Re: Lance Hohaia retires : Thu Apr 30, 2015 8:01 pm  

jools wrote:

as well as the welfare of lance hohaia - the RFL also have to consider the welfare of Ben Flower.

They have done that for the last six months. It is now Lance Hohaia's turn as he was the injured party in all of this and there is the possibility that what Ben Flower did has not only ended Lance's career but put his future health at risk.

I generally respect Blake Solly but on this occasion his response was poor form. He should have made a full statement about Lance's wellbeing and how that is of the utmost concern to the RFL, how they have learned from the GF experience, etc, etc, and our so-called rugby league correspondents should be pressing him on the matter, challenging him on his dismissive statement.

Re: Lance Hohaia retires : Thu Apr 30, 2015 9:13 pm  

Leaguefan wrote:

Lance Hohaia is a classic cause and effect player. Whilst not condoning the OTT action of Flower, Hohaia brought the action on himself.
He's always been a nasty niggler and he has to suffer the consequences of his actions.

Spoken like a true Sean Connery: "When they don't stop niggling - it's ok to give them a slap!"

Re: Lance Hohaia retires : Thu Apr 30, 2015 9:15 pm  

Leaguefan wrote: Whilst not condoning the OTT action of Flower. after typing this you immediately started making excuses which is in itself condoning. Lance could have spat in his face, elbowed him on the back of the head and kicked him on the nuts and insulted his mother.......it still wouldn't excuse the second punch on an unconscious and prone player lying on the ground defenceless. Hohaia's ability to niggle and get under the skin of opposition players is a part of the game from many RL players....the fact that you seem to think the assault on him was "deserved" or somehow "earned" is a condoning the thuggish action that should have seen the perpetrator banned for life IMHO..... I see the BBC are quick to remind anyone lucky enough to stumble on their RL section about a probable cause of Hohaia's concussion http://www.bbc.com/sport/0/rugby-league/32525472

Leaguefan wrote: Whilst not condoning the OTT action of Flower. after typing this you immediately started making excuses which is in itself condoning. Lance could have spat in his face, elbowed him on the back of the head and kicked him on the nuts and insulted his mother.......it still wouldn't excuse the second punch on an unconscious and prone player lying on the ground defenceless. Hohaia's ability to niggle and get under the skin of opposition players is a part of the game from many RL players....the fact that you seem to think the assault on him was "deserved" or somehow "earned" is a condoning the thuggish action that should have seen the perpetrator banned for life IMHO..... I see the BBC are quick to remind anyone lucky enough to stumble on their RL section about a probable cause of Hohaia's concussion http://www.bbc.com/sport/0/rugby-league/32525472

Re: Lance Hohaia retires : Thu Apr 30, 2015 9:15 pm  

craigizzard wrote:

If Flower had done what he did in boxing, he would never be allowed in the ring again. And that's in BOXING.

And if he did it in UFC he's just be like all the other fighters (We'd probably be asking why he didn't use an elbow or a knee). We can all pick a sport for our agenda.

Let's all cut this stupid sensationalism. Recurrent concussion symptoms is not a permanent thing, there is no recorded case in history of it being a permanent thing. Let's be frank, he's probably taken harder hits to the head than the one Flower gave him. The punch itself wasn't that hard. The fact Flower did it to an unconscious player is what was appaling. He'll have taken shoulder charges harder than that. He'll have probably hit the ground harder than that punch. Christ, he may have even flat out been punched harder than that. If he is suffering from something like that, I'd be willing to bet it's from playing a tough, contact sport week in, week out rather than a single incident. I've no doubt it contributed, but let's get real here.

Say a boxer has to retire from something like that, does everyone point the finger at the last guy he fought?

Re: Lance Hohaia retires : Thu Apr 30, 2015 9:23 pm  

for a bit of a laugh, read the wigan board on this issue.... when i say laugh, i mean cringe.

Re: Lance Hohaia retires : Thu Apr 30, 2015 10:05 pm  

secondstanza wrote:

And if he did it in UFC he's just be like all the other fighters (We'd probably be asking why he didn't use an elbow or a knee). We can all pick a sport for our agenda.

Let's all cut this stupid sensationalism. Recurrent concussion symptoms is not a permanent thing, there is no recorded case in history of it being a permanent thing. Let's be frank, he's probably taken harder hits to the head than the one Flower gave him. The punch itself wasn't that hard. The fact Flower did it to an unconscious player is what was appaling. He'll have taken shoulder charges harder than that. He'll have probably hit the ground harder than that punch. Christ, he may have even flat out been punched harder than that. If he is suffering from something like that, I'd be willing to bet it's from playing a tough, contact sport week in, week out rather than a single incident. I've no doubt it contributed, but let's get real here.

Say a boxer has to retire from something like that, does everyone point the finger at the last guy he fought?

The danger of this incident was the fact that Hohia's brain absorbed the full impact of the contact. Usually, if the head is able to move backwards, the brain does not suffer the full impact of the force due to the movement of the head that will disperse the force. When the head is unable to move at the point of impact the brain will suffer greater damage.

Re: Lance Hohaia retires : Thu Apr 30, 2015 10:23 pm  

I've avoided the Wigan board on purpose after seeing some of the comments on cherry and White, I'd probably end up getting a ban.

Re: Lance Hohaia retires : Thu Apr 30, 2015 10:29 pm  

secondstanza wrote:

And if he did it in UFC he's just be like all the other fighters (We'd probably be asking why he didn't use an elbow or a knee). We can all pick a sport for our agenda.

Let's all cut this stupid sensationalism. Recurrent concussion symptoms is not a permanent thing, there is no recorded case in history of it being a permanent thing. Let's be frank, he's probably taken harder hits to the head than the one Flower gave him. The punch itself wasn't that hard. The fact Flower did it to an unconscious player is what was appaling. He'll have taken shoulder charges harder than that. He'll have probably hit the ground harder than that punch. Christ, he may have even flat out been punched harder than that. If he is suffering from something like that, I'd be willing to bet it's from playing a tough, contact sport week in, week out rather than a single incident. I've no doubt it contributed, but let's get real here.

Say a boxer has to retire from something like that, does everyone point the finger at the last guy he fought?

Don't come on here with all that sensible talk.

Re: Lance Hohaia retires : Thu Apr 30, 2015 10:59 pm  

nottinghamtiger wrote:

The danger of this incident was the fact that Hohia's brain absorbed the full impact of the contact. Usually, if the head is able to move backwards, the brain does not suffer the full impact of the force due to the movement of the head that will disperse the force. When the head is unable to move at the point of impact the brain will suffer greater damage.

Is that actually correct, or is it a RLFans 'truth' that people have adopted as gospel?

On the face of it, it seems to me that a head that is violently accelerated will do far more damage to the brain, which is then also subjected to violent movement, consequently impacting not only the skull but damaging blood vessels and other tissue.

It also seems patently obvious that 'Hohaia's brain' didn't 'absorbed the full impact of the contact'. His cheekbone/eye socket did, and they did exactly what they evolved to do - absorb the shock and protect the tissue behind them. There was no great movement of his head on the floor, therefore I can't see why the brain would have suffered particularly as a result.

Put it this way: if I place an apple in a metal box, which will bruise the apple more - punching it out of my hand and letting it hit the floor, or placing the box on the floor and punching it?

Almost everything I've read on brain injury talks consistently about acceleration as the key cause of traumatic brain injury - of which there was practically none during that second punch, as outrageous as it was morally. If anything, the first one (which most people agree was fair game) did more damage - it knocked him out cold for a start, which isn't to be underestimated.

Re: Lance Hohaia retires : Fri May 01, 2015 12:00 am  

Cronus wrote:

Is that actually correct, or is it a RLFans 'truth' that people have adopted as gospel?

Oh God - here we go! Cronut's thinking again. Anything can happen in the next five minutes.

On the face of it, it seems to me that a head that is violently accelerated will do far more damage to the brain, which is then also subjected to violent movement, consequently impacting not only the skull but damaging blood vessels and other tissue.

Is this a sentence?

It also seems patently obvious that 'Hohaia's brain' didn't 'absorbed the full impact of the contact'. His cheekbone/eye socket did, and they did exactly what they evolved to do - absorb the shock and protect the tissue behind them. There was no great movement of his head on the floor, therefore I can't see why the brain would have suffered particularly as a result.

You have no idea what Hohaia's brain did or did not absorb.

Put it this way: if I place an apple in a metal box, which will bruise the apple more - punching it out of my hand and letting it hit the floor, or placing the box on the floor and punching it?

An apple is about as far away from a human brain in form and function as yours is.

Almost everything I've read on brain injury talks consistently about acceleration as the key cause of traumatic brain injury - of which there was practically none during that second punch, as outrageous as it was morally. If anything, the first one (which most people agree was fair game) did more damage - it knocked him out cold for a start, which isn't to be underestimated.

You read as well!? What - "Apple Injuries For Dummies"?