Not directly related to RL but directly related to RL fans' rantings about the unfair treatment RL gets. Well after a positive start to the RUWC from an RU fans perspective, Panorama did a hatchet job on the dangers of RU and in particular tackling. They didn't mention RL at all (which they could easily have blamed as the source of all their ills).

I know a couple people involved with the American Football team featured in part of it, and they said it was originally a production for BBC Scotland Investigates, which is probably why there was little RL mention, as they don't have any professional teams up there.

Well it came up as a story in the press some month's back, didn't it?

I do somtimes wonder what the beeb is up to? having a go at union at the start of a major competition, they did the same with football in the run up to the world cup vote & suprise suprise we go no votes. Maybe it is because they dont havethe broadcast rights.

I saw that, expecting there to be some mention of RL; the issues were broadly the same, but the code wasn't mentioned at all.

I thought Bill Beaumont's absolute refusal to acknowledge the issue was quite telling - juxtaposed with all the ballyhoo about the RUWC, it was quite jarring; it did feel rather like an attempt to pi$$ on someone's cornflakes.

Been running a topical story when that sport is most in the news. What's the confusion?

Out of interest did they say that your more at risk dying from a bee sting whilst out on a walk in the countryside than on a sports field playing either code of rugby?

I don't suppose risk of death is the only thing that players need to be protected from though; the long term effects of repeated concussion can be life-changing, and could see the governing body of either code in hot water if they can't be seen to have done everything reasonably practicable to remove or mitigate that risk.

I imagine it's only a matter of time before one or more players of either code bring some form of action against the governing body; hasn't that already happened in the NFL?

Bill Beaumont. Did he say he's not affected at all by head injuries? If so, there must be some other explanation for the fact that I came across him at Schipol airport about 20 years ago with the woman on the KLM ticket desk having to explain to him that he wasn't in the right place to check in for his flight.

There was reference to a former Australian rugby player - but no mention of which sport. Yes, the NFL has had claims from ex-players. So, yes, the RFL / NRL may need to rethink the rules too. Tag rugby?

Also, yes I guess the BBC was miffed about not getting the rights given the timing. I was surprised RL wasn't blamed - there was an article written in the press by a woman a few months back who if I recall said she was / would not be keen to let her son play as the game (RU) was getting too physical and then seemed to blame it all on Sam Burgess a human battering ram brought in from RL!

How does boxing get by!

They've just removed head guards from amateur boxing!

No it hasn't. Sport has inherent risk and you accept that risk if you decide to play the sport. The NFL case was due to the NFL not informing the players of evidence they had of danger of repeated concussions therefore not giving players an opportunity to make an informed decision about taking the risk. Concussions still happen in the NFL. They still allow the shoulder charge, despite RL saying it is a major issue. It is I a sports interest to minimise risk to a point but if you wanted to reduce risk significantly in RL you would need to start playing flag or touch, most injuries happen in legitimate tackles.

While I'm not dismissing the effects of repeated concussions, the cases of individuals who've suffered the type of long term condition shown in the programme are few and very far between.

I've been involved in Rugby League all my life, I myself have played at many different levels and know hundreds of friends who've played international, SL, NRL and amateur. I would struggle to name 4 or 5 that have any type of mental condition and it is debatable whether it was caused by Rugby League.

The issues are very real for those individuals who do suffer reactions to being concussed, so I'm not diminishing those cases.

However
The programme makers, sports scientists and doctors are doing what they always do and sensationalising their work with over the top reactions.

How does football escape this argument, the number of times you see a clash of heads in football is greater than either Rugby code. The damage caused by repeated heading of the ball must be more significant than that of the whiplash effect of collisions in Rugby. I for one would not want to get my head under a ball that's been launched 70 metres downfield by the opposition Goalkeeper.

Boxing, I love the sport but come on..
If we're having a discussion about the effects of concussion on sportsmen and women then it has to start with Boxing, UFC etc.

As someone said earlier this smacks of a smug BBC journalist trying to make a name for themselves by timing this oversensationalised programme with the start of ITVs Rugby World Cup.

All the sports listed are nowhere near as dangerous as horse riding, which Her Majesty still does at 89 without a hat!

As does the Duke of Edinburgh who's even older. All those head-first landings clearly did him no harm.