Bombshell law suit over concussion crisis



  • NRL hit with bombshell law suit over concussion crisis

    LEAGUE
    July 3, 2019 10:21am
    by STAFF WRITERS
    Source: FOX SPORTS
    The brain disease CTE has been found in two former rugby league players.

    The NRL has been hit with a bombshell class action lawsuit over its handling of player concussion.

    Two law firms - Bannister Law and Cahill Lawyers - have jointly launched the suit against rugby league’s governing body in Australia.

    It follows a torrid week for the game which began when a medical report was released, revealing Chronic Traumatic Encephalopathy (CTE) in the brains of two former professional players.

    “There is concern this was caused by incidents of concussion received during the playing of the sport, and that the rules of the game did not take or implement reasonable precautions to protect player safety from concussion,” a statement on the Bannister Law website says.

    The two law firms have been investigating the issue of concussion in NRL players for the past 12 months and will launch a class-action suit against the NRL.

    They say they are striving to “protect those persons disadvantaged through injury or illness”.

    On Fox League’s League Life on Wednesday, Parramatta legend Ray Price allowed cameras to follow him through brain scanning and testing in order to explain the process.

    Current Roosters player Luke Keary also opened up on the lasting effects multiple concussions have had on him, while retired legends Mark Carroll and Martin Lang also spoke about their experiences.



  • Hardly surprising. The NFL got taken to the cleaners a few years ago. Concussions are a massive deal these days.



  • That’s all well and good and I’m not necessarily contesting that players should not be compensated, but honestly apart from severe penalties in illegal acts that result in concussions, what do they expect the NRL to do? It’s a contact sport, if a player slips and falls into a tackle that a defender is already committed to, or fall into a defender that doesn’t commit that still results in a concussion, how does the NRL control that?

    Playing devil’s advocate here of course.



  • Also a bit rich of Martin “suicide king” Lang to whinge about concussions with the running style he had. That’s 100% on him IMO.



  • The Luke Keary part is a bit odd. It’s taking a toll on him but he still continues to play the game? If he has issues down the track he won’t be in any position to sue the NRL because he has clearly shown he knows the risk he is taking.



  • who are the law firm’s clients? weird they didn’t say that



  • @Cultured_Bogan said in Bombshell law suit over concussion crisis:

    Also a bit rich of Martin “suicide king” Lang to whinge about concussions with the running style he had. That’s 100% on him IMO.

    Lang actually said he has no issues health or memory wise



  • It’s all about choice isn’t it. You chose to drive your car = possible car accident, you chose to go surfing = possible drowning or shark attack etc etc etc…At the end of the day these guys made their choice to play a contact sport the onus should be placed squarely on their shoulders and nobody else’s.



  • @Tigerlily said in Bombshell law suit over concussion crisis:

    It’s all about choice isn’t it. You chose to drive your car = possible car accident, you chose to go surfing = possible drowning or shark attack etc etc etc…At the end of the day these guys made their choice to play a contact sport the onus should be placed squarely on their shoulders and nobody else’s.

    Yes it is, the NFL had issues because they hid research that showed concussion was a problem. The NRL has been very good is this area.



  • I think the question is really whether NRL were aware of the concussion risk and if so, did they do enough to try and prevent it. Nobody is going to argue that rugby league isn’t inherently dangerous, but it’s a question of did the governing body do enough to address known and reducible dangers.

    At one point the long-term implications for concussion were unknown, so you can’t be pointing fingers at people for stuff that medicos hadn’t worked out yet. NRL are arguably consistent with other sports in instituting a concussion policy and it is now well-enforced.

    League’s Head Bin was first introduced in 1987, though it lacked rigorous assessment, it did allow players to leave the field for tests, then return without affecting the interchange.

    NHL has had concussion checks since 1997, but NFL and MLB didn’t have a policy until 2007. NBA still doesn’t have an official policy.

    The current assessment checklist of NFL was introduced in 2011. This same year, the IRB introduced a concussion policy including medical assessment, however it has been under fire for concussed players being able to fool the tests and play on.

    NRL’s concussion policy came into effect 2012, so around about the same time as the other full-contact sports for a detailed concussion assessment protocol. Arguably, NRL’s policy is now one of the most rigorously administered.

    If you take a look at the NFL’s trouble with concussion, and being quite a litigious culture, there have been lawsuits for quite some time and allegations of suppression of the data by the NFL.



  • @cochise said in Bombshell law suit over concussion crisis:

    @Tigerlily said in Bombshell law suit over concussion crisis:

    It’s all about choice isn’t it. You chose to drive your car = possible car accident, you chose to go surfing = possible drowning or shark attack etc etc etc…At the end of the day these guys made their choice to play a contact sport the onus should be placed squarely on their shoulders and nobody else’s.

    Yes it is, the NFL had issues because they hid research that showed concussion was a problem. The NRL has been very good is this area.

    Yeah, just posted the same thing. It needs to be argued that NRL knew and were negligent, not just that “rugby league is dangerous to brains” because that is inherent to full-contact.



  • It’s more about the lack in duty of care I think. Until recently the NRL was virtually doing nothing in this regard until the concussion rules were implemented. I’m not sure how far these cases stretch back, but if it’s before any of those implementations were introduced then they probably have a case to answer.



  • Its a contact sport,if they are so concerned these days about the severity of concussion on the players,make them wear approved headgear …you can go out and tackle an opposition player in the correct technique,but if you misstime your tackle or slip for example and hit his knee full on and get concussed,who is to blame the attacking or defending player…big grey area where the fault lies…however if the NRL is to get fairdinkum,then it must completely overhaul the OH and S policies relating to player safety,no mean feat…🕵



  • @Sco77y it has to be shown that the NRL knew about long term effects and didn’t do anything about them.



  • @TrueTiger said in Bombshell law suit over concussion crisis:

    Its a contact sport,if they are so concerned these days about the severity of concussion on the players,make them wear approved headgear …you can go out and tackle an opposition player in the correct technique,but if you misstime your tackle or slip for example and hit his knee full on and get concussed,who is to blame the attacking or defending player…big grey area where the fault lies…however if the NRL is to get fairdinkum,then it must completely overhaul the OH and S policies relating to player safety,no mean feat…🕵

    There is quite a bit of research that shows that headgear doesn’t have any benefit in relation to concussions!


Log in to reply
 

Recent Topics