Contact Sports, Concussions and Repercussions
afL
Amidst outrage and uproar of recent suspesion tribunals, many fans of the AFL are starting to question the future of their beloved sport.
Photo by Mathurin NAPOLY / matnapo on Unsplash
The issue spurns from a disparity between protecting the players and protecting the “way of the game”. Players being punished for failing to protect other player’s heads during tackles has resulted in has resulted in the game becoming less physical - at the fear and risks these penalties are instilling.
The question is, as Lawyers & Law Students, why does “law” have so much of a say over a sport dating back hundreds of years?
The AFL's Evolving Legal Landscape
Photo by Damien Tait on Unsplash
As an avid follower of the AFL, I’ve noticed a trend in how the league addresses player safety and concussions through rule changes. These changes often appear reactionary, prompted by isolated incidents, and result in regulations named after the players involved. With the 2024 season on the horizon, several new rules highlight this approach.
The Maynard Rule
One significant addition this season is the "Maynard Rule." This rule now classifies any player who jumps to smother the ball and makes contact while off the ground as acting "carelessly." This was sparked by an incident involving Maynard and Brayshaw, showing the AFL's commitment to addressing concussions and head-high contact. While this rule underscores a focus on player safety, it also raises concerns about altering the game’s dynamic nature.
The Butler Rule
The "Butler Rule" represents a reinterpretation of what constitutes rough conduct and dangerous tackles. This rule came about after Butler’s tackle on Blakey, where Blakey’s head hit the ground due to the momentum of the tackle. This reinterpretation aims to prevent head injuries during tackles, reflecting the AFL's stringent stance on concussions. However, it may also impact the traditional, aggressive style of gameplay that many fans love.
The Ballard Rule
The "Ballard Rule" addresses off-the-ball scuffles, specifically targeting actions like Ballard's elbow on Guelfi. This rule is designed to penalize head contact during physical altercations, furthering the AFL's efforts to present a safer image. It highlights the league's dedication to preventing incidents that could lead to head injuries.
While these rule changes are well-intentioned, they contribute to a gradual sanitization of the game, potentially making it unrecognizable. I understand the necessity of addressing concussions, but it seems impractical to eliminate all risks in a contact sport. This overregulation could be compared to everyday life, where trying to mitigate every potential risk can lead to absurdity.
These frequent rule changes can lead to confusion among fans, players, and umpires. It’s challenging to create a comprehensive legal framework that covers every possible outcome. Regulations are crucial for safety, but the AFL must also consider the broader implications on the sport’s integrity and viewer experience.
In summary, the AFL's evolving rules reflect a heightened focus on player safety and concussions, sparking debates about the game’s future. Striking a balance between necessary regulations and maintaining the sport's fundamental nature is essential for the league's continued success
Bad Advice from jeremy
On the topic of sport, I have used a super-computer to predict the state of origin score tonight.
NSW
40
QLD
4
Just reminding everyone that this is super accurate so it’s not my opinion…