NRL ex players to sue NRL

[TrueTiger]

Reading the SMH article this morning regarding players like Ian Roberts thinking of sueing the NRL for brain damage is really I think grasping at straws…
Rugby League is a contact sport and you know the dangers associated with it....
Headgear and padding were available to use,but was considered uncool and not tough if you wore them...
The other interesting thing that Roberts said..I knew things weren't right for along time but now I know...
If things weren't right why not go and get checked out,especially if you had as many knocks as Roberts had,why wait until the condition gets more serious.....

I completely understand that people get hurt in sport,however if you choose to play a sport you know the dangers that come with that sport and should take precautions to limit the danger..

I know that in this day and age everything is about safety and duty of care,however in Roberts era the main goal was to play in the big arena and get as much as you could money wise and the glory that came with it..

These are my thoughts,have any forumers got any on the subject.....

 

[MAFIA]

So if Roberts has some brain damage which I hope he hasn't did he consider Garry jack in this article and what he and ridge did to his head and the damage he caused memo Mr Roberts people in glass houses

_Posted using RoarFEED_

 

[Snapper]

I agree if you choose that sport that's the way it is!
As far as putting helmets and padding on its proven that helmets did not help the situation. The sudden impact the brain hits the wall of the skull and does damage. Helmets protect that out to laying of the skull not the brain.
Look at American football they are suing by the dozens and they wear helmets.

_Posted using RoarFEED 4.1.4_

 

[pHyR3]

they use america as a precedent, but its a pretty litigious place. not the same as australia

and NFL is a completely different sport as well.

 

[balmain boy]

Historically there's not much they could get i don't think, but any current players could certainly sue both their clubs and the NRL for failing in their duty of care.

It shouldn't be up to the player whether he feels ok to play or not. 1 concussion =5-6 weeks on the sidelines, 2 concussions = 3 months on the sidelines, a third one demands an extended layoff and possibly considering retirement.

These are fairly standard protocols across many sports around the world. Head injuries are the worst of all (well except for perhaps spinal injuries). Any player encouraged or even allowed to play earlier than intentionally recognised standards could sue.

 

[supercoach]

I am afraid although I agree with most people, that when you play a contact sport you have to accept their is a risk involved, the law will see it in a different light. I would imagine a good silk will argue the NRL have a duty care to its players. Ignorance will not stand up as a excuse in 2014, its a shame because now we have the evidence of the dangers of concussion the league has acted swiftly on it.

Anyway I am sure Smith and the board will be very worried where this could lead to

 

[softlaw]

This whole article strikes me as one big advertisement for the lawyer who wants to drum up a very very lucrative case - no player has approached him - he is approaching all players through a free advertisement.
bad journalism and ambulance chasing litigation.

 

[Snapper]

This whole article strikes me as one big advertisement for the lawyer who wants to drum up a very very lucrative case - no player has approached him - he is approaching all players through a free advertisement.
bad journalism and ambulance chasing litigation.

Agree
(I understand thanks for that.)

_Posted using RoarFEED 4.1.4_

 

[Muffstar]

I guess that explains why Roberts is or was such a crappy actor.

 

[Demps]

Attention seeker.
Anything to keep his name in the spot light.
Who cares about this guy…