Posting current litigation & court actions due, one needs to understand the law term of " duty of care"
Legal duty which are onerous to the provider in Law of "Tort" Law of Tort is a very onerous legal term.
No one or body has ever beaten this legal duty.
However one has to prove lack of duty of care & in extreme cases if negligence is proven the full weight of the law will side against you & your actions not only in fines but corporate actions against individuals & bodies or companies & yes government bodies.
I am like all of you not enthused by the RFL, however, they simply have NO CHOICE in dealing with this situation of damage to the individual via head contact on a single basis or cumulative. Even in Australia this is recognised & in the RFU !
So those who think this will go away by popular pressure of supporters are on the wrong side of factuality, as sadly so are those players willing to strike !
I personally have loved the game in all its facits for some 60yrs, but times are changing the sport liked or lumped, old players playing old physicality of taking players out by intended damage & careless damage are the most vulnerable in being/holding the batten of constant bans & fines.
People will not like these points of view but its coming & changing ( Liked or Not ).

Yep. Completely agree.

Trying to push against it is futile. Better to put your energy into finding a way to make it work.

With the impending legal case being brought by former players then obviously the RFL have to be seen to be doing whatever they can to protect players from injury both on the field and subsequently in their future lives, so I think we are all in agreement that they have to be proactive in achieving this, but what about bringing in a policy to inform young players of the potential implications of playing professional rugby league whereby both they and their parents would be given a presentation by a suitably qualified individual/team on the risks involved and potential outcomes and then given a few days to consider their decision before then being asked to sign a professional contract with a club and also sign a disclaimer to say that they have been made aware of the risks and, most crucially, then agree NOT TO TAKE ANY LEGAL ACTION against either the RFL or any clubs they have played for/against in their subsequent rugby career, should they then develop any symptoms such as CTE ??
Their could also be an exemption in there to cover intentional acts of thuggery/deliberate assault such as the Ben Flower attack on Lance Hohaia which ended his career prematurely, which would still allow a route for litigation against the perpetrator rather than the RFL or club ??
Thoughts ??

Hi Fil, your points of view make good logic, 1st Next year Head injury or injuries control by mitigation & referee control passes down to ALL RL played from age 5 upwards to SL it is that serious.
2nd point, you cannot sign an agreement contract to remove the Law in culpability of a). Duty of Care & b). Assault.
But what you can do is demonstrate to court actions that you do carry out you legal obligations & protection in so far Reasonably possible thus avoiding direct claims.