-
IMPORTANT // Please look after your loved ones, yourself and be kind to others. If you are feeling that the world is too hard to handle there is always help - I implore you not to hesitate in contacting one of these wonderful organisations Lifeline and Beyond Blue ... and I'm sure reaching out to our PRE community we will find a way to help. T.
Head knocks
- Thread starter graystar1
- Start date
two parts to the decision
if a player has a head knock from his head hitting the ground after a marking contest , incidental head knock in play - that is the risk all players take
if a player is being assessed for a head knock , responsibility for him being allowed to continue is with the doctors and coaches , players always think they are ok
how long ago was it when Jack copped a knock and was subbed out , he protested and the more he protested the more obvious he wasn't right
and hence why the commentators and plenty of AFL people were very alarmed when Port had two players rushed thru the concussion tests in a game V us last year
I get drunk, fall over, hit my head and cant remember what happened the next day. Can i sue CUB? I know the risks, the players know the risks only difference is they get paid lots of money for theres and mine costs me lots of money!!!
I don’t think the lawsuits will be about getting injured as such, it’ll be more about the duty of care the club or league showed when a player got injured.
Were they given the correct treatment, were they rested for the appropriate amount of time or rushed back before they were fit, was the injury/concussion diagnosed correctly etc.
If the clubs and league can show that they followed all protocols and appropriate treatments for concussion that were known at the time, then the class action must surely fail.
With the AFL’s recent reluctance to be a part of concussion studies, It’ll be interesting to see if that was the case
Were they given the correct treatment, were they rested for the appropriate amount of time or rushed back before they were fit, was the injury/concussion diagnosed correctly etc.
If the clubs and league can show that they followed all protocols and appropriate treatments for concussion that were known at the time, then the class action must surely fail.
With the AFL’s recent reluctance to be a part of concussion studies, It’ll be interesting to see if that was the case
Yes, I assume you are correct. The case would be asking did clubs and the league act in the players best interests with the knowledge they had at the time?
I think there will be a few sports going by the wayside before footy. Both forms of rugby for starters. And I remember reading that the eguestrian events are the most dangerous Olympic sports but they are still going.
I am no lawyer, but I understand that under Australian law waivers are extremely difficult to enforce as a protective mechanism for the defendant from a legal view-point if the risks are clearly established beforehand. I'd have thought the reverse might be true, that the more information the plaintiff had in making their decision, the stronger the waiver as a protective legal barrier for the defendant, but apparently not.
Additionally, the landscape around waivers changes dramatically if the person is legally deemed an employee of the organisation promoting the risk.
I reckon it's about the game's concussion protocols...do the side's coaches/medical team take their players off the ground/play when their players are concussed in play. Do they have lengthy rest periods away from the game before being played again...weeks?!
Are the game's custodians doing the right thing by the concussed players?!?
If not, go the big insurance whack!
I have a feeling this is a hot issue and the current AFL house may not be up for the fight...seeing it's all about being a boy's club and self interest! If the AFL don't handle this issue right...in the players best interests...it could lead to AFL Clubs being sued...might make the Clubs a tad nervous and possibly push for BGale(a lawyer) to be Gil's replacement!
Are the game's custodians doing the right thing by the concussed players?!?
If not, go the big insurance whack!
I have a feeling this is a hot issue and the current AFL house may not be up for the fight...seeing it's all about being a boy's club and self interest! If the AFL don't handle this issue right...in the players best interests...it could lead to AFL Clubs being sued...might make the Clubs a tad nervous and possibly push for BGale(a lawyer) to be Gil's replacement!
I hope Vlaustin sues Dangerflopdiversniper and the afl when he retires. And Prestia sues Stewart and the afl.
”Concussion protocols”?
Free hit on Richmond players
The afl will be shitting themselves. Gil could see this coming, no wonder he want’s to bail
They can gagf
”Concussion protocols”?
Free hit on Richmond players
The afl will be shitting themselves. Gil could see this coming, no wonder he want’s to bail
They can gagf
This is exactly why Christian should be sacked because he lets players get away with these offences while the rest of the AFL is saying the head is sacrosanct.
The Dangerfield/Vlastuin stuff is nonsense but I think one of the things that will come out of this will be a dramatic increase in reports and penalties for high contact.
A high bump might get you a month, and one like Stewart on Prestia might get you 12 weeks. Even a significant high tackle will likely see you sat down for a week or two.
A high bump might get you a month, and one like Stewart on Prestia might get you 12 weeks. Even a significant high tackle will likely see you sat down for a week or two.
Dangerfield/Vlaustin is nonsense? Give yourself an uppercut and then self report. Ya nong
The eyes don’t lie.
They sometimes do when only one is open.
Just a split second footy collision that one, which is where the inherent problem lies. You cannot remove serious head knocks from the game regardless of what you do, so management is impossible.
It wouldn't completely shock me if we eventually get to the point where an event where a player loses consciousness is career ending.
I presume the usual suspect is defending the Vlastuin/Dangerfield incident as usual. It goes against the rules of the game where it clearly should have been cited, but rules are to be enforced only when the Boys' Club feels like it according to some.
DS
Another opinion from a former player who should know a bit about injuries. Nathan Buckley.
Collingwood great Nathan Buckley has sided with the AFL in the wake of a landmark concussion class action, arguing that players knowingly run the risk of head injuries.
Collingwood great Nathan Buckley has sided with the AFL in the wake of a landmark concussion class action, arguing that players knowingly run the risk of head injuries.
I agree with you on most cases of concussion especially if it is a "football act". Two blokes clash heads going for the footy on the ground is a football act. Being kneed in the head when a guy jumps high for a mark is a football act. But Dion Prestia's concussion vs Geelong last year was not a football act...so maybe a bit more ground to sue on these sort of ones. But definitely still grey area stuff.
I always wondered about this...thanks for clearing it up.
So begs the question...why does Caleb Daniel, Brayshaw from Melbourne and our own "Griffens" for a while wear one each week?
This is a time bomb for the AFL. They will be culpable for not enforcing their own rules.
There should be a maximum player/coach salary cap of 400-500k per year and the savings put in a war chest to pay compensation to the long-term injured.
Players might know the risks but there is also an expectation that they will be protected against careless/reckless/negligent actions from those involved in the game.
And if you think the stars of the game can earn more than the PM doing something else...
a) I doubt it.
or
b) good luck to them.
We have a growing list of high and low profile ex-players who need help with specialist bills and care.
There should be a maximum player/coach salary cap of 400-500k per year and the savings put in a war chest to pay compensation to the long-term injured.
Players might know the risks but there is also an expectation that they will be protected against careless/reckless/negligent actions from those involved in the game.
And if you think the stars of the game can earn more than the PM doing something else...
a) I doubt it.
or
b) good luck to them.
We have a growing list of high and low profile ex-players who need help with specialist bills and care.
