Appalling that Lloris was allowed to stay on

[SandroClegane]

I've not read this thread but I will say this.

Similarly to drink drive these days making life difficult to go out and enjoy oneself this head injury thing and people saying Lloris should not have played on, IMO a good life comes with danger .

Take away danger and life becomes boring.

That's it from me. I won't be reading any replies.

This is the most disgusting response I've seen yet. Not only is drinking and driving incredibly irresponsible to yourself, but you are putting other people's lives at risk.

 

[mpickard2087]

A related article I found interesting, hopefully Hugo is fine and has no setbacks.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/cricket/24836016

 

[IGSpur]

Heard about this. Don't mean to sound rude but what is your point? Is the whole issue over receiving concussion?

I posted earlier a video of Chanderpaul being hitting in the head and getting knocked out. He was assessed, carried on playing and had no concussion.

Smith got hit in the head, didn't get knocked out carried on batting and had concussion later.

Lloris, Lukaku, Flamini and Huth were knocked out, assessed by the medics using concussion tests and medics deemed them to not have concussion. As far as I know all medics were proven correct after scans and none had concussion.

The only one out of all of them to have post concussive affects (if that's correct) was the person who never got knocked out.

So do we take off any footballers who have head collisions, have a ball hit them hard in the head or repetitively head the ball as they may have concussion and not show immediate signs. People ask why did Hugo have a scan after if they were sure he had no concussion, well it's common sense. Just because they couldn't be 100% sure he wasn't concussed doesn't mean they weren't 95% sure. You still get them scanned.

You can't ever be 100% sure that those who have clashed heads or head the ball, have/will not suffer concussion so would you accept a medic allowing them to carry on playing if they deem it ok?

What do you do from here then? How do you put one person's safety over another? You either take everyone off who suffers from some sort of head trauma, KO'd or not, to go for scans and checks as you can't prove they don't have concussion or you leave em on.

As much as we laughed when Fergie claimed RVP could have been killed by Williams, was he wrong?. It was a hard hit in the head. I'm sure the docs on here will agree that he could potentially have suffered from concussion. Shouldn't he come off? Would what have happened if he got another hard ball in the head?

Where does it stop? where do we draw the line?
I stick by my original point. We employ medics who are trained in this. Of course docs can make mistakes but they are trained and trusted. If they believed Hugo Lloris to not be concussed what is the problem with letting him play on?

 

[Gedson100]

Not impressed by Andre's response today:

Spurs insist Lloris was fit to continue playing following thorough checks by club doctor Shabaaz Mughal and physio Geoff Scott.
It is this criticism of the club's medical staff, who saved Fabrice Muamba's life at White Hart Lane two seasons ago, that has riled Villas-Boas so much.
"I stand absolutely by the decision I took and I stand by the decision that the medical department took following the checks that they made on the player," the Tottenham manager said in a fiery press conference on Wednesday afternoon.
"All the checks were according to the book.
"I have registered the fact that a couple of people have taken this opportunity to find the chance to get themselves publicised who have no experience in the pitch whatever in these type of situations.
"And I find it extremely disappointing that two people - a great doctor and a great physio, who saved the life of Muamba were heavily put into question by lots of incompetent people, with absolutely no experience on the pitch, no experience in the action, no experience in the moment.
"That is extremely serious and disappointing."

When asked if Scott and Mughal were angry about their conduct being questioned, Villas-Boas said: "Yes, of course."< [probably because it's not their fault!]

He would be best off leaving this alone IMO.
To my mind the medical staff and players, lead by Dawson wanted Lloris to go off and the only person who wanted to stay on was Lloris himself. All the while, Andre looked particularly shifty and as if he'd rather not waste a substitution. This might be strategically sound from a 'game theory' standpoint, but a pure human response is that Hugo should have come off immediately. A response that the medical community at large supports.

It seemed clear to me: Lloris overruled the med staff and Andre let him. Buck stops with Andre.

Citing Muamba is a cheap shot too as is calling people who questioned Lloris staying on: 'incompetent people' whilct citing that these people have 'no experience on the pitch, no experience in the action, no experience in the moment.' an irrelevance if ever I saw one.

I am a big fan of Andre generally but he's being a dick on this issue and is wrong.

 

[IGSpur]

Not impressed by Andre's response today:

Spurs insist Lloris was fit to continue playing following thorough checks by club doctor Shabaaz Mughal and physio Geoff Scott.
It is this criticism of the club's medical staff, who saved Fabrice Muamba's life at White Hart Lane two seasons ago, that has riled Villas-Boas so much.
"I stand absolutely by the decision I took and I stand by the decision that the medical department took following the checks that they made on the player," the Tottenham manager said in a fiery press conference on Wednesday afternoon.
"All the checks were according to the book.
"I have registered the fact that a couple of people have taken this opportunity to find the chance to get themselves publicised who have no experience in the pitch whatever in these type of situations.
"And I find it extremely disappointing that two people - a great doctor and a great physio, who saved the life of Muamba were heavily put into question by lots of incompetent people, with absolutely no experience on the pitch, no experience in the action, no experience in the moment.
"That is extremely serious and disappointing."

When asked if Scott and Mughal were angry about their conduct being questioned, Villas-Boas said: "Yes, of course."< [probably because it's not their fault!]

He would be best off leaving this alone IMO.
To my mind the medical staff and players, lead by Dawson wanted Lloris to go off and the only person who wanted to stay on was Lloris himself. All the while, Andre looked particularly shifty and as if he'd rather not waste a substitution. This might be strategically sound from a 'game theory' standpoint, but a pure human response is that Hugo should have come off immediately. A response that the medical community at large supports.

It seemed clear to me: Lloris overruled the med staff and Andre let him. Buck stops with Andre.

Citing Muamba is a cheap shot too as is calling people who questioned Lloris staying on: 'incompetent people' whilct citing that these people have 'no experience on the pitch, no experience in the action, no experience in the moment.' an irrelevance if ever I saw one.

I am a big fan of Andre generally but he's being a dick on this issue and is wrong.

We have medical staff for this very reason, and no doctor in their right mind would allow their judgement to be overruled by a patient.

I assume you think the medical staff made a mistake and were incorrect in their assessment. They allowed a player to endanger their life and presumably should be sacked no? Negligence on their part.

Also it's quite arrogant of you to say AVB is plainly wrong for supporting his medical staff as they were actually all correct in their assessments. Are you implying that Arsenal, Everton, Newcastle and Stoke's medically trained staff were all incorrect despite subsequent scans proving their players had no concussion and so were correct, strange.

 

[Legend10]

So many know alls about something they're not qualified in, if people are qualified fair enough, if not then just leave something you really don't understand.

 

[worcestersauce]

Look, the doctor allowed him to stay on, if he said he should come off he'd have been off but he didn't, he made a medical decision and he was clearly correct. The point of the detractors was that it was a knock to the head however, you do not need to be knocked out to suffer a subdural haematoma so why is anybody who bangs their head allowed to play on? I'm sorry but Andre is right to defend his medical staff who have been proven to have acted correctly

 

[Gedson100]

We have medical staff for this very reason, and no doctor in their right mind would allow their judgement to be overruled by a patient.

I assume you think the medical staff made a mistake and were incorrect in their assessment. They allowed a player to endanger their life and presumably should be sacked no? Negligence on their part.

Also it's quite arrogant of you to say AVB is plainly wrong for supporting his medical staff as they were actually all correct in their assessments. Are you implying that Arsenal, Everton, Newcastle and Stoke's medically trained staff were all incorrect despite subsequent scans proving their players had no concussion and so were correct, strange.

I don't think the med staff did anything wrong, I don't think they had ultimate authority in this situation.

If Lloris seems fine and is saying 'I'm fine', without a protocol for removing players, the med staff aren't even in the mix. They seemingly tested him with a couple of standard tests, which presumably he passed. Andre can still take him off if he perceives the situation accurately ie. he's just been knocked out and should be checked further.

He didn't do that and is clearly lacking knowledge about concussions.

And yep, you should take all those players off but football is woefully neanderthal in its understanding of concussions et al, so it's no surprise that all these players stayed on, whether or not they were subsequently fine is irrelevant.

There's too much stock put into Terry Butcher style heroism in football. If you've sustained what could be a serious injury, you should go off; especially related to head injuries.

 

[IGSpur]

Fair @jair1970 , but surely if the medical staff thought he was concussed or were genuinely concerend they would have pressed the issue to AVB and told him to take Lloris off. The same way if someone goes down with a niggling injury, and they recommend taking them off throught he mouth pieces. I'm just saying that I back their decision.

I too think footballer health is important and understand the need to take precautions esp with head injuries, but see my post about. Where do you stop? Ironically out of all the cases mentioned the only player to show concussion was the one who didn't end up unconscious (Graeme Smith) so how do you safeguard against all of this? Then it all gets very messy. Who's injury is worse? Who do we force off? How can we prove who's concussed? Should we heck all head injuries? That's why for me, we should just leave it with the medical staff we have at the time and place and trust their decision.

 

[Dan Yeats]

I would humbly suggest that anyone who isn't formally medically trained and GMC registered is probably unfit to comment about the judgement of the professional doctor who saved Muamba's life not so long ago.

 

[Dan Yeats]

I don't think the med staff did anything wrong, I don't think they had ultimate authority in this situation.

Of course they do. They have medico-legal responsibility.

 

[parklane1]

So many know alls about something they're not qualified in, if people are qualified fair enough, if not then just leave something you really don't understand.

Especially the media who are making a mountain out of a molehill.

 

[Khilari]

Lloris, Lukaku, Flamini and Huth were knocked out, assessed by the medics using concussion tests and medics deemed them to not have concussion. As far as I know all medics were proven correct after scans and none had concussion.

People ask why did Hugo have a scan after if they were sure he had no concussion, well it's common sense. Just because they couldn't be 100% sure he wasn't concussed doesn't mean they weren't 95% sure. You still get them scanned.

I don't think they can do that. You'd need to do quite a lot more examining and questioning after someone has lost consciousness following head trauma to exclude concussion or a more serious problem (such as a fracture, a bleed, axonal injury etc). That's probably what they wanted to do after removing Lloris from the field. But all they could do is ask him basic questions about his vision, shine a light in his eyes to look for an abnormality (very early to be abnormal) etc.

Also, the scan was to look for bad things. Observing him immediately after would have given them the time to decide if he needed a scan at all, urgently then, later or if something changes, like his pupil size changes relative to each other, slurred speech etc.

It's very difficult to summarise 6 years of med school and 8 years as a doctor into a few paragraphs to explain why lots of assumptions made by people watching what happened aren't what they thought.

A lot of people wouldn't have a CT scan at all on the NHS (not indicated) but as he's a prof footballer and Spurs no doubt will simply pay for one, he will have had one anyway.

Also, if of 100 players concussed / knocked out only 1 each time had some evidence of brain injury, I wouldn't feel it sensible to take a chance and leave them on the field, even though something may go wrong 1% of the time - why? Not just because of the probability of something going wrong, but the dramatic effects of missing someone like an intracranial haemorrhage or C-spine injury. That's why all players knocked out should be taken off the field. Lukaku, Hutch, Flamini - all.

 

[Flashspur]

Andre is hitting back in the press pointing the finger at Lakaku as well. I think its high time someone turned the blowtorch on the striker. How avoidable was the incident as it seems Lakaku had a trailing leg.

He seems to have got off scot free when the reason for Loris' injury was Lakaku's dangerous play. Isnt prevention of these kind of injuries as importnat as the treatment of them?

Why aren't people commenting on this? I think a red card would not have been out of order. Accident - bah!!

 

[gorky]

I am in total shock the last few weeks with the Spurs medical staff. First they let Andros stay in after being knocked unconscious and now they let Lloris stay in? Completely dangerous and barely regarding any protocol on concussions. I don't even think they gave him a concussion test.

When you are knocked out, you have a concussion, that's a fact. In no world should either of those players have been allowed to stay on.

Disagree with every word and I'll put my faith in the spurs medical team who have more experience than you.

Nice name though, mr game of thrones

 

[southlondonyiddo]

Andre is hitting back in the press pointing the finger at Lakaku as well. I think its high time someone turned the blowtorch on the striker. How avoidable was the incident as it seems Lakaku had a trailing leg.

He seems to have got off scot free when the reason for Loris' injury was Lakaku's dangerous play. Isnt prevention of these kind of injuries as importnat as the treatment of them?

Why aren't people commenting on this? I think a red card would not have been out of order. Accident - bah!!

I agree. For me Lakaku could have done more to avoid catching Lloris and if he'd really wanted to could have avoided any contact whatsoever. I'm sure he meant to give him a little nudge to let him know he was around but ended up accidentally catching him very nastily

 

[jerseyspur]

Again...scans do not prove/disprove the presence of a concussion...

There appears to be some back tracking here from AVB in these comments, because I'm sure initially he stated it was his decision to keep Lloris on, although the Medics advised him to be withdrawn

These are the guidelines which are endorsed by FIFA when assessing someone with a head injury. It is a clinically validited tool called 'SCAT 3' designed to differentiate between injuries that could be more significant than others. Pay particular attention to the 'initial pitch side assessment (page 2) which states, if any other these symptoms are present, a player SHOULD NOT return to Sport on the same day...& then rewatch the video of the incident...

http://bjsm.bmj.com/content/47/5/259.full.pdf

 

[Kendall]

So many know alls about something they're not qualified in, if people are qualified fair enough, if not then just leave something you really don't understand.

And yet there are people that are more qualified than our medical staff that are saying the same thing. Vile of AVB to bring up Muamba, completely different kettle of fish and if it wasn't for the fan who was a specialist in thus area then he'd of been dead anyway (according to the specialist).

The medical staff for these things are not specialists in individual areas. They're jacks of many aspects.

 

[Khilari]

Just to say I emailed the club and they replied. You don't have to read the whole thing, but basically they have nothing further to say on the matter. I think tbh, neither do I. Hope Lloris stays well and IMO head injuries are treated more seriously in general.

I said on 4th Nov:

Dear Sir / Madam

I have been a Tottenham fan for over 25 years and enjoy attending both home and away games as often as I can and am currently a bronze member. I'm also a doctor currently working in hospital medicine and have been for 10 years. I'm emailing you to raise concerns over the way Hugo Lloris was allowed to remain on the pitch and continue to play.

Firstly I'd like to express my relief that he remains well. He also played exceptionally well.

I was concerned that he was allowed to remain on the field to continue playing, despite, it seemed the medical staff's initial insistence that he leave. Secondly, I am more concerned by the statement released on the Official Site, where the Head of Medical Services Wayne Diesel said: "Once the relevant tests and assessments were carried out we were totally satisfied that he was fit to continue playing."
As a doctor, who works in acute medicine and the casualty department regularly on call, I find it hard to believe that the "relevant tests and assessments" could be carried out on a football pitch. No formal neurological examination could be carried out with a player standing at the pitch side, his cervical spine was not immobilised and given he had no recollection of what had just happened, it seems strange his opinion on whether he should or could continue to play was taken into account. Retrograde amnesia, the loss of memory after a traumatic head injury is usually a sign the trauma was significant.
Furthermore, I am slightly annoyed that the website comments that a precautionary CT scan of the brain was performed in a manner suggesting this was over and above what was needed. In fact, one of the things a doctor would be looking for on a CT scan was bleeding in or around the brain - given this was looked for after the match, it is more concerning he was allowed to continue to play despite concerns this needed to be excluded. According to the American Academy of Neurology grading of concussion, Hugo Lloris suffered a Grade III (the highest) level of concussion given comments suggesting he lost consciousness (even though for seconds).
I do agree with media comments that guidelines on concussion or loss of consciousness need to be followed more carefully, in particular Fifpro and the Professional Footballers' Association as reported by the BBC.

Hugo Lloris is a fantastic goalkeeper who gives absolutely everything whilst playing in a Tottenham shirt, which makes the decision to take a risk with his health more perplexing. I accept, not being there means I am not in possession of all the facts, but I wonder if you could explain the decision to allow him to continue to play, given there was still opportunity to bring on a (very good and experienced substitute goalkeeper)?

I am grateful for your response.

THFC Customer Care responded today:

Hello Dr ______,


Thank you for your email.


The Club have made a statement in relation to this matter and will be making no further comment.


Your comments have been noted and are appreciated and we thank you for taking the time to write to us with your view.


Kind regards,


Jake


Customer Care Team

 

[SpursManChris]

The simple fact is, EVEN if AVB wanted to replace him, he couldn't have. Lloris was NOT coming off. AVB has not helped his critics by saying "I made the decision to keep him on based on him feeling he was okay." He should have said, "I made the decision not to organise a team of us to physically restrain him and remove him from the pitch." Not that people should need to be told that, it should be obvious that it would not be a good look.