Rugby's ruling bodies have got the message on concussion but remain hindered by ambivalence

The game's ruling bodies have emphatically, if belatedly, got the message on concussion. World Rugby's medical commission reiterated welfare issues last month, and the SRU and sportscotland have been at the forefront of addressing risks and devising protocols. Yet they appear to be fighting a losing battle. The issue will not go away, no matter how hard they try to bury it.

This week, Dr Gary O'Driscoll lambasted Northampton Saints for allowing Welsh internationalist George North to return to the field earlier this month, despite having lost consciousness in a match against Leicester. O'Driscoll is a former Ireland full-back, second cousin of Lions' captain Brian, and more pertinently, the man who quit World Rugby's medical commission in rebellion over their concussion management.

He still considers procedures inadequate, and would "go to the end of the earth" to prevent North from playing again if he were an amateur.

Dr O'Driscoll told the BBC that North is at significantly increased risk of neurological problems, including anxiety and depression. "The protocols are totally unfit for purpose," he claimed. "Time and time again they're putting brain-damaged players back on the field."

He called the protocols: "an experiment on players' brains . . . I am worried for the doctors who are having to follow a medical protocol which is not fit for purpose."

He believes rugby medics are "laying themselves open to legal comeback."

Only ice hockey has a higher incidence of concussion, and the US courts have already forced gridiron to establish a $1bn fund for head-injured players, some of whom have committed suicide. NFL research shows ex-players are at 20-times greater risk of early dementia if they had a history of concussions.

Glasgow neuropatholgist Willie Stewart, a former club prop, has identified punch drunk syndrome in the brain of a former player in his 50s. His discovery of abnormal proteins associated with dementia pugilistica led to the first confirmed case of early-onset dementia caused by playing rugby. This resulted in a booklet put out by the Scottish executive, sportscotland, SRU, and SFA, to raise concussion awareness. It's basic message is: "If in doubt, sit them out".

Yet there is disturbingly little feedback on potentially illuminating research undertaken by Saracens. If the data suggest the game is safe, they'd surely trumpet this. And if not, it will assuredly be subpoenaed whenever rugby is finally challenged on its duty of care by ambulance-chasers.

Saracens budgeted £350,000 to fit sensors to record the impact of hits on players, but say the project was dismissed as "a gimmick".

The sensors, made by a Seattle company, are used in the NFL and NHL.

Their project came after concussive head injuries in the English game had increased by 59% over 10 years, and followed on Auckland University of Technology research which examined every hit sustained by a single New Zealand amateur team over the 2013 season. It revealed an average of 77 head impacts per player-position per match, and a total of 181 "above the injury-risk limit".

These repetitive sub-concussive impacts are of of greater frequency than in gridiron.

The Auckland study focused on amateur rugby players. Data from a Premiership side with heavier, stronger, faster professionals would have been invaluable, but neither Saracens, nor the US manufacturer, responded to Herald requests for information.

An SRU spokesman confirmed they: "have not been in direct contact with Saracens on the head injury telemetry (HIT) technology, but should any clear findings be published we would be interested to see them.

"We take player welfare very seriously. We are monitoring many different studies and once credible research and findings become available then we review them accordingly . . . World Rugby consult and set out the framework of the game internationally and we are happy to work within those parameters."

Video analysis of hits, in matches and in training, was pioneered by the SRU in 2009, under chief medical officer Dr James Robson. We put several questions to the SRU which we were led to believe Dr Robson would answer, but to no avail.

Despite rugby governing bodies' attempts to do the right thing – and been seen doing so – they are hindered by ambivalence and failure adequately to address the biggest issue in the game.

The mishandling of North's concussion – and lack of subsequent sanction – is not the first involving the Welsh player. The Concussion Management Review Group which let Northampton off included the RFU director of professional rugby and his counterpart at Premiership Rugby.

The example of the lenient sentence meted out to England's serially thuggish captain, Dylan Hartley, after a third red card, is woeful. He received six weeks – four short of the maximum sentence. This for a man with 54 weeks of suspension already on his rap sheet. The fact that the second longest ban of his career (11 weeks) was for swearing at a referee, while biting, punching, striking and headbutting received significantly less, tells us the true disciplinary priorities.

And the independent disciplinary panel which last month imposed a two-week ban for a reckless (rather than intentional) kick to the head by England's Joe Launchbury. It could have been double that. The new rules now mean Launchbury could receive 12 weeks.

If rugby lacks the stomach to apply them, the price may destroy the game.

And another thing. . .

THE appointment of Malky Mackay as SFA performance director has provoked strong reaction. Given the decaying image of a sport where paedophilia is exposed as increasingly widespread and deep-rooted, the last thing Scotland needs is inappropriate role models. Emails ascribed to Mackay, and widely publicised, were homophobic, anti-Semitic, misogynist, and racist. They don't bear repeating here.

When Mackay was dismissed by Cardiff, he was employed by Wigan. Within days their shirt sponsor and a second backer, an energy drinks firm, terminated their agreements. Club supporters hailed his eventual sacking as "a popular decision".

Mackay is a proven talented coach, but I hope the SFA considered the potential costs if their sponsors steer by the same moral compass as those at Wigan.

This appointment, effectively affirming Mackay as a role model for future players and coaches, is a return to the dark ages. I have been accused on air of lacking Christianity, for saying he is unworthy of a second chance.

Well, convicted paedophiles never teach again; drunk drivers lose their licence and employment. So do corrupt police. Even non-criminal conduct can cause accountants, lawyers, and doctors to be struck off, for breaching their professional code.

It's time that football introduced a code outlawing unacceptable behaviour, but the fact that the FA cleared Mackay of any wrong-doing speaks volumes about what passes for ethics in football.

This is not a minor spat about over-zealous political correctness. It's about how the country's biggest and most influential sport is perceived through the prism of its messages to society.