Scarlets coach unhappy with Pro14 medical procedures

First topic message reminder :

Coach Wayne Pivac has queried the role of independent medical advisors after Scarlets' Pro14 defeat by Benetton.

Scrum-half Kieran Hardy and back-rower Josh Macleod were taken off despite being passed fit by Scarlets medics.

Pivac believes the temporary loss of the players for head injury assessments, complicated by language problems, influenced the score-line.

"To take guys off after ... our guys have checked and cleared him, I find strange," he said.

"HIA's aren't my favourite subject at the moment.

"We'll go through a process with our medical team of reporting it through to the Welsh Rugby Union ... it's information for the powers-that-be to hopefully make improvements for next season."

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/47305546

Because you're such an obvious unbiased judge

RugbyFan100 wrote:

LondonTiger wrote:

RugbyFan100 wrote:

BamBam wrote:So you think a qualified medical professional would falsely diagnose someone because of the rugby team they play for. Right

I believe that is what Wayne Pivac is hinting at yes.

But it's more exaggerating the symptoms than falsely diagnosing someone. It's a real extenuating circumstance - because there would never be any come back on the doctor - as he or she would be able to say "I was operating a zero tolerance approach to head knocks in this circumstance".

There is absolutely no way Pivac is moaning about this because he's in a bad mood about it. He would have spoken at length to his own physios and the condition of the players involved.

I trust the doctor more than I trust his physios to do 100% the right thing and err on the side of caution. We have seen far too many club employed officials ignore medical common sense in the heat of the moment - most noticeably with George North when playing for Wales and Northampton.

.

And I trust that Pivac believes that there is more to the story.

Maybe he does, but if Cockerill had made a statement like this he would be pilloried and reasonably so. I would have some respect for Pivac's position if he had raised it with the authorities before whining to the press.

We'll go through a process with our medical team of reporting it through to the Welsh Rugby Union - it's information for the powers-that-be to hopefully make improvements for next season.

LondonTiger wrote:

LD wrote:

LondonTiger wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:

LondonTiger wrote:So long as he is neither employed by WRU or RFU he is completely independent, nationality is irrelevant. Even if he was I would demand that said Doctor applied his medical knowledge independently of any pressure applied to him.

I am with Bam Bam - if the assigned medic states a player is not fit to go back onto the field then he should not go back on. If we then lose it is because the players on the pitch were unable to match the opposition.

But Pivac is not saying that is he ?

He is saying because of the language barrier his medics, and the independent doctor got their wires crossed and his players were refused to come back on. What a complete shambles.

That is not how I read his comments, nor how RF100 is.

Again I refer to this quote, what would you take this as meaning then ?

Pivac believes the temporary loss of the players for head injury assessments, complicated by language problems, influenced the score-line. 

So two comments with really very different meanings. He does not say language problems (and if I were being Devil's advocate why shoul dteh Doctor speak Welsh?) caused the issue, but that the withdrawal of the players for a temporary loss (meaning they could come back on) was complicated by the language barrier. 

Why have you made your typing so small ?

LondonTiger wrote:

Maybe he does, but if Cockerill had made a statement like this he would be pilloried and reasonably so.

Why? That would seem massively unreasonable to me. It's a serious issue. And would be no matter who had raised it.

If a Welsh speaking doctor had done the same to 2 Munster/Edinburgh/ Benetton players, the matter would be equally important to raise, deal with and ensure that everything is done to make the game as fair as posisble.

I would have some respect for Pivac's position if he had raised it with the authorities before whining to the press.

In my opinion this just shows the frustration that some club officials have at the incompetency of the league. Nothing will be done about it. Pivac knows that. So he's ensuring that the process that he sees as unfit for purpose is known about. I commend him for getting the word out.

The system is much better than it was before your league had any independent medical personnel. Can things be improved yes because nothing is perfect, but to blame the defeat on this incident is in my opinion appalling. Unless the Doctor spoke no English, very doubtful, then raising the issue of language is a red herring. What we have is a difference in medical opinion - with the doctor feeling the players needed HIAs.

There would be bloody murder, if for every game in Wales, the independent doctors were all Welsh, and were only ever speaking in Welsh when they made their decisions.

LondonTiger wrote: Can things be improved yes

What we have is a difference in medical opinion - with the doctor feeling the players needed HIAs.

As I have said - reading between the lines, it seems that Wayne Pivac does not believe this is the full story. It's your perrogative to believe what you choose, naturally.

It is very rare for a coach to speak out about such an issue as this, especially in the climate of HIAs, which Pivac himself refers to.

Can I just check what the complaints are please?

LD you are annoyed because you believe the doctor did not speak English?

RF100 you believe that the independent doctor was not independent and was making decisions to hinder the scarlets?

LondonTiger wrote:

RF100 you believe that the independent doctor was not independent and was making decisions to hinder the scarlets?

I believe that is what Wayne Pivac is hinting at in his very discretely worded statement yes.

As I said it's a nuanced area - there can never be any proof that the Doctor wasn't acting in the best interests. Which is why this matter is not likely to be investigated.

LondonTiger wrote:Can I just check what the complaints are please?

LD you are annoyed because you believe the doctor did not speak English?

RF100 you believe that the independent doctor was not independent and was making decisions to hinder the scarlets?

No I am not annoyed at anything. I can just see Pivacs point of view and I do not run with the trend that he is sore just because his team lost. To be honest, Benneton for me edged that game anyway.

What gets me most though, that certain members on here like to bury their heads in the sand when it comes to the fundamentals of the Pro14 and think everything is rosy in the Pro14 garden, reality is, it's not.

I don't even get why language is being brought into it

Should Ireland have Irish speaking Doctors, will Scotland roll out a Gaelic speaking doc from the outer Hebrides? All just to try and confuse people?

No!

Take nationality/language/other daft non important reasons out of the equation. What you have is a doctor overruling a medic/physio to say that a player isn't well enough to return to play.

If the issue was that the Italian Doctor felt that the players were absolutely fit enough to return to play but for some bonkers reason couldn’t signal this sufficiently clearly enough that the officials kept the players off then yes, it would be something that the league would need to look at. What is being said here though is that the Italian Doc over-ruled the club staff and said the players were not to return to the field.

And as for claiming a doctor would “exaggerate” someone’s symptoms, well, that’s just plain stupid as a doctor can be struck off for malpractice for doing such a moronic thing.

tigertattie wrote:I don't even get why language is being brought into it

Should Ireland have Irish speaking Doctors, will Scotland roll out a Gaelic speaking doc from the outer Hebrides? All just to try and confuse people?

No!

Take nationality/language/other daft non important reasons out of the equation. What you have is a doctor overruling a medic/physio to say that a player isn't well enough to return to play.

If the issue was that the Italian Doctor felt that the players were absolutely fit enough to return to play but for some bonkers reason couldn’t signal this sufficiently clearly enough that the officials kept the players off then yes, it would be something that the league would need to look at. What is being said here though is that the Italian Doc over-ruled the club staff and said the players were not to return to the field.

And as for claiming a doctor would “exaggerate” someone’s symptoms, well, that’s just plain stupid as a doctor can be struck off for malpractice for doing such a moronic thing.

Ok I'll leave it there then. It's clear we won't get anywhere, and you seem to be able to call posters stupid, whereas I expect I won't get afforded the luxury of reciprocating that kind of point of view. Thanks.

tigertattie wrote:Take nationality/language/other daft non important reasons out of the equation. What you have is a doctor overruling a medic/physio to say that a player isn't well enough to return to play.

I'm not arguing with this.

What I am alluding to is, the fact that Pivac could not get his players back on because their was a language problems between his medical team, and the doctor.

Surely this should not be an issue in this day and age, where we have a Faulty Towers scenario where Basel Fawlty is having problems with Manuel.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-oH-TELcLE

LordDowlais wrote:

LondonTiger wrote:Can I just check what the complaints are please?

LD you are annoyed because you believe the doctor did not speak English?

RF100 you believe that the independent doctor was not independent and was making decisions to hinder the scarlets?

No I am not annoyed at anything. I can just see Pivacs point of view and I do not run with the trend that he is sore just because his team lost. To be honest, Benneton for me edged that game anyway.

What gets me most though, that certain members on here like to bury their heads in the sand when it comes to the fundamentals of the Pro14 and think everything is rosy in the Pro14 garden, reality is, it's not.

No you just don't like when your black and white world is pointed out to be multi-coloured

Did Scarlets raise any issues with the appointment of the medic before hand or was it only after the fact?

marty2086 wrote:Did Scarlets raise any issues with the appointment of the medic before hand or was it only after the fact?

I don't know, I'm just going with the OP.

marty2086 wrote:No you just don't like when your black and white world is pointed out to be multi-coloured

LondonTiger wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:Would you take the advice off anyone you would not understand tigertattie ?

Every day, thousands of people see NHS doctors for whom English is not their first language.

Pivac is looking for something and someone to blame. He is the only person bringing the game into disrepute.

But they do speak English right? That's like the basic requirement of medical professionals coming here to upskill and work.

How is one medics word taken over the other medics word in the Pro14, what's the ruling there?

Mad for Chelsea wrote:I think LD is extrapolating a lot from the statement "complicated by language problems", which as far as I can tell doesn't refer to a direct quote from Pivac in the article.

Reading just what Pivac said, he's unhappy his players were told to come off by the independent medics after the Scarlets medics had cleared them. But that's surely the point of having medics who are independent, i.e. they can make decisions without the same pressure. So for me this is a good example of the system working (mostly) as it should.

If said players turned out to be healthy as the Scarlets medics said, then it's an example of the system not working?

LondonTiger wrote:The system is much better than it was before your league had any independent medical personnel. Can things be improved yes because nothing is perfect, but to blame the defeat on this incident is in my opinion appalling. Unless the Doctor spoke no English, very doubtful, then raising the issue of language is a red herring. What we have is a difference in medical opinion - with the doctor feeling the players needed HIAs.

Kind of a stretch to say he's blaming the defeat on this? If anything, it was the non-try that was awarded by the TMO that had a greater effect - double movement clear as day, yet it happened to a welsh team so it's to be swept under the rug.

The 'Independent' medic had no English.. the inference is that the Scarlet's medics couldn't communicate with him and yet it seems the medic got across his point fine enough, as that's Pivac's point of irritation... that Indepedent medic wouldn't allow players back on.
Nope, it seems to me Pivac is saying what everyone suspects him of saying... medic had bias and used it. Now if Pivac truly believes that then write his report/meet with/phone the Pro 14 admin people and formally complain ... and articulate his true feelings about what happened without the fluffy crap about language difficulties. But make his genuine complaint in private and see what the response is. He knows what he's doing by moaning in public.... taking responsibility off his back by dropping the old loaded Pro14 accusation - cheating.
So that's players that cheat, TMOs that cheat, refs that cheat and medics that cheat. Every game should be legally a draw to protect us from all this cheating.

Is the independent medics rule final, is what I'm asking? As what would be the point of having your own qualified medics if that's the case. And yes being bilingual should be a basic requirement, the same way French ref's speak English, and Wayne Barnes able to speak both French and Welsh...
Anyone would think Pivac is the first to openly discuss the low-quality refs in the Pro14. Jackman, Cockerill, Davies, Young, etc. They've all done it - maybe it is a real issue after all.

Dragons, Edinburgh, Blues, Blues and Scarlets?

Yep, seems to be a pattern. Like I alluded to earlier, when these people, coaches or fans, do a thorough dissection of reffing quality through the ranks of English Premiership, Top 14 and super rugby over the course of a full year, looking at all games and picking out all eyebrow raising decisions, then I'll be open to listening to a fully argued debate on the particular ref issues of Pro 14 over and above issues in those leagues.

Ps.... I'd assume an independent medic's decision should be final in an ongoing game when decisions on player welfare must be made. Certainly medics from one of the teams shouldn't have the power to over rule him/have the final say.... as that's the very conflict of interest that an Independent voice is meant to guard against.

The pattern being that coaches coming in and alluding to the low standard, for a number of years? That thorough dissection would be interesting to see but for now we’re concerned over the Pro14.

If this is the case then the independent committee should at least by bilingual. Wonder if the Scarlets medics were right and said players were okay?

No, we're not on the Pro14 for now..... Certain posters keep writing topics that allude to the EXCEPTIONAL nature of Pro14 in comparison to other leagues.
So I say if those people want to continue making assertions of exceptionality - prove it by looking at all games throughout a season from all the Leagues as a neutral, itemising all dodgy and downright suspect reffing decisions. I know there'll be a pile of them in each League because .I live in the real world and have observed enough of these external refs in operation through the years at International level.
'

We certainly have evidence in the past of downright Dangerous team tactics being employed in other leagues as regards player welfare.

SecretFly wrote:We certainly have evidence in the past of downright Dangerous team tactics being employed in other leagues as regards player welfare.

Guy Noves as a prime example.
There was at least one incident with North at Saints (though arguably a worse one by Wales with him)
Finally pretty sure there was something a bit iffy when Scarlets came to Welford Road but struggling to remember the specifics.

While the treatment of players by clubs following diagnosis of concussion has improved out of sight, there is still a pressure during games to keep players on the pitch. I was not aware that any league used independent medical staff before this thread started, and frankly I think it is brilliant that Pro 14 does this.

LondonTiger wrote:
Finally pretty sure there was something a bit iffy when Scarlets came to Welford Road but struggling to remember the specifics.

I'd be interested to know more on this if you have any details.

Thanks.

How have we moved to moaning about the standards of the refs on the Pro 14?

We're talking about an independent doctor. Not the refs or officials!!!

A team can always blame a defeat on a ref that’s been rubbish, but to blame a doctor who is looking out for the welfare of a player is a step too far.

Even the National Forward-passing League have independent doctors now who go round teams and rule players out of games. For a dark time, NFL teams would often pressure their own medical staff to inject pain killer after pain killer into players just to get the on the field. This had no regard for the player's welfare and future living standards which is why the independent team go round checking!

No game/bonus point/league/trophy is worth the life of a human being!

tigertattie wrote: to blame a doctor who is looking out for the welfare of a player is a step too far.

Even if you think that Doctor was under orders from the home team to try some gamesmanship instead of do his job as an independent medical assessor? (I'm not saying that is what 100% happenned)

For me this is another, in a long list, of inept instances the Pro14 is being brought into disrepute over.

But we are not allowed to talk about these things because we are just whinging because the Welsh teams are so crap and we are looking for excuses.

If people know me on here, I am the biggest critic of the Welsh regions for their under achievements so that does not really wash with me.

RugbyFan100 wrote:

tigertattie wrote: to blame a doctor who is looking out for the welfare of a player is a step too far.

Even if you think that Doctor was under orders from the home team to try some gamesmanship instead of do his job as an independent medical assessor? (I'm not saying that is what 100% happenned)

How can he be under orders when they aren't his bosses?

LordDowlais wrote:For me this is another, in a long list, of inept instances the Pro14 is being brought into disrepute over.

But we are not allowed to talk about these things because we are just whinging because the Welsh teams are so crap and we are looking for excuses.

If people know me on here, I am the biggest critic of the Welsh regions for their under achievements so that does not really wash with me.

As this thread has proved, the Pro14 are untouchable and can do no wrong. Even when a head coach calls them out on such a serious matter.

Do posters actually think Wayne Pivac is lying on public record or something?

RugbyFan100 wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:For me this is another, in a long list, of inept instances the Pro14 is being brought into disrepute over.

But we are not allowed to talk about these things because we are just whinging because the Welsh teams are so crap and we are looking for excuses.

If people know me on here, I am the biggest critic of the Welsh regions for their under achievements so that does not really wash with me.

As this thread has proved, the Pro14 are untouchable and can do no wrong. Even when a head coach calls them out on such a serious matter.

Do posters actually think Wayne Pivac is lying on public record or something?

Except he hasn't stated fact, he think they made a wrong call Im sure they would disagree

Pivac never assessed the players, the Scarlets medics could well think from knowing the players they were ok but independent medics are there to be objective and assess what they see before them, if they have any query over a concussion they have to take the players out of the game and rightly so as it's a dangerous matter.

Pivac hasn't stated that he thought the issue of their independence is under question, he has queried their role and in this case their language skills and if they aren't up to scratch he is right to do as it plays a major role in the HIAs

Two posters on here have questioned their independence, maybe best not to equate your opinions as facts presented by someone else

I can't believe people seriously think medical professionals would misdiagnose someone because of a rugby match

BamBam wrote:I can't believe people seriously think medical professionals would misdiagnose someone because of a rugby match

Yes because it's never happened before. Blood gate....cough...cough.... or HC semi between Leicester and Cardiff.......

BamBam wrote:I can't believe people seriously think medical professionals would misdiagnose someone because of a rugby match

Only way they could have lost, how else do you explain it? Everyone is cheating and screwing over the regions

It's clear for everyone to see, it's typical of some people on here they can't see what's right in front of them despite no evidence or anyone involved actually saying it but it's just typical of you to argue differently

As a side note: Both players passed as unfit by the 'independent' Italian doctor have been named as fit to start the Scarlets game this Sunday.

So either the Scarlets are showing utter reckless abandon for these 2 players by starting them 6 days after suffering head knocks that a doctor declared too severe to carry on.....................or...................erm.........something else.

RugbyFan100 wrote:As a side note: Both players passed as unfit by the 'independent' Italian doctor have been named as fit to start the Scarlets game this Sunday.

So either the Scarlets are showing utter reckless abandon for these 2 players by starting them 6 days after suffering  head knocks that a doctor declared too severe to carry on.....................or...................erm.........something else.

And there we have it, more manufactured indignation

You obviously didn't watch the game or read the article

LordDowlais wrote:

BamBam wrote:I can't believe people seriously think medical professionals would misdiagnose someone because of a rugby match

Yes because it's never happened before. Blood gate....cough...cough.... or HC semi between Leicester and Cardiff.......

Funnily enough, that's probably part of the reason independent medics were brought in. The pressure placed on team medics by their employers makes these cases more likely

Why would an independent doctor feel any pressure from a rugby coach?

BamBam wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:

BamBam wrote:I can't believe people seriously think medical professionals would misdiagnose someone because of a rugby match

Yes because it's never happened before. Blood gate....cough...cough.... or HC semi between Leicester and Cardiff.......

Funnily enough, that's probably part of the reason independent medics were brought in. The pressure placed on team medics by their employers makes these cases more likely

Why would an independent doctor feel any pressure from a rugby coach?

And it seems to draw these conclusions some posters are ignoring the facts of the case they brought up or aren't actually fully aware of them but are happy to jump to conclusions and create claims that no one involved has actually made

I mean it's not like BOTH players passed their HIAs and returned to the field during the game or that Pivac called their removal temporary or anything like that. It's not like he hasn't claimed they were biased merely questioned why the players were removed after their medics cleared them and has cited issues around language. I mean he hasn't exactly been clear on what the issues were so all we can do is speculate there and some have been happy to use speculation as fact.

marty2086 wrote:

BamBam wrote:I can't believe people seriously think medical professionals would misdiagnose someone because of a rugby match

Only way they could have lost, how else do you explain it? Everyone is cheating and screwing over the regions

It's clear for everyone to see, it's typical of some people on here they can't see what's right in front of them despite no evidence or anyone involved actually saying it but it's just typical of you to argue differently

Given that I explicitly said I was agreeing with marty in my post, why has the bit in bold not been deleted for being xenophobic? Not that I remotely think any of it is, but then I'm not a sensitive little sausage

BamBam wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

BamBam wrote:I can't believe people seriously think medical professionals would misdiagnose someone because of a rugby match

Only way they could have lost, how else do you explain it? Everyone is cheating and screwing over the regions

It's clear for everyone to see, it's typical of some people on here they can't see what's right in front of them despite no evidence or anyone involved actually saying it but it's just typical of you to argue differently

Given that I explicitly said I was agreeing with marty in my post, why has the bit in bold not been deleted for being xenophobic? Not that I remotely think any of it is, but then I'm not a sensitive little sausage

Seemingly my charm and dazzling smile helps me get away with these things

Jeez after the discussion I just had, I'm wondering how certain individuals are allowed to keep going off topic and continue to stink up the place.

Seeing as nobody addressed a single point I made, I guess we're in all agreement that one of the basic requirements for Independent Medical staff operating in a cross-country competition is to be bilingual.

Who said they weren’t bilingual though?

LordDowlais wrote:

BamBam wrote:I can't believe people seriously think medical professionals would misdiagnose someone because of a rugby match

Yes because it's never happened before. Blood gate....cough...cough.... or HC semi between Leicester and Cardiff.......

Red Bar for another factual comment

marty2086 wrote:Who said they weren’t bilingual though?

Well through the information we've got through Pivac they don't speak English, just Italian. Perhaps they speak French except nobody in this league speaks French, we all speak English and some of us Italian, so bilingual in that regard. Are you struggling again?

RugbyFan100 wrote:As a side note: Both players passed as unfit by the 'independent' Italian doctor have been named as fit to start the Scarlets game this Sunday.

So either the Scarlets are showing utter reckless abandon for these 2 players by starting them 6 days after suffering  head knocks that a doctor declared too severe to carry on.....................or...................erm.........something else.

Oh there we go. ANOTHER point I raised yesterday, AGAIN ignored by the V2 Patrol because it could have been..... correct? Which it's proven to be.

Now I'm not saying something foul has gone on, and I'm not saying get rid of the independent committee as I think it's a great solution to avoiding such scandals in the future (Bloodgate, etc.). The Scarlets professional medical team passed the two Scarlets players as fit, for some reason the independent committee did not (we think), and Pivac alluded to a language barrier in turn leading to a misunderstanding - hence being overruled even when said players were in good health as has been proven twice now. The home team is Italian, the 'independents' only speak Italian (as far as we know) - and this same medical team overruled another medical team who were correct.

Is Pivac right to suspect something fishy has gone on? Perhaps. Was Pivac right to bring it up, suggesting it was a problem then and will be a problem going forward? Absolutely.

I’m struggling to see where Pivac said they couldn’t speak English

marty2086 wrote:I’m struggling to see where Pivac said they couldn’t speak English

It's what the article suggests, so maybe something was said and it isn't highlighted. Are you suggesting there isn't a language barrier sufficient enough to complicate the issue? As I thought that was Pivac's point. Care to address anything else I've said that turned out to be correct, or you going to go back to ranting and raving?