|
| + Visit Newcastle United FC Mad for Latest News, Transfer Gossip, Fixtures and Match Results |
Please explain why it is obvious that a doctor should decide if a grown plan can play football or not?
A doctor can advise, but that's a different thing. In these cases the doctors are always going to err on the side of extreme caution. There is no way they can make a clear diagnosis on the pitch. Imagine if this was a world cup final. You've worked your entire life to get to this point, then a fanny doctor and fanny rules kill your dreams after 10 minutes because you banged your head. Even though you feel fine and want to play. You'd have a better argument if you said the manager should make the decision, but i'd like to think the manager would take the players view into account, and the situation on the pitch.
Would you ban boxing toptoon?
I am curious to know how far you would go to follow your doctors advice? Have you just outsourced all of your own thinking to third parties?
Romero said he's fine. He should ****ing know!
I'll let people make up their own minds on the penalty, though I suspect you are just trying to wind me up.
Timewasting was the gamemanship in this case. He stood in front of the ball. I was just pointing out the hypocrisy of a rule that books players for stuff like that, but yet it's fine for VAR to take an age and disrupt the game.
Yeah no need to backup your comments toptoon, you only think a doctor should somehow determine the actions of an individual against their will.
Sorry if this is a sore subject after the crap we all just had to go through because doctors said so. Not to mention these rules are ruining football.
Last edited by GBruno; 13-08-2023 at 02:33 PM.
Mate, you've gone off the deep end here. Unsure why you think TT should be trolling you just because he has a different opinion? Your post reads like one of those you make before you ask about how to delete your account. or say you're off. Chill out, bud-your other contributions as a poster are good-you don't need to react like this.
For what it's worth, I agree with TT. To use your analogy, a player in a World Cup final is equally capable of erring on the side of complete recklessness, ignoring the true extent of any head injury in order to stay on the pitch. Add in the fact that their decision-making might be flawed precisely because of that injury and you have a potentially very dangerous situation for the player.
In addition, I don't think your boxing comparison works...and no, I'm not trolling you. In football, players accept that there's a risk of injury but in boxing, the entire purpose is to deliberately inflict injury on your opponent. And even in boxing, it's not left to the fighter to decide whether to carry on or not-the ref will end the fight (or the corner) if the fighter is in danger of serious injury-is the boxer "outsourcing" their thinking too?
Just my opinion, though, which is what this-or any-forum is all about.![]()
If you value safety over freedom that's fine, but why do you get to impose that on other people?
The arrogance is astounding. It's like saying you know what's best so therefore I should have to act in a certain way.
It's authoritarianism disguised as being considerate.
Let the individual footballers take responsiblity is what i am saying. There is no excuse for any of them not to know the risks. I would happily sign a waiver saying I choose to play football with other adult men and I know i may get a bang to the head. I take full responsiblity for any long term brain injury that may occur as a result of this.
My big problem with football right now is the level of subjectivity invovled. I want a few objective rules to protect the game from the whims of other peopl, including people like myself. I don't want to impose myself on others anymore than I want them to impose on me.
These are grown athletes, let them make their own minds up.
You cannot make the game risk free and surely we don't want to?
And that's all fair enough-you make your point well.
As I say, I have a different view. I do see genuine concern for player welfare where you see authoritarianism. You mention a player's individual responsibility but the League have an overall responsibility to look after the game and those who play it.
There are lots of their rules and regulations that I don't agree with but I'm with them on this. We're coming out of a time when there was very little care taken in respect of players' physical-or mental- health, certainly compared with how things are now. Chris Sutton speaks very wisely, passionately and articulately on the issue of players needing to come off after head injuries, not least becaise the long term dangers increase exponentially if a player stays on and receives a further blow to the head.
Look at it another way-imagine the outcry if a player chooses to stay on the pitch against a doctor's advice but he is more injured than anyone realised and suffers a seizure-or worse. Isn't it better to be safe rather than sorry?
I'll change the subject....
I was encouraged by Liverpool's performance today. Very flat.
Chelsea much imrpoved but still missing something.
Didn't see it but taking points off each other is good for us. Ditto Spurs and Brentford.