Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

ESPN Football Analyst Walks Away, Disturbed by Brain Trauma on Field

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

371–380 of 396 posts

Re: ESPN Football Analyst Walks Away, Disturbed by Brain Trauma on Field

#371

Post by Jeremy1026 »

Coincoin wrote: post #230
Jeremy1026 wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hockey is a contact sport, and because of that the referees can't issue a penalty everytime someone gets hit. There are hits that are illegal, and they are called (most of the time). Hits where the principle contact point is the head is illegal, hits directly from behind are illegal, and hits where the hitter takes more than two strides into the hit are illegal. Anything else is fair game and because of that, the puc…

It's more than that, in the NHL at least. Why are scuffles around the net tolerated? They are disgraceful. Almost every game you will see someone get punched or cross checked in the face with no consequence, as long as it's after the whistle or the victim is an asshole. Which leads to my next point. Why is general assholery tolerated and even celebrated? There is a thing called sportsmanship and there is none of it i…

The majority of those pushing matches after the whistle are a continuation of the play from before it. Defender is trying to clear the front of the net, offensive player is trying to secure position to screen the goalie, get a deflection, or tuck away a rebound. When the whistle blows the players are still tangled and the pushing continues. Sometimes its the offensive player who took an extra whack or two at the puck after it was blown dead that draws the push. These hits are very superficial, they are mainly a "I saw what you did, knock it off" message.

There is plenty of sportsmanship in the NHL. Almost every fight is between willing participants who discuss it first to ensure the other party isn't playing with an injury or something. Handshake lines after playoff series when you just spent the past week and a half playing the same opponent every other day. There is plenty of shit talking from the benches, but wingers will typically shoot the shit a bit when lining up for faceoffs.

Why is fighting only a 5 minute penalty? Because see above about "dem da rules". Fighting has always been a part of the game, and has fallen dramatically in the past few years. Players don't tend to get head injuries from fights, and when they do its because they fell awkwardly and hit the ice with their head. The hits that are borderline dirty or overly aggressive just aren't there, knowing that you might have to put up for a fight for giving the hit. Those hits are the ones that are causing the injuries. From behind, sending your opponent face first into the boards. Lining up the big hit from across the ice. Steve Moore jumping on Tood Bertuzzi's back and driving his head into the ice. Those are the plays that have lasting affects.

Re: ESPN Football Analyst Walks Away, Disturbed by Brain Trauma on Field

#372

Post by Consultant32452 »

hondo77 wrote: post #318
pwthornton wrote: post #166

Football's core problem is still denial that this is an issue. Until that happens, real, concrete steps won't be taken to address it. Here are a few suggestions: 1) No tackle football before a certain age (to be determined by scientists based on brain development and how damaging a concussion would be). You can learn a ton about football, running routes, learning plays, getting in shape, etc. without hitting people.…

> 7) Ban players for PEDs. Interesting that Americans do not care about PED use in their sports. Oh, they'll feign horror when a cyclist or an Olympic athlete tests positive but have no problem with the unnatural size and strength gains in the NFL or that drug testing in the major sports like baseball and football is a joke or that PED use has long-term bad health effects (including suicide). But concussions! That's…

In my opinion we'd be far better off just accepting that virtually every player at the top level of every sport is using PEDs. Chess players even use PEDs. And it's not just in the US. We acknowledge prohibition doesn't work for pot, why in the world do we pretend it will work when fame and fortune are at stake? Give up that ghost and act accordingly with the other rules of sports.

Re: ESPN Football Analyst Walks Away, Disturbed by Brain Trauma on Field

#373

Post by BearGoesChirp »

yequalsx wrote: post #107
BearGoesChirp wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I just can't support the NFL. I'm not sure what the NFL does that's wrong. Their players get significant fame, are consenting adults, and get pay checks that many would trade even more of their health for. It is the college level, and especially the high school level, that I see the major problems at. When you have kids, or even people who aren't paid, risking their health it crosses a significant line. If college p…

Would you be OK allowing two consenting adults to fight to the death for pay? Most people would not be for allowing this. A lot of people are willing to work in very risky environments because they feel they have no alternative. Should companies be allowed to have dangerous work environments because there are people desperate enough to be willing to work in them?

>Would you be OK allowing two consenting adults to fight to the death for pay?

If we are talking where death is a risk but not a definite, then we do allow such jobs. At what point do you consider the harm too bad to allow and would we really consistently apply that standard?

Re: ESPN Football Analyst Walks Away, Disturbed by Brain Trauma on Field

#374

Post by BearGoesChirp »

vacri wrote: post #279
BearGoesChirp wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I just can't support the NFL. I'm not sure what the NFL does that's wrong. Their players get significant fame, are consenting adults, and get pay checks that many would trade even more of their health for. It is the college level, and especially the high school level, that I see the major problems at. When you have kids, or even people who aren't paid, risking their health it crosses a significant line. If college p…

Why do you have a major problem with consenting adults at college level, but not at professional level? How is consenting-for-money any different to consenting-in-hopes-of-money? As for fame, which players get significant fame? Every team has over fifty guys on their roster - how many of those could ever be named by a random member of the public who isn't a diehard fan of that same team? The linemen are the ones that…

>Why do you have a major problem with consenting adults at college level, but not at professional level? How is consenting-for-money any different to consenting-in-hopes-of-money?

Because often the offers are made and accepted when the person is underage and the collusion to keep there being no pay. If colleges didn't get involved at all until people were 18 and players were paid I wouldn't have an issue.

It is like the difference between a college student who meets and dates an older individual vs a college student who dates someone who knew and groomed them while they were still a child. Both may be legal, but far more people will be appalled at the second one.

Re: ESPN Football Analyst Walks Away, Disturbed by Brain Trauma on Field

#375

Post by phillc73 »

_puk wrote: post #205
Jeremy1026 wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In rugby there is no blocking. The only time non-ball carriers come into contact with the opposing team is during a scrum or accidental collision (which are quite rare).

And even the scrums have reduced contact nowadays; arguably this has resulted in them becoming rather difficult to execute well, and they're becoming a bane to the modern game. Tweaking these things does have knock on effects.

I think there's been a positive change since Rugby Union scum engagements went from "Crouch-Touch-Pause-Engage" to "Crouch-Bind-Set". The initial contact is not as violent, and it would seem far fewer scrums are collapsing, especially on the point of engagement.

I don't have stats to back this up, but my general impression over the last couple of seasons is that less scrums require resetting.

Re: ESPN Football Analyst Walks Away, Disturbed by Brain Trauma on Field

#376

Post by phillc73 »

girvo wrote: post #350
amiramir wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Rugby has also included head injury assessments (HIA) into its laws. They sports governing body introduced HIAs in 2012 and they have been getting more stringent over the years. At he elite level a player who is suspected of having taken a significant knock to the head can be substituted off the field for 10 minutes to be assessed by a doctor. The referee, assistant referees, sideline medics or the television match o…

Even at club rugby level all of the players do neck muscle training! Even back in 2008 they were. Rugby is still dangerous, of course, but the governing bodies do take safety pretty seriously and reasonably openly, at least compared to the NFL. Besides, I prefer watching a huge perfectly executed tackle in union than I do watching two people run into each other without even attempting to get arms around them to bring…

> Even back in 2008 they were.

When I started playing Rugby Union back in 1989 as a teenager (League in 1986 for a couple of seasons) I was always taught to do neck exercises before training and playing. I was also encouraged to continue these exercises in my own time to build overall neck strength.

I'm sure this training has been around for a long time before that too.

Re: ESPN Football Analyst Walks Away, Disturbed by Brain Trauma on Field

#377

Post by Bartweiss »

hkmurakami wrote: post #285
Bartweiss wrote: post #235

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, but you can probably make the sport a bit safer. In cycling or tennis, the lasting effect of PED use (after stopping) is being more competitive. In football, the lasting effect is being more dangerous to other players on the field. That's a huge distinction.

But even if you make the penalty a ban, players are still incentivizing to try to cheat the system because they'll get paid. You have to take away both the financial and glory rewards of PEDs

Yeah, agreed. I wasn't interpreting that as an attempt to end PED use, just to mitigate damage once it's found.

Re: ESPN Football Analyst Walks Away, Disturbed by Brain Trauma on Field

#378

Post by jackvalentine »

mattm wrote: post #341
ThrustVectoring wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the rules could get reworked to make it less dangerous for brain injury. Take a cue from Australian Rules Football: remove all padding and make high tackles that endanger the head illegal.

As a big hockey fan, I completely agree with this. The pads players wore 30+ years ago were pretty much nothing so if you tried to hit someone hard it hurt you as well. My theory is that the NHL would see less concussions if they reduced the padding but such a counter-intuitive process is never going to happen. I'm curious, did Australian Rules Football go to padding and then remove it? Because I think that once padd…

AFL has never had padding.

Re: ESPN Football Analyst Walks Away, Disturbed by Brain Trauma on Field

#379

Post by dhimes »

Rapzid wrote: post #353
dhimes wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The parents are the problem. It's ridiculous to see them. Football is the most important part of their life and damn if their kid isn't going to play. Could you imagine if our schools and home cultures emphasized putting that kind of work into math rather than football?

That's a lot of stuff though to be fair. This On Point episode seems very timely: http://tpr.org/post/big-business-youth-sports . I didn't catch the entire thing but they were discussing some pretty shocking dollar amounts parents spend on sports that are not football.

Great post, thanks. Indeed- we can generalize beyond football. These kids have no time for intellectual curiosity any more. It's really a shame. Again, I blame the parents. They should know better.

But the kids' sports become part of the parents' ego and there's no going back. Source: am parent of three almost grown boys. Two were sports kids, one is not.

Re: ESPN Football Analyst Walks Away, Disturbed by Brain Trauma on Field

#380

Post by logfromblammo »

girvo wrote: post #343
Waterluvian wrote: post #335

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lacrosse or field hockey is basically hockey on foot. Floor/Ball hockey played in an arena apparently breaks at very high skills and you need the changes added by the formerly named sports to make it work. Roller hockey never really caught on.

I grew up playing field hockey (as well as rugby union) as a kid in New Zealand. Such a fun sport!

Yes, any of those would be better than football.

Even shirling (snake baiting) would be better. No-fly Quidditch would be better. Robot fighting league would be better. Two old barbershop guys telling shaggy dog stories would be better. A magnified view of an ant colony devouring a moth would be better. Just watching the grass on the field grow would be... worse. There is a line.

Post reply on HN