It is easy to get a visual image of the results when an injury happens in sport.

Graphic pictures of blood pouring from someone’s face or body parts bending and setting at angles reserved for mathematics books. Images like these are an unfortunate consequence of any contact sport.

One of these gory images was captured on Thursday’s game between Penrith and Brisbane, where a head clash between Taylan May and Reece Walsh culminated in the latter’s eye enclosing as though he had had an allergic reaction to a bee sting.

A contentious penalty was given, with the ref remarking that May had a duty of care, referencing the speed at which he impacted with Walsh.

May faced no further charges, despite the NRL’s Head of Elite Football Operations Graham Annesley saying he should have.

He is quoted as saying: “There is an obligation on all defenders to ensure that they play the game with due regard for the safety of other players. It doesn’t matter whether it’s shoulder to head, whether it’s arm to head or whether it’s head-to-head. It’s the way a player approaches the tackle rather than the outcome.”

I feel that Mr Annesley is basically saying that it is a process rather than an outcome, yet is only discussing the incident due to the graphic injury resulting from the collision.

This quote represents a concerning trend within rugby league and its continued attempts to discipline every piece of contact that results in an injury.

The English Super League is having its crackdown on head-high contact. From next year, the competition will lower the highest point of contact to below the armpit, replacing the shoulder-high rules.

There has been a noticed effort to enforce stricter punishment for high contact. Across five rounds this year, there have been 39 cards issued.

The lunacy of the crackdown culminated in the sending off of Fa’amanu Brown in Round 2 of this year.

Far from a Dylan Napa flying headbutt, the head clash was a result of incidental head-to-head contact from a falling player being swung around by another lower-tackling defender, something that is unavoidable in a contact sport such as rugby league.

Rugby league has to decide what it is going to be as a sport. It can go down the rugby union path, where more cards are given than a game of UNO.

Every incident is replayed and reviewed in slow motion, completely missing the context in which the contact happened. Referees look to use their whistles, halting any flow from the game.

Or it can be acknowledged that these incidents happen when thirteen grown men try to ground a football past a try line defended by another thirteen men.

Rugby league is afraid of an impending Concussion Class Action Lawsuit resembling the NFL lawsuit that was settled in 2015.

The NFL agreed to a 1 billion dollar lawsuit to be paid out to over 20,000 plaintiffs over 65 years due to cognitive injuries sustained as a result of their partaking in the sport.

Such a payout would cripple the significantly less wealthy sport of rugby league. But despite both being contact sports in which head injuries unfortunately occur, the lawsuit shouldn’t be a deterrent from embracing the gladiatorial nature of the sport.

It is not an apples-and-apples comparison when reviewing the NFL’s and NRL’s treatment of concussions.

Firstly, as dramatised by Will Smith in the film Concussion, the NFL played a significant role in attempting to discredit the work of neurologists uncovering the effects of repetitive head trauma experienced by former players.

Furthermore, American football has not always taught correct tackling techniques to footballers. In both rugby league and union, you are told from a young age to bring your head to the side and use your shoulder when tackling to avoid contact with your head.

The NFL only introduced the ‘Crown Helmet Rule’, in which players were prohibited from initiating contact with the crown of their helmet, in 2010.

There is a balance between player welfare and entertainment. In an ideal world, we could get all the excitement that comes with brutal collisions without any players getting injured. But we do not live in an ideal world.

Otherwise, I’d be sipping a Pina Colada on a beach in Fiji tomorrow instead of catching a congested train at 6:30 in the morning.

The NRL has no issue leveraging these collisions when marketing the game.

The game’s own advertising videos, such as promotions for the Vegas double-header or even a State of Origin series, don’t exactly show low-cutting tackles or people jogging at a gradual pace before being brought softly to a halt.

The clips show repetitive heavy contact with players putting and being put on their backsides. No school kids are looking up textbook leg tackles in period three science.

This is not a Modus Operandi for Reg Reagan super fans harbouring for the days of fights and shoulder charges. It’s an acknowledgment that the sport is vicious, and injuries happen as a result of that.

There is no wording or interpretation of the rules that will eradicate injuries outside of turning the sport into touch football.

There is an inherent risk in playing the sport, a risk players accept.

The more we attempt to litigate every piece of contact, the greater the risk we take of erasing the essence of what makes the game so enthralling in the first place.