The Tottenham Thread 13/14 part 3.

[mancboy123]

Honestly, with the Lloris situation, it never should have never been his decision to make whether he stayed on the field or not. He's obviously going to fight to stay on the field, and it's obvious the manager isn't likely to be doing any kind of long-term thinking in the heat of a match either.

That leaves the physio. Right now, the physio's job to do everything possible to make sure the player gets back on the field as quickly as possible. At the same time though, they need the power (and directive) to protect the player from themselves and be the final decision maker, even above the manager, when a head injury is involved. This type of action is starting to be implemented in some US sports, though there have been clear instances when the spirit/letter of the rules have been violated.

I'm more surprised though that this became big news at all, since the isn't the first instance of a playing losing consciousness in a match and continuing to play this year. The Stoke defender was out cold against City and Lukaku himself doesn't remember a goal from earlier in the year. It'll be interesting how many more incidents will have to occur before actual action is taken...

I agree with what you say, but it was the Spurs medical team who made the decision for Lloris to continue on Sunday, not AVB or the player himself.

And as they are the same medical team who saved Fabrice Muamba's life not so long ago, I think they have a good idea of what they're doing.

Whether or not there should be a mandatory replacement for players with concussion is another matter entirely.

Your equating someone being brought back round after suffering heart failure to the long and short term effects of a head injury really. There is well documented evidence on what you should do should someone suffer cardiac arrest their is no such data to show what the course of action is should someone suffer a head injury but in any other sport a head injury results in immediate removal from the game. he should have been removed from the game and your attempts to justify the actions of the spurs medical team is reprehensible if it was a member of your family who had recieved a blow to the head would you be happy for them to play on in an inconsequential football match on medical advice or would you want them to be removed from all risk asap.

 

[squirtyflower]

Meet the one Everton fan who thought it might be a good idea to take a pair of sunglasses for the Spurs game...

What about him?

I've got too much time on my hands...

The obvious answer, and one I didn't want to make as it could be deemed inappropriate is that 99% of the fucking crowd have their hands up to their yes trying to cover them from the low Sun
The two with sunglasses are the sensible ones

 

[THFC6061]

Honestly, with the Lloris situation, it never should have never been his decision to make whether he stayed on the field or not. He's obviously going to fight to stay on the field, and it's obvious the manager isn't likely to be doing any kind of long-term thinking in the heat of a match either.

That leaves the physio. Right now, the physio's job to do everything possible to make sure the player gets back on the field as quickly as possible. At the same time though, they need the power (and directive) to protect the player from themselves and be the final decision maker, even above the manager, when a head injury is involved. This type of action is starting to be implemented in some US sports, though there have been clear instances when the spirit/letter of the rules have been violated.

I'm more surprised though that this became big news at all, since the isn't the first instance of a playing losing consciousness in a match and continuing to play this year. The Stoke defender was out cold against City and Lukaku himself doesn't remember a goal from earlier in the year. It'll be interesting how many more incidents will have to occur before actual action is taken...

I agree with what you say, but it was the Spurs medical team who made the decision for Lloris to continue on Sunday, not AVB or the player himself.

And as they are the same medical team who saved Fabrice Muamba's life not so long ago, I think they have a good idea of what they're doing.

Whether or not there should be a mandatory replacement for players with concussion is another matter entirely.

Your equating someone being brought back round after suffering heart failure to the long and short term effects of a head injury really. There is well documented evidence on what you should do should someone suffer cardiac arrest their is no such data to show what the course of action is should someone suffer a head injury but in any other sport a head injury results in immediate removal from the game. he should have been removed from the game and your attempts to justify the actions of the spurs medical team is reprehensible if it was a member of your family who had recieved a blow to the head would you be happy for them to play on in an inconsequential football match on medical advice or would you want them to be removed from all risk asap.

Why was there none of this fuss when Everton's Romelu Lukaku carried on playing after suffering concussion after scoring against West Ham United earlier this season?

Or the countless other examples where a similar thing has happened?

 

[The Flash]

Honestly, with the Lloris situation, it never should have never been his decision to make whether he stayed on the field or not. He's obviously going to fight to stay on the field, and it's obvious the manager isn't likely to be doing any kind of long-term thinking in the heat of a match either.

That leaves the physio. Right now, the physio's job to do everything possible to make sure the player gets back on the field as quickly as possible. At the same time though, they need the power (and directive) to protect the player from themselves and be the final decision maker, even above the manager, when a head injury is involved. This type of action is starting to be implemented in some US sports, though there have been clear instances when the spirit/letter of the rules have been violated.

I'm more surprised though that this became big news at all, since the isn't the first instance of a playing losing consciousness in a match and continuing to play this year. The Stoke defender was out cold against City and Lukaku himself doesn't remember a goal from earlier in the year. It'll be interesting how many more incidents will have to occur before actual action is taken...

I agree with what you say, but it was the Spurs medical team who made the decision for Lloris to continue on Sunday, not AVB or the player himself.

And as they are the same medical team who saved Fabrice Muamba's life not so long ago, I think they have a good idea of what they're doing.

Whether or not there should be a mandatory replacement for players with concussion is another matter entirely.

Your equating someone being brought back round after suffering heart failure to the long and short term effects of a head injury really. There is well documented evidence on what you should do should someone suffer cardiac arrest their is no such data to show what the course of action is should someone suffer a head injury but in any other sport a head injury results in immediate removal from the game. he should have been removed from the game and your attempts to justify the actions of the spurs medical team is reprehensible if it was a member of your family who had recieved a blow to the head would you be happy for them to play on in an inconsequential football match on medical advice or would you want them to be removed from all risk asap.

He also forgets that it was the actions of a certain Dr Andrew Deaner, a Spurs fan and cardiologist, who ran on to the pitch and carried out the lengthy resuscitation that saved Muamba's life that day.

Not the Spurs medical team.

More lies from the man who continually sets his trews on fire.

 

[Salford_Blue]

Maybe I'm just too cynical, but I got the distinct impression that AVB didn't want him coming off as he had few or no substitutions remaining.

I could almost see this thought running through his mind at the time.

Completely reprehensible in my eyes.

 

[mancboy123]

I agree with what you say, but it was the Spurs medical team who made the decision for Lloris to continue on Sunday, not AVB or the player himself.

And as they are the same medical team who saved Fabrice Muamba's life not so long ago, I think they have a good idea of what they're doing.

Whether or not there should be a mandatory replacement for players with concussion is another matter entirely.

Your equating someone being brought back round after suffering heart failure to the long and short term effects of a head injury really. There is well documented evidence on what you should do should someone suffer cardiac arrest their is no such data to show what the course of action is should someone suffer a head injury but in any other sport a head injury results in immediate removal from the game. he should have been removed from the game and your attempts to justify the actions of the spurs medical team is reprehensible if it was a member of your family who had recieved a blow to the head would you be happy for them to play on in an inconsequential football match on medical advice or would you want them to be removed from all risk asap.

Why was there none of this fuss when Everton's Romelu Lukaku carried on playing after suffering concussion after scoring against West Ham United earlier this season?

Or the countless other examples where a similar thing has happened?

Passing the buck as usual there, you were the one who defended SPURS medical teams actions, i dont hold evertons or stokes team in any regard for allowing their players to play on after their injuries but this is a spurs thread as you keep on harping on about when you post pointless facts about them and you were talking about spurs medical team so i kept it to that and surprise surprise you passed the buck as per usual. I dont know why anyone tries to engage with you as they should hold to the old adage that you should never argue with an idiot as they will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience.

 

[THFC6061]

I agree with what you say, but it was the Spurs medical team who made the decision for Lloris to continue on Sunday, not AVB or the player himself.

And as they are the same medical team who saved Fabrice Muamba's life not so long ago, I think they have a good idea of what they're doing.

Whether or not there should be a mandatory replacement for players with concussion is another matter entirely.

Your equating someone being brought back round after suffering heart failure to the long and short term effects of a head injury really. There is well documented evidence on what you should do should someone suffer cardiac arrest their is no such data to show what the course of action is should someone suffer a head injury but in any other sport a head injury results in immediate removal from the game. he should have been removed from the game and your attempts to justify the actions of the spurs medical team is reprehensible if it was a member of your family who had recieved a blow to the head would you be happy for them to play on in an inconsequential football match on medical advice or would you want them to be removed from all risk asap.

He also forgets that it was the actions of a certain Dr Andrew Deaner, a Spurs fan and cardiologist, who ran on to the pitch and carried out the lengthy resuscitation that saved Muamba's life that day.

Not the Spurs medical team.

More lies from the man who continually sets his trews on fire.

Really?

http://www.theboltonnews.co.uk/news/9945360.Muamba_medical_teams_are_named_Life_Saver_of_the_Year/

 

[The Flash]

Your equating someone being brought back round after suffering heart failure to the long and short term effects of a head injury really. There is well documented evidence on what you should do should someone suffer cardiac arrest their is no such data to show what the course of action is should someone suffer a head injury but in any other sport a head injury results in immediate removal from the game. he should have been removed from the game and your attempts to justify the actions of the spurs medical team is reprehensible if it was a member of your family who had recieved a blow to the head would you be happy for them to play on in an inconsequential football match on medical advice or would you want them to be removed from all risk asap.

He also forgets that it was the actions of a certain Dr Andrew Deaner, a Spurs fan and cardiologist, who ran on to the pitch and carried out the lengthy resuscitation that saved Muamba's life that day.

Not the Spurs medical team.

More lies from the man who continually sets his trews on fire.

Really?

http://www.theboltonnews.co.uk/news/9945360.Muamba_medical_teams_are_named_Life_Saver_of_the_Year/

Really...

http://www.nhs.uk/Livewell/nhs-anniversary/Pages/doctor-who-saved-Fabrice-Muamba.aspx

 

[manimanc]

anyway enough of all this childish, playground stuff,who do tottingham play in the CH5 cup on Thursday??

 

[Matty]

I agree with what you say, but it was the Spurs medical team who made the decision for Lloris to continue on Sunday, not AVB or the player himself.

And as they are the same medical team who saved Fabrice Muamba's life not so long ago, I think they have a good idea of what they're doing.

Whether or not there should be a mandatory replacement for players with concussion is another matter entirely.

Your equating someone being brought back round after suffering heart failure to the long and short term effects of a head injury really. There is well documented evidence on what you should do should someone suffer cardiac arrest their is no such data to show what the course of action is should someone suffer a head injury but in any other sport a head injury results in immediate removal from the game. he should have been removed from the game and your attempts to justify the actions of the spurs medical team is reprehensible if it was a member of your family who had recieved a blow to the head would you be happy for them to play on in an inconsequential football match on medical advice or would you want them to be removed from all risk asap.

Why was there none of this fuss when Everton's Romelu Lukaku carried on playing after suffering concussion after scoring against West Ham United earlier this season?

Or the countless other examples where a similar thing has happened?

Then there should have been the same amount of fuss. Any player who loses conciousness due to a blow to the head simply shouldn't be allowed to continue. It's impossible to see what damage has been done internally to the head without a thorough examination, far more thorough than the ones able to be carried out by a physio on the pitch. Lloris should have been removed, as should Huth against us, Lukaku against (I think) Villa, Kompany playign for Belgium, and, I believe, Townsend also for you at some point. Simply stating that there's no guidelines so therefore no-one has done anything wrong is hiding behind red tape, the medical professionals should know the dangers. The player has been smashed in the head so hard they've lost concsiousness, there's no way in any other profession a doctor would say, on the employee coming round, right, up you get, time to get back to work.<br /><br />-- Tue Nov 05, 2013 2:32 pm --<br /><br />

anyway enough of all this childish, playground stuff,who do tottingham play in the CH5 cup on Thursday??

The finest team Moldova can provide, Sheriff Tiraspol.