Jump to content

Tom Savage shakes after headshot, allowed to continue playing


Buddy Hix

Recommended Posts

19 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

First, there was nothing "illegal" done, so no "legal repercussions" would apply.

 

Second, all sideline evaluators are likely given the same accepted protocol for examination of a player immediately after a hit like that.  It's likely a neuro check with a physical exam and questions/following commands.  If the player satisfies the criteria for re-entry, the neurologist tells the coach.  It is certainly likely that Savage was alert, responsive and appropriate during his exam and judged stable for re-entry. 

 

In order to prove malpractice, you would have to prove that the neurologist deviated completely from the standard of care that has been adapted for this specific scenario (i.e.: Savage was totally out of it when examined)---AND that his disregard for the standard of care and poor judgment led to damages in the patient/player.  None of these are true in this case, so...no malpractice.

 

You watching this on SportsCenter later in the day and saying "look---his hand is twitching for crissakes!!" doesn't really count as a neuro assessment.

So I guess we should just ignore the hundreds of Millions of dollars the NFL is currently settling for negligence, due to concussions.

We should also ignore the HC saying it was the wrong call to let Savage go back in that game.

We should also ignore the fact he was knocked unconscious and was left convulsing on the field.

We should also ignore the fact, then NFL is already investigating this matter. 

The independent neurologists do have access to TV replay and should have seen the replay. 

Regardless of what you want to believe, there was a lot of wrong doing, there is zero reason Savage should have been put back in, end of story.

90% of concussion symptoms dissipate after only a short few minutes and are rarely long lasting. 

Edited by CountDorkula
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, CountDorkula said:

So I guess we should just ignore the hundreds of Millions of dollars the NFL is currently settling for negligence, due to concussions.

We should also ignore the HC saying it was the wrong call to let Savage go back in that game.

We should also ignore the fact he was knocked unconscious and was left convulsing on the field.

We should also ignore the fact, then NFL is already investigating this matter. 

The independent neurologists do have access to TV replay and should have seen the replay. 

Regardless of what you want to believe, there was a lot of wrong doing, there is zero reason Savage should have been put back in, end of story.

90% of concussion symptoms dissipate after only a short few minutes and are rarely long lasting. 

 

 

I see stuff like this, the incident, not your post, and am just left wondering how we continue to overlook this issue in regards to acceptable medical practice and ethics, because the doctor followed NFL procedure. Just ignoring the fact that they never would have done this in their daily practice. The consensus in peer reviewed studies is that a standard concussion evaluation takes no less than 10 minutes. 

 

If a player was cleared, that means he was evaluated. If he was evaluated, then there was suspicion. I just do not understand the turn-around time in events like this and Russ Wilson. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

 

 

You watching this on SportsCenter later in the day and saying "look---his hand is twitching for crissakes!!" doesn't really count as a neuro assessment.

 

Part of the evaluation includes the doctor watching the video. So the fact that the video is disturbing is completely relevant. The fact that he wasn't allowed back into the game later and that he's likely to miss next week's game means that a mistake was initially made. Not sure why you're defending this so wholeheartedly. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Boyst62 said:

Completely true. 

 

Who and why is someone deciding for him?  Why should someone else make that decision?

 

 

He shouldn't be given the decision. He was just knocked unconscious literally moments prior, it is no time for anybody to be making any critical decisions. You're acting like this happened yesterday, and somebody on Thursday is like:

 

"Hey Tom, you were knocked unconscious last week, and you started trembling, you might not remember, that is common with concussions. Your body is physically capable of competing in a football game, but you could/will face very serious and dangerous medical repercussions for the rest of your life if you do, such as killing yourself, your family, and not being able to ever sleep through the night again do to head aches. Do you assume the risk?" 

 

What happened was: 

 

"Hey Tom, you got your bell rung pretty good there. We think you're good. You good to go?"

 

"put me in coach"

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Mr. WEO said:

A few things. 

 

First, it wasn't a "head shot".

 

Second, he did go off, was examined by a non team independent neurologist and then allowed to go back in.  He was subsequently reassessed and taken out.

I should have described the headshot better, I didn't mean by a defender just that his head banged off the turf.

 

Your second point is semantics. He went off because the drive ended. Savage was then evaluated and allowed to continue playing, as I stated. Despite the optics of an obvious brain injury and concussion. The system failed. It was reported that the Texans are saying they didn't see the video of him shaking. What good is the protocol if it misses video that every fan saw and if somebody who suffered trauma like that can't be diagnosed without the video?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Mango said:

 

 

I guess I am saying that while he followed NFL procedure, that does not mean he was following standard medical practice, which are two different things. I am also implying that I do not think that there was a "real" neuro assessment done because anything I read (I know internet is not always true) from neurologists say that during the convulsion he was also unconscious. 

 

I'm not saying he should have gone in, I'm saying that he was evaluated by an independent neurologist as per protocol and judged Ok per that protocol to go back in.  The protocol no doubt was developed by neurologists and sport medicine people.  So how can you claim he wasn't following standard medical practice?

 

No if someone saw his exam and says it was not done per protocol, then yes, he is not following the standard of care.

 

 

13 minutes ago, Buddy Hix said:

I should have described the headshot better, I didn't mean by a defender just that his head banged off the turf.

 

Your second point is semantics. He went off because the drive ended. Savage was then evaluated and allowed to continue playing, as I stated. Despite the optics of an obvious brain injury and concussion. The system failed. It was reported that the Texans are saying they didn't see the video of him shaking. What good is the protocol if it misses video that every fan saw and if somebody who suffered trauma like that can't be diagnosed without the video?

 

He went off and was evaluated.  Then he was judged ok to go back in.   Then he was re-evaluated and pulled.

2 hours ago, CountDorkula said:

So I guess we should just ignore the hundreds of Millions of dollars the NFL is currently settling for negligence, due to concussions.

We should also ignore the HC saying it was the wrong call to let Savage go back in that game.

We should also ignore the fact he was knocked unconscious and was left convulsing on the field.

We should also ignore the fact, then NFL is already investigating this matter. 

The independent neurologists do have access to TV replay and should have seen the replay. 

Regardless of what you want to believe, there was a lot of wrong doing, there is zero reason Savage should have been put back in, end of story.

90% of concussion symptoms dissipate after only a short few minutes and are rarely long lasting. 

 

As I said above, I'm not agreeing with the decision to put him back in, per se.  I am disagreeing that the neurologist committed an illegal act or an act of negligence.

 

 

2 hours ago, MDH said:

 

Part of the evaluation includes the doctor watching the video. So the fact that the video is disturbing is completely relevant. The fact that he wasn't allowed back into the game later and that he's likely to miss next week's game means that a mistake was initially made. Not sure why you're defending this so wholeheartedly. 

 

It's my understanding that the team trainer is up in a booth and is the "spotter" for these video reviews.  It's not clear who saw the video and when.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, row_33 said:

 

They are extremely inconsistent in making the right decision on plays like this.

 

Michigan sent a QB back out a few years ago that didn't know what huddle to return to.

 

 

 

In their defense, it's difficult to differentiate between "brain damage" and "Michigan quarterback."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, MDH said:

 

The evaluation is supposed to include watching the tape of what happened. 

Ah- I’ve never actually seen a formal list of what’s included 

5 hours ago, MDH said:

 

Part of the evaluation includes the doctor watching the video. So the fact that the video is disturbing is completely relevant. The fact that he wasn't allowed back into the game later and that he's likely to miss next week's game means that a mistake was initially made. Not sure why you're defending this so wholeheartedly. 

 

 

Hes defending proper medical and legal terminology use primarily 

 

You can get a quick diagnosis wrong without it being malpractice or illegal or even negligent. 

 

my impression was that someone in the booth watching the game could pull a guy not that the doctor was required to watch video before clearing. Odds are they cleared the test and then in reviewing the film pulled him back out. Just a guess. And like I mentioned, I’m not familiar with the formal protocol. If you have a link that’d be cool for discussions sake.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Mango said:

 

 

He shouldn't be given the decision. He was just knocked unconscious literally moments prior, it is no time for anybody to be making any critical decisions. You're acting like this happened yesterday, and somebody on Thursday is like:

 

"Hey Tom, you were knocked unconscious last week, and you started trembling, you might not remember, that is common with concussions. Your body is physically capable of competing in a football game, but you could/will face very serious and dangerous medical repercussions for the rest of your life if you do, such as killing yourself, your family, and not being able to ever sleep through the night again do to head aches. Do you assume the risk?" 

 

What happened was: 

 

"Hey Tom, you got your bell rung pretty good there. We think you're good. You good to go?"

 

"put me in coach"

 

Doesn't matter.  His body, his choice.  Emotionally, mentally or otherwise strained ... I don't want someone else making the call for me. Ever.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Boyst62 said:

Doesn't matter.  His body, his choice.  Emotionally, mentally or otherwise strained ... I don't want someone else making the call for me. Ever.

 

 

I generally do not disagree. And while I may get a bad feeling about my first scenario above if Tom decides to play. I don’t think the second scenario is just either.

 

To me this situation is more akin to mental health decisions. Where in NYS you cannot home somebody who is mentally ill long term against their will. However if they are deemed mentally unfit in a way to where they are a danger to themselves, you can absolutely mandate a temporary stay in the hospital for a few days.

 

In this case, on game day, Savage is not deemed fit enough to make decisions that would not endanger himself. If he wants to play next week, while I disagree, I would accept the fact that he made the decision himself in a much healthier place.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...