There was plenty of Twitter discussion about Piri Weepu’s concussion this weekend – in case you missed it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gq7h7kvcQEg.

Although the injury looked traumatic, I would argue that this is a "preferable" concussion.

"Perferable" in the sense that there was absolutely NO DEBATE as to whether Weepu was concussed or not: the player’s obvious Loss of Conciousness (LOC) confirmed his diagnosis for not just the team medical staff, but also for the fans and spectators watching the game.

The problematic concussion cases in collision sports are those that do NOT present with classic signs of concussion – players feel "foggy" or out of sorts either during or after a game. The macho nature of rugby would often not permit such lowly symptoms to warrant a player missing training or match. Yet research has indicated that repeated knocks of this, less obvious nature can have dangerous long term effects for players. Thus, one should err on the side of caution with concussion and follow the mantra of leading researchers in this field currently: "If in doubt, sit ’em out!"

Why would the authors of this article include "injury-hit" as a prefix to Stormers, in article headline? According to UK-based soccer statistical group, Fink Tank, "player availability" is a critical determinant of a team’s success. Simply, the more players you have unavailable, the less your chances of a successful result. 

By implication in this article headline, the favourable result of the Stormers could have been even MORE favourable had they had all of their number one players available. 

Simple point made, but this flies in the face of those who claim that injury prevention can’t be considered part of "sports performance". Furthermore, it highlights the importance of a brilliant medical staff for a team.