Before the northern hemisphere sides set off on their end-of-season tours late last month, World Rugby’s chief medical officer Eanna Falvey spoke of "a new mindset for coaches and players” when it came to the concussion protocols.
nfortunately, the last week has felt too much like more of the same.
In what has been viewed as a huge step forward for a game that has long felt on the brink of an existential crisis in regards to player welfare, changes brought in at the end of June were motivated by what World Rugby described as “the latest review of scientific evidence and rugby-specific research by federation’s expert independent Concussion Working Group”.
Essentially, the headline difference meant that, again in the words of Falvey, it was now “overwhelmingly likely a player diagnosed with a concussion won't play in their team's next match”.
In the main, the news appeared to be met with something of a sense of relief. Rugby’s reckoning with brain injuries has long been coming.
While there is always a danger in any layman expressing a strident opinion on medical matters, the old system in which players could suffer a confirmed concussion but come through the return to play protocols to take the field again six days later simply never felt right.
It certainly jarred when coupled with digesting news of the early onset dementia diagnoses delivered to the likes of Carl Hayman, Steve Thompson and Alix Popham when still in their early 40s.
All delivered powerful and shocking testimonies of a life spent in rugby’s first two decades of professionalism, while one wonders how many more of their contemporaries suffer on in silence.
Change felt necessary and we have already seen the new protocols in action with Tom Curry ruled out of the rest of England’s tour of Australia with a head injury sustained in the first of three Test matches Down Under.
Sale flanker Curry, who also went off with a head injury during the Six Nations, will return home after the RFU confirmed that “in the interests of player welfare and recovery, he will take no further part in the tour”.
While all that chimes with the recent changes, what does not is that Curry appeared to suffer the injury early in the game but was withdrawn only at half-time. It was a scenario that harked back to Ireland’s own Jeremy Loughman earlier in the week.
Against the Maori on Wednesday, the Munster prop took a knock after only 90 seconds but would reappear later in the game having passed his HIA (Head Injury Assessment). The issue was that by the time he re-emerged into the fray, television replays had already shown him stumbling back to the turf when trying to find his feet after the initial contact.
Such clear evidence of a brain injury is supposed to negate the need for any further tests and prompt an immediate removal of the player, as well the subsequent stand-down period.
The pictures, described as “ deeply alarming” by Progressive Rugby, a player welfare lobby group, coupled with the passing of the HIA brought immediate questions that a review by New Zealand Rugby concluded was the result in a “gap in communications”.
Essentially, it seems, those that needed them the most didn’t have access to the footage that we all did back at home on our sofas watching on television.
That Loughman was taken off at half-time in the game was described as a "precaution” by Ireland head coach Andy Farrell afterwards, but it was clear that he never should have been back on the pitch in the first place.
Seventy-two hours later and it was a not too dissimilar situation with hooker Dave Heffernan. This time the Connacht man only played on for a further two-and-a-half minutes after injury but, while he was only caught on TV staggering backwards rather than falling to the ground, again it was two-and-a-half minutes too long.
Throw in that Ireland’s Johnny Sexton failed his HIA 1 but could yet play this weekend in Dunedin given that he subsequently passed his HIA 2, and the lack of a card or later citing for New Zealand flanker Scott Barrett’s high shot on Peter O’Mahony, and at best we can see evidence of mixed messages when the game requires a united front in the face of its greatest challenge.
The change to the protocols is a big step forward. The last week will have many asking if the in-game HIA doesn’t urgently require a similar overhaul.