything. A head injury at work and you must follow different protocol. Its rare but bleeds can occur, these may not show signs until sometime later, if they do, you're off to theatre. In this day and age of H&S, the employer could be sued if it doesn't act correctly and the injured party falls ill later on. Decisions are taken away from boxers who all want to carry on, this should have been no different.
Yeah, both Cech and Cudicini were almost goners. I guess I (for once) got sucked in by all the media hysteria and thought he was actually concussed. If that's not the case then what's the issue? It's as bad as Sky having neurologists in to condemn Ferguson's ridiculous implication that Ashley Williams could have killed RVP by kicking a football at his head
BBC News just had a quick piece on the Lloris incident. Looks like BBC London are going to have a longer article about it straight after the main news.
I think the real danger is when Jonjo Shelvey gets a head injury because you won't be able to tell if he's concussed, he always looks like he's a bit dazed.
This is a little OT, but I was just thinking about what Bill Nick (infamously said), about failing aiming high vs succeeding aiming low, and pondering on what a complete load of bollocks it is. Success is success, failure is failure. Surely, it is better to succeed than to fail? If a team, say, Everton, aims low and wins the league (ie. gains success), and we aim for CL footy, but end up finishing 5th (yet again) (ie, failure), who will history write down as the more successful club? Exactly.
Also, what is "aiming low," anyway? Does any team in any division of any league really aim low? Surely, it's all about realistic expectations, anyway, rather that "aiming" at anything? No team is going to going into any competition, especially its domestic league, to fail at achieving its realistic expectations. For some teams, that will simply be surviving relegation, for others it will be a good cup run, and for a select few it will be competing for a Europey League and CL footy slot. So, the whole quote is complete bollocks from top to bottom.
Um - I hardly think that the rule "If you've lost consciousness due to a head collision you should not continue playing a contact sport for the remainder of a game" is that old chestnut Healthandsafetygonemad. It's hardly the same as stopping kids playing outside or using anti-bacterial soap and food containers. I disagree with almost all modern fears of the world and disease etc but this one is very rare and very sensible. Being knocked out does not necessarily lead to concussion. But you can't tell that at the time and have to err on the side of caution. I would not want to be a passenger on a plane where the only pilot have got knocked out just a few minutes beforehand. Concussion is only now being understood in relation to the potentially huge neurological damage it can cause. It is not the same as banning conkers in playgrounds.
You are to a certain extent right Hiag. This quote comes from a different era though, when expectations were higher, so perhaps it should never have been applied to the current day Spurs. It was okay for Billy to say something like that because he had us winning trophies, so the failures were excusable if it meant protecting our famously attractive playing style. Now though, perhaps many would rather win some long overdue trophies at the expense of that playing style.
