Why I will continue to argue for concussion victims – past and future

That is, while the NRL and NFL have always been heavy-contact sports, just like rugby union, the game has changed and not just on the field, where the players are bigger and faster than ever before, making the impacts even more devastating.

Off the field, medical science has advanced to the point that proof of the damage done by such constantly clashing and crashing vertical convertibles is incontrovertible. And civil law is now awash with precedents that professional sports organisations have a duty of care to their employees, that they breach at their peril.

Am I too strong in my expression of dismay at those who don’t get it, those endlessly trying to block change? Maybe, I guess.

But I certainly don’t get any blowback from concussion experts, affected footballers or their families – all of whom, and without exception, urge me to go harder. I challenge anyone to spend an evening with someone suffering from possible CTE and not come away reeling, determined to do everything possible to lessen the risks for the current generation.

At every step along the way of this saga, there have been those who have argued strongly against the link between football and CTE; against doing away with shoulder charges; against HIAs; against independent medicos; against players who have obviously been affected by too many concussions from retiring early; against compulsory stand-downs for those who have been badly knocked out. I have argued for all those things, against oft-bitter opposition, and mercifully they have all come to pass anyway, making the game safer.

For me, the debate over the long kick-off is another step along the way. It is obvious that it must change, and obvious that it will change. And to me – and the many concussion experts I consult extensively before every concussion piece I write – yes, I do have frustration that it is not changing quickly enough, meaning ever more damage is being done.

Civil law is now awash with precedents that professional sports organisations have a duty of care.

For me, the idea that “changing tackling technique” can make the long kick-off returns safer is like saying there might be a way you can hold your head that will lessen the risk to your neck when you constantly drive your car into another car at 20km/h. Yes, there might be, but it is rather beside the point – particularly when it comes to the 99 per cent of players who are not professional, and not so skilled, starting with the juniors.

Ditto, the idea we can just leave the NRL to it, as it knows what needs to be done and can be counted on to do it. In no commercial sports organisation in the world, in history, has this been the case. Each step forward has come from legal, medical and public pressure. I am proud to amplify the views of the first two and help inform the view of the third.

As for Andrew, I bear you no ill will and look forward to reading your next column, as much as ever. I think!

NRL is Live and Free on Channel 9 & 9Now

Sports news, results and expert commentary. Sign up for our Sport newsletter.