Should Players take civil action

[cunno]

There would have to be the option of taking civil action for damages such as payment of medical bills, loss of income maybe pain and suffering resulting from an illegal act by the games rules. The next question is whether the governing body has questions to answer as well in terms of enforcing rules thereby deterring illegal plays- long bow probably. Players also have the option of going down the criminal path as well although rarely taken up.

 

[Snake]

There would have to be the option of taking civil action for damages such as payment of medical bills, loss of income maybe pain and suffering resulting from an illegal act by the games rules. The next question is whether the governing body has questions to answer as well in terms of enforcing rules thereby deterring illegal plays- long bow probably. Players also have the option of going down the criminal path as well although rarely taken up.

I am glad I am not alone here.

 

[bp_tiger]

IST it was the eels who got let of easy for there salary cap, now the NRL want THERE team the titans to go into the finals and nothing will stop the hayne plane. its a joke the way the NRL work and they want us all to buy the gear and go to the games but they treat us like shit with decisions like this.

 

[GoldXR50Leroy]

IST it was the eels who got let of easy for there salary cap, now the NRL want THERE team the titans to go into the finals and nothing will stop the hayne plane. its a joke the way the NRL work and they want us all to buy the gear and go to the games but they treat us like s*** with decisions like this.

Actually you have completely missed the point of the Thread, it's about players who have suffered an injury illegally, apparently Jame's injury fell into the 'Grey' area, it wasn't foul play as were the other incidents mentioned, it's highly unlikely in the current era that there will ever be another case of a law suit.
As far as I can recall there have been 4 suits that made it to a resolution, some were judged on while others were settled out of court, the Brohman V Boyd suit is equally famous not only for Brohman winning but for the equally famous fallout on 2GB's Continuous Call Team where Les Boyd's coach at the time called Brohman out as as a coward for the Litigation, nice call Bob!.
Steve Rogers the Cronulla Legend on his return to the Sharks had his Jaw broken by the Bulldog's Mark Bugden, RLW has a graphic photo that showed Bugden with a very stiff arm about to make contact, a very easy win for Rogers whose career was effectively ended, Bugden had to battle away in the CRL for many years to pay the awards.
Garry Jack sued Ian Roberts for damages following a Balmain V Manly game at Leichhardt Oval circa 1991, there was a brawl that saw Jack held back by a Manly player while Ian Roberts punched the tripe out of Jack, when it came to litigation Roberts accepted Liabilty, the same occured with the Jarrod McCracken case, Marcus Bai accepted his involvement and was found accountable.
So it goes to show, if you have a case then you have grounds to sue, not a great success rate but then again there weren't as many Lawyers chasing the $$$ back then as there are now.

 

[LARDS]

And don't we have lawyers as sponsors? Maybe it's worth a shot.
At the very least it will highlight the ineptitude (at best) or corruption (at worst) of the nrl.

 

[newtiger]

Here's a few more

http://www.triplem.com.au/sydney/sport/nrl/news/2015/5/five-players-to-have-sued-in-rugby-league/

Well I am behind the times then ..so the question remains should they ? If they are not being protected by the governing body.

Fair point but I believe it should be left on the field, I'm more disappointed one of our big boys didn't grab a hold of Ryan James and give him a square up.

So, "leave it on the field, just make sure that one of our players deals out some punishment"

How? A good solid punch to the jaw? That would be worth about 2 to 3 weeks. So, not only are we down the best fullback in the land, we would be down another player. Good idea.

For an offence like this, the person charged should be out for the same amount of time that Teddy is out. In this case, the season at least.

Do you really think that the NRL is going to suspend the co-captain of a team that they own!!!!!

 

[magpiecol]

Well I am behind the times then ..so the question remains should they ? If they are not being protected by the governing body.

Fair point but I believe it should be left on the field, I'm more disappointed one of our big boys didn't grab a hold of Ryan James and give him a square up.

So, "leave it on the field, just make sure that one of our players deals out some punishment"

How? A good solid punch to the jaw? That would be worth about 2 to 3 weeks. So, not only are we down the best fullback in the land, we would be down another player. Good idea.

For an offence like this, the person charged should be out for the same amount of time that Teddy is out. In this case, the season at least.

Do you really think that the NRL is going to suspend the co-captain of a team that they own!!!!!

Of course not. There is a difference between what should happen and what did happen.

The NRL is totally inept and corrupt.

:brick:

 

[Silentio]

Watch the replay and you will see:

- Game on the line
- Titans player offside after kick
- Sprints over 30 metres
- Is watching the ball at no point, has eyes fixed on opposition player
- Times the tackle to deliberately hurt the best player of opposition team when we can't defend himself
- Ends up giving opposition player the kind of injury you'd get in a car accident
- Titans end up winning

The laws of the game simply aren't up to speed. The incident is a disgrace.

 

[Tiger_Watto]

He couldnt take civil action against Ryan James as he is a willing party to being tackled. You need to understand, this was a tackle gone wrong, not assault like the Jack vs Roberts situation.

He might be able to take the NRL if THEY continue to allow him to be attacked while playing the game?

He could also seek damages or compensation, but Teddys medical costs and time off the field are covered by the club. He isnt disadvantaged in any way at this stage so therefore there would be no compensation.

 

[cochise]

There are suits being lined up in the US by players unions in both the NHL and NFL re: concussions etc. There's a reason the game has taken such draconian measures to wipe out shoulder charges and the like. Being called 'soft' by blokes in the pub is a markedly better scenario than being liable for millions in a court case.

There is a difference in the NFL though, the NFL knew that concussions were causing long term damage to the brain and actively told players that this wasn't the case. They misled players and that is why they are being sued. The NRL has not misled players and could have notified players that the research shows that concussions cause long term effects and put in strict protocols on concussion testing. There is a reason boxing and UFC still exist as a sport and the aim of those sports is to knock your opponent unconscious.

The NFL has not banned shoulder charges, has not banned contact to the head. They have banned helmet to helmet contact and restricted hits on defenseless players and brought in strict concussion protocols.

 

[cochise]

The only time I would be comfortable with a player taking legal action is when the act is undoubtly an intentional act to cause serious injury to the player. The type of incident I am talking about is the Boyd/ Brohman incident. This is no where near this level of incident.

 

[tig_prmz]

stay away from the head you morons.

 

[stryker]

Geeze this unfortunate incident has really brought the sooks out.
The whole league world is saying it was a tackle gone wrong. If you want to talk about players being taken out, look no further than Cronk and Thursty….they cop it a dozen times every week.

 

[Fade_To_Black]

Geeze this unfortunate incident has really brought the sooks out.
The whole league world is saying it was a tackle gone wrong. If you want to talk about players being taken out, look no further than Cronk and Thursty….they cop it a dozen times every week.

What years did Thurston and Cronk have their season ended through injury caused by an illegal tackle?
Talk of civil action is crazy but so is the notion that Ryan James may get off with no punishment at all.

 

[ricksen]

There are suits being lined up in the US by players unions in both the NHL and NFL re: concussions etc. There's a reason the game has taken such draconian measures to wipe out shoulder charges and the like. Being called 'soft' by blokes in the pub is a markedly better scenario than being liable for millions in a court case.

There is a difference in the NFL though, the NFL knew that concussions were causing long term damage to the brain and actively told players that this wasn't the case. They misled players and that is why they are being sued. The NRL has not misled players and could have notified players that the research shows that concussions cause long term effects and put in strict protocols on concussion testing. There is a reason boxing and UFC still exist as a sport and the aim of those sports is to knock your opponent unconscious.

The NFL has not banned shoulder charges, has not banned contact to the head. They have banned helmet to helmet contact and restricted hits on defenseless players and brought in strict concussion protocols.

The misdirection is part of the NFL situation, but there's a duty of care issue as well.

 

[cochise]

There are suits being lined up in the US by players unions in both the NHL and NFL re: concussions etc. There's a reason the game has taken such draconian measures to wipe out shoulder charges and the like. Being called 'soft' by blokes in the pub is a markedly better scenario than being liable for millions in a court case.

There is a difference in the NFL though, the NFL knew that concussions were causing long term damage to the brain and actively told players that this wasn't the case. They misled players and that is why they are being sued. The NRL has not misled players and could have notified players that the research shows that concussions cause long term effects and put in strict protocols on concussion testing. There is a reason boxing and UFC still exist as a sport and the aim of those sports is to knock your opponent unconscious.

The NFL has not banned shoulder charges, has not banned contact to the head. They have banned helmet to helmet contact and restricted hits on defenseless players and brought in strict concussion protocols.

The misdirection is part of the NFL situation, but there's a duty of care issue as well.

No the NFL was sued and reached a settlement over the concealing of information relating to the long term damage concussions cause and that they returned players to the field too soon despite this knowledge. They were not sued because of concussions occurring in the sport. They were sued primarily because they lied.

PHILADELPHIA – The NFL has reached a tentative $765 million settlement over concussion-related brain injuries among its 18,000 retired players, agreeing to compensate victims, pay for medical exams and underwrite research.

A federal judge announced the agreement Thursday after months of court-ordered mediation. It came just days before the start of the 2013 season.

More than 4,500 former athletes -- some suffering from dementia, depression or Alzheimer's that they blamed on blows to the head -- had sued the league, accusing it of concealing the dangers of concussions and rushing injured players back onto the field while glorifying and profiting from the kind of bone-jarring hits that make for spectacular highlight-reel footage

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap1000000235494/article/nfl-explayers-agree-to-765m-settlement-in-concussions-suit

 

[cochise]

There are suits being lined up in the US by players unions in both the NHL and NFL re: concussions etc. There's a reason the game has taken such draconian measures to wipe out shoulder charges and the like. Being called 'soft' by blokes in the pub is a markedly better scenario than being liable for millions in a court case.

There is a difference in the NFL though, the NFL knew that concussions were causing long term damage to the brain and actively told players that this wasn't the case. They misled players and that is why they are being sued. The NRL has not misled players and could have notified players that the research shows that concussions cause long term effects and put in strict protocols on concussion testing. There is a reason boxing and UFC still exist as a sport and the aim of those sports is to knock your opponent unconscious.

The NFL has not banned shoulder charges, has not banned contact to the head. They have banned helmet to helmet contact and restricted hits on defenseless players and brought in strict concussion protocols.

The misdirection is part of the NFL situation, but there's a duty of care issue as well.

No the NFL was sued and reached a settlement over the concealing of information relating to the long term damage concussions cause and that they returned players to the field too soon despite this knowledge. They were not sued because of concussions occurring in the sport. They were sued primarily because they lied.

PHILADELPHIA – The NFL has reached a tentative $765 million settlement over concussion-related brain injuries among its 18,000 retired players, agreeing to compensate victims, pay for medical exams and underwrite research.

A federal judge announced the agreement Thursday after months of court-ordered mediation. It came just days before the start of the 2013 season.

More than 4,500 former athletes -- some suffering from dementia, depression or Alzheimer's that they blamed on blows to the head -- had sued the league, accusing it of concealing the dangers of concussions and rushing injured players back onto the field while glorifying and profiting from the kind of bone-jarring hits that make for spectacular highlight-reel footage

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap1000000235494/article/nfl-explayers-agree-to-765m-settlement-in-concussions-suit

Though after looking into this there are a couple of lawsuit that have recently been launched that state that players were coached to lead with there head when tackling in 70's and 80's. So this does support your argument. This is likely to be unsuccessful as the previous settlement is supposed to include all players who retired before 2014.

 

[magpiecol]

Geeze this unfortunate incident has really brought the sooks out.
The whole league world is saying it was a tackle gone wrong. If you want to talk about players being taken out, look no further than Cronk and Thursty….they cop it a dozen times every week.

Tackle gone wrong?

Teddy was nearly on the ground. All James had to do was put a hand on him and the tackle is complete.

Why, if it was an accident, would he go in with a swinging arm with a closed fist??

Get real.

 

[WestsSupporter]

If NRL don't do something soon it will come back to bite them in 15-20 years time.

 

[Fade_To_Black]

If NRL don't do something soon it will come back to bite them in 15-20 years time.

And i hope that it does. There is no major sporting organization that is as shoddy and wishy-washy as the NRL in the world IMO. Rules and regulations, laws of the game etc are just made up on the spot and changed to suit agenda's and the best/most profitable outcome for the NRL itself.
Slimebags like Greenberg rabbit on about player safety when it comes to strictly enforcing the concussion rule but the incident at the start of this season when Penrith's Peter Wallace was so heavily concussed that he crawled on hands and knees for a few metres to get back onside and then propped himself up by leaning against the upright went unpunished.
Yet other more innocuous incidents resulted in fines for clubs who "didn't comply".