Shocking news this morning that Aussie cricketer Phil Hughes has died from injuries sustained by receiving a blow to the head during a domestic game in Australia.

25 is no age to pass away, but even worse to happen playing a game he loved and considered one of the supposed less dangerous sports to play.

Very sad. RIP.

It does raise the issue of the legality of bouncers in cricket. It's a topic the cricketing 'family' have been very careful and coordinated in insisting isn't an issue. It's something helmets no doubt help with, but as this shows, huge areas are unprotected and protecting them would cause a big restriction in movement and prevent a lot of the entertaining shots.

I'm not BTW suggesting they should ban them, but it needs to be discussed at least. The aim of a short delivery I always thought was to entice the batman into an airshot. That's how my high school cricket coach always told us. But it's definitely used to intimidate and bully the batsman and cause them to make an error. I think the number of bouncers is limited these days, at least in some forms of the game?

I agree.

First of all, condolences to his friends and family.

Secondly, hopefully it might encourage ALL sports (especially those that have contact to the head/neck, to think about player safety.
Whilst freak acts do occur and aren't always possible to avoid I'm sure there's more that could be done in most relevant sports.

Due to sport now being full time pro alongside huge advances in sports science, you've got sportspeople who are fitter/stronger/faster/more powerful etc than ever before. In RL I'm convinced there will be another McKinnon type incident in the near future and I worry about the effect of the blows to the head that RL players regularly receive.

It's a very sad story all round.

From what I gather he was struck behind and below his left ear which damaged an artery and led to a blood clot. With this in mind I'm sure they will look at the helmet designs and try to protect this area better, which they should be able to do easily enough without reducing vision or mobility too much.

Should they ban the bouncer? That's a tough one. It's an integral part of the game. Should boxers only be allowed to use body shots? Or should footballers be stopped from heading the ball?

As sad as it is I think it does just have to go down as one of those freak accidents that unfortunately do occur sometimes. By all means look at ways to protect the players better, but I'm not sure banning bouncers is the best way to do this.

Whilst my thoughts go out to his friends and family, the person who I can't help but feel for most is Sean Abbott. Imagine how he must feel right now.

RIP Phil.

Listening to several cricket expert (some ex-test batsmen) today, it seems that this is such a rare occurence that they mainly believe that it should not have an effect on the way the game is played, other than the strive to get safer helmets. Apparently, the ones in use today would not have stopped this tragedy and to extend the helmet past the neck would restrict movement of the head and lead to more head bangs.

It was a tragic accident that may never happen again (hopefully). I feel for Sean Abbot as well, the lad must be dying inside.

It shouldn't be forgotten that it isn't compulsory to wear a helmet at all. Yorkshire's Brian Close wouldn't, for example, have worn one. Nor probably would he have ducked, tbh. To me, it is an extremely rare tragedy in unique circumstances (it wasn't a blood clot but what apparently happened was the impact actually dissected the vertebral artery, leading to a massive bleed into the brain).

However the vertebral artery is not the only place on the body you can get a blow to and risk serious injury or even death. I suppose the trade-off is protection versus being impeded in playing cricket - or indeed any sport.

The difficulty in having "cage" protection much lower than helmets already provide is that the more cage, padding and support you add, the more you restrict comfort and mobility.

I don't expect many batsmen will feel the need to change their headgear as they will understand that this was just sheer terrible luck and one of those isolated serious injuries that statistics dictate will happen from time to time in any sport.

I think it was just a freak set of circumstances, and all the more tragic for having happened to what reportedly couldn't have been a nicer bloke. And I do feel desperately sorry too for the bowler, who has nothing to reproach himself for but must be devastated.

I think helmet manufacturers will develop new protection helmets and sell the benefits to players.
It's their choice then....

Ironically, the helmet probably contributed to the tragedy.... In the days of no helmets, the hook shot was a lot less utilised by batsmen, simply because batsmen were more aware of the dangers involved in playing the shot. The skill in facing a short ball was as much about avoiding the ball, as actually playing a shot to it.

Nowadays, nearly everybody plays the shot, even the less talented tailender, because they have the 'shield' of their helmet and other protection - Witness Stuart Broad taking one in the grill this summer.

It was a complete freak accident though and it would be massively misguided to make some knee-jerk reaction to this incident .... Instead, it should just make batsmen look at their own technique and make them realise that simply hooking in a gung-ho style is not the way to go and they should learn the art of defence.

I'd imagine the solution to this particular impact would be pretty simple; an extension to the helmet hanging over the exposed neck area. Something that can absorb fairly well but not hinder the player. Wouldn't be too difficult with modern materials.

The thing is, when you're hurling an object as hard as a cricket ball at a person, accidents will happen. I've never forgotten a game during a school PE lesson. We had some fairly good players, but one of the lads was County level for his age group (I think we were about 14) and a fast bowler. Anyway, he steamed in and bowled this ball out of hell, so fast the batter and keeper (both competent players) simply never saw it - until the keeper's face exploded in cloud of red mist. His nose was shattered and I think he sustained fractures to other surrounding bones. Poor lad couldn't attend school for about 4 weeks. Pretty nasty.

Either way, awful incident and a tragedy for all concerned. I bet hundreds of cricketers have been within millimetres of something similar.

To be fair, I think 99% of sportsmen play their particular sport for the thrill of that danger, whether it be cricket, either rugby codes, skiing, car or bike racing, horse racing, etc.

I'm in my mid 40's and still play cricket, keeping wicket and batting mid order, and over the years have had my share of bruises and breaks. However, I still get a buzz from being challenged by some young lad hurling the ball at me - Its almost unexplainable why I want to do it, but I imagine most sportsmen feel the same.

Sadly, Philip Hughes probably got that same buzz too and tragically paid the ultimate price for it, but to take that element of danger from the game, and with it the buzz, would end up diluting the sport to a level where the game wouldn't be worth watching or playing anymore.