www.dailystar.co.uk/rugby-league ... per-League saw this last week but could not cut and paste the link. Very critical of his employers and in light of him being a one club man that looks like the Giants.

www.dailystar.co.uk/rugby-league ... per-League saw this last week but could not cut and paste the link. Very critical of his employers and in light of him being a one club man that looks like the Giants.

more critical of the rfl

Rubbish Durham-he's not at all being critical of the Giants- he's being critical of RFL Stance on player welfare.
He's also clarified publicly he is not "considering quitting" but HAS considered quitting in the past.
Nothing to see here - no negative story for you to peddle. Sorry to disappoint.

Interesting article although not sure an RL players life is worse now than years ago.

It's full time, human beings have got naturally bigger and the training is far more scentific along with a better understanding of nutrients and rehydration.

Medical technology has moved on so injuries can be scanned, identified properly, treated properly and operated on to return to full fitness to prolong a career.

There are more replacements and less games, the Easter period being the only back up weekend where teams play twice over a period.

The maximum number of games an ever present can play is 36, excluding internationals in a 9 month period.

Back in the part time days you played 30 league games plus, Challenge Cup, Yorkshire/Lancashire Cup, Floodlight Cup and Championship play offs.

30 league, plus 5 challenge cup, 4 county cup, 4 floodlit cup and 2 play off games an ever present could play 45 games.

Teams would play Xmas day and Boxing Day too remember we used to play Halifax and the players would also work as well as train.

Also injuries such as ligaments, muscles etc were harder to identify and almost impossible to treat other than by rest and natural recovery. Also concussion as not understood the same as it is now. There were also competitive scrums.

The only way to reduce the number of games a player takes part in would be to increase the cap but cap an individual players wages and the number of games a player can play, so clubs would have to have more squad players and a good rotation policy.

So for instance any player can only play 20 games in a season plus internationals which would certainly even up the injury situation a bit.

Any more thoughts ??

Two thoughts on this

First players should be able to recover properly! If this cannot be achieved on a week recovery time scale one of three things needed.
Minimum squad number put in place to ensure cap is spread over X amount of players ''however this still may not fully deal with a big list of injuries"
Increase of the cap to allow a greater player pool. Although good players won't want to sit in the stands until a starter is needing a rest injured. Also a club could just spend the money on increasing the wages of the squad.
The best is sorting out the reserve league. A b side playing its own compititon below ours. Some clubs are doing this but not enough. If each club had this another X amount of players who are quite there can come in for player rotation to avoid fatigue or players playing busted. Although this would cost a whole lot of money that clubs including us would struggle to fund.

My other thoughts are that this is the second complaint article with big eorl. The other being the Easter weekend. The players at some point played rugby for fun a hobby and they had the talents and physical attributes to turn this hobby and passion into paid work. I understand player welfare is important but you have to think how many young players would love to get to where eorl is! I would certainly say the majority

its certainly becoming a problem , the amount of injuries clubs are having is not good for the player or fans, as fans we want to see the best players on the pitch

easter needs to be looked at and maybe also magic weekend but money talks and the rfl will make money from it so wont be scrapped

.

Ooh Jools in default position defend Giants without thinking nothing new there.

The article is about the number of games that players play and I do think there is something in that.

The game has changed a lot in recent years. Players now are so strong and big and fit that been hit by one of them is a huge thing.

20 years ago even as an amateur I could have played against pro's and maybe held my own .NOW I WOULD HAVE BEEN DEAD AFTER ABOUT 10 MINUTES.

I do though think the article is critical of the Giants although I think it would be no different about any club and could be written about any player at any professional club the way players are still expected to pull on the shirt when injured or not recovered properly.LAST YEAR I DID SAY THAT WHEN WE HAD OUR FIVE FULL PROPS THAT WE SHOULD HAVE ROTATED THEM EVERY 4 WEEKS SO THAT PLAYERS ONLY PLAYED 4 OUT OF 5 games. THAt reduces over a season by at least 5 less games.
Some posters such as jools said we should play out best team every week. I still disagree with that, players should be rotated regularly and only in big games do you put out your best team.

Every year there is one team that struggles with a big injury crisis. This year Leeds, Wigan Cas and ourselves have all had big injury problems and we have not even got to the halfway stage.

I agree with most of what you say Durham,clubs nowadays take a naturally big player and build him up with weights to turn him to a giant with no thought of what will happen to him in later life.Since SL started I have taken notice of the increase in serious injuries to players and it seems that the numbers increase each season.This needs looking into as a matter of urgency before a player is really seriously hurt or worse.Players of 100kgs plus are now commonplace and these guys can motor,One of the reasons the squad system was brought in was so players wouldn't be playing the full 80 mins and as you say can be rotated but I believe the real damage is being done simply by the creating of bigger faster athletes and heavier hit ups.We all love watching hard and fast RL but as spectators few of us look at the damage that happens to players not just during a game but in later life.I believe this is what Eorl was alluding to.

Just my opinion but the way forward is for Super league to break away from the RFL, with the right people running it, It could forge ahead and improve itself no end, there would be more money for bigger squads, you could limit the number of games any player could play, which would introduce more skill from a coaching point of view, Sky are only really interested in S league anyway, that's where the money is generated let them have it.

Wouldn't be very popular with a lot of people but the lower divisions would have to negotiate their own deals, would clear out a lot of dead wood at RFL as well, More money in S league means better imports = better standards = better game = more Fans being attracted hopefully, It will come one day ( It's already been discussed more than once ) Bite the bullet now and cure more than Eorl's problems.

Where would this "more money" come from Jo?

instead of going 10 metres back they will change it to going 5 metres and lessen the impacts

They could always have a word with Barry Hearne, just look at what he's done for Darts.....