James McManus to sue Knights

[T-Boon]

I have doubts about the future of all body contact sports.

It will just be like the cigarette industry with all sorts of warnings. Pictures of brain damaged brains etc, scary images of Lance Thompson looking people.

I think it is more likely that China will invade than contact sports regresses.

 

[Perth Red]

Are you sure? I've heard that waivers signed before things like white water rafting are not legally binding, and are used to just get people to take it seriously.

This could be an urban myth though.

Signing a waiver doesn't stop you from bringing a case. It just gives the company a stronger position in court. Like I said you can and should sue for negligence, you cant and shouldn't be allowed to sue for doing something risky that ends badly as long as you knew the risks and the company did everything it was responsible for.

Most waivers say something like " I understand this is a dangerous pastime and I may get injured or killed pursuing it" The bit that says "I indemnify the company of all liability and responsibility" is the bit that is a waste of ink, you cannot waiver your legal responsibilities or duty of care.

So in this case suing the Knights because he got repeated concussions playing a high contact sport wouldn't have much legs, suing the knights because they didn't follow agreed protocols in terms of assessing and treating concussions the way the NRL or medical practice has laid would be very much up for a court case.

 

[T-Boon]

suing the knights because they didn't follow agreed protocols in terms of assessing and treating concussions the way the NRL or medical practice has laid would be very much up for a court case.

Its going to be interesting. I am guessing until recently players would have often hidden symptoms so as to get back on the field quicker. That said, I don't know a damn thing about concussions.

 

[DC_fan]

It will just be like the cigarette industry with all sorts of warnings. Pictures of brain damaged brains etc, scary images of Lance Thompson looking people.

I think it is more likely that China will invade than contact sports regresses.

A lot of parents already don't like their kids playing body contact sports. As more information concerning the effects of concussions becomes available their is the likelihood that more parents will not allow their children to play.

If you want to compare smoking to playing body contact sports then you have to admit their is less people smoking today then years gone. Could this drop off also happen with sports.

 

[Timbo]

Pre-1945 the two most popular sports in the United States (both spectator and participatory at all levels) were baseball and boxing.

What killed off boxing as a participatory sport was the rise of televised sport and for the first time mothers realising that little Johnny was getting the living shit beaten out him at the local gym when he went off to boxing. It remained very popular as a spectator sport but the number of people participating - particularly kids - fell.

This stuff takes time. I'm recently engaged and my fiancée has already mentioned to me that when we have kids, she's not sure about wanting them to play full-contact sports because of the rapidly increasing knowledge of concussion and it's long term effects through rugby, league, afl, gridiron, etc.

As the dangers become more well known the numbers playing will fall.

 

[Knight76]

Its going to be interesting. I am guessing until recently players would have often hidden symptoms so as to get back on the field quicker. That said, I don't know a damn thing about concussions.

I'm sure this still happens. Teams are built on the premise of not letting your mates down, and when a player is concussed they are not thinking as clearly would in a lot of cases be very adamant to go back on the field.

Is the current protocol that a player undergoing the concussion assessment is assessed by the teams doctor? If so this needs to change. Someone mentioned above that the NRL must appoint their own docs to each game, one for each team who then makes the decision. This would also eliminate the fines for clubs being required, and the please explain letter sent out.

I found this an interesting article http://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/opinion/89925569/nrl-players-are-a-major-obstacle-in-concussion-problem

Which does lay some of the blame with the player putting tremendous pressure on club officials to let him back out there. In the end though, it is the responsibility of the club to protect their player in that case and if concussed not let them play, no matter how angry the player is.

It will be an interesting court case for sure.

 

[Knight76]

"McManus has pinpointed the Knights’ 22-6 defeat of the Bulldogs at ANZ Stadium on September 15, 2013, as one of the incidents in which the club was negligent in its response to the series of concussions that preceded his enforced retirement in 2015 from brain injuries. McManus’s case will begin with a directions hearing in the Supreme Court on March 17 and will allege he was allowed to continue playing, and was encouraged to keep playing when it was dangerous for him to do so on numerous occasions for the Knights."

The above quoted from the article I posted above.

Just watching that game now, and he was felled by Ennis blatantly right on the jaw. Clearly groggy. Came to the sidelines and was assessed by trainer only. It does not appear a doctor assessed him at all. At the 4 minute mark he was again taken in a high tackle whilst catching a bomb. Penalty given. McManus seemed fine and was the player that ran to the sideline to retrieve the penalty touchfinder.

James Graham also copped a high shot in the opening 2 minutes and came out of it clearly groggy. He didn't leave the field either. Future court case there!

In the 10th minute Andrew Johns talks about McManus still holding his head after that first head knock, the vid cuts to him wincing as he pushes in on his temples. Johns remarks he is still in Disneyland! Gus talks about when that happens players tend to have blurred or double vision. He remained on the field still.

At 12th minute of the game Sterlo states a trainer is again out on the field for McManus. Gus states he guarantees McManus has blurred or double vision.

16th Minute, cross field kick defused on McManus wing, trainer can be seen coming on to see Mcmanus.

I stopped watching the game at the 25 minute mark.

What was the concussion rules back then?

 

[Perth Red]

It wasn't until the 2014 season the rules were tightened and clubs punished for not following rules.

http://www.nrl.com/nrl-strengthens-concussion-laws/tabid/10874/newsid/78236/default.aspx

According to this back in 2011 the first rules were brought in and by 2013 it was mandatory to go off and be assessed by a Dr if signs of concussion during play.

http://theconversation.com/is-the-nrl-enforcing-its-own-concussion-rules-13093

 

[Timbo]

"McManus has pinpointed the Knights’ 22-6 defeat of the Bulldogs at ANZ Stadium on September 15, 2013, as one of the incidents in which the club was negligent in its response to the series of concussions that preceded his enforced retirement in 2015 from brain injuries. McManus’s case will begin with a directions hearing in the Supreme Court on March 17 and will allege he was allowed to continue playing, and was encouraged to keep playing when it was dangerous for him to do so on numerous occasions for the Knights."

The above quoted from the article I posted above.

Just watching that game now, and he was felled by Ennis blatantly right on the jaw. Clearly groggy. Came to the sidelines and was assessed by trainer only. It does not appear a doctor assessed him at all. At the 4 minute mark he was again taken in a high tackle whilst catching a bomb. Penalty given. McManus seemed fine and was the player that ran to the sideline to retrieve the penalty touchfinder.

James Graham also copped a high shot in the opening 2 minutes and came out of it clearly groggy. He didn't leave the field either. Future court case there!

In the 10th minute Andrew Johns talks about McManus still holding his head after that first head knock, the vid cuts to him wincing as he pushes in on his temples. Johns remarks he is still in Disneyland! Gus talks about when that happens players tend to have blurred or double vision. He remained on the field still.

At 12th minute of the game Sterlo states a trainer is again out on the field for McManus. Gus states he guarantees McManus has blurred or double vision.

16th Minute, cross field kick defused on McManus wing, trainer can be seen coming on to see Mcmanus.

I stopped watching the game at the 25 minute mark.

What was the concussion rules back then?

That's pretty rough.

You still had dinosaurs like MG on the radio saying 'this is a blokes sport, you can't let your mates down, bullshit bullshit bullshit' at this point and it's less than five years ago.

 

[Knight76]

That mentality in the game is still alive and well today, and always will be. As it should be.

The point to the case, is that regardless of the player wanting to stay on and continue playing, it is the clubs duty of care to say no, and replace him.

 

[POPEYE]

Get used to it folks, head contact sports that pretend to deny that contact can only go with the dinosaurs. Boxing dismisses it by stating the obvious and enforcing long layoffs. RL will one day face the inevitable . . . if the game lasts as long as I do that'll do me

 

[Hello, I'm The Doctor]

Nothing to do with being owned by the nrl who have a very large wallet?

Not sure what he is suing them for? NRL has strict guidelines in place re concussions so unless he is claiming knights failed to abide by the nrl's guidelines then not sure what he is claiming?

He has been around since 07, so thats about 7 seasons before the the ARLC brought in the mandatory concussion tests...

That definitely given the case a grey area, but whether the directly translates into negligence is debatable: did the Knights know their was a problem and force him onto the field anyway? Were there studies about concussion that the Knights just ignored?

Without this, i dont see much of a case, the ARLC seems to have been on top of every new development in the research. I dont think they can be held responsible for something NO ONE knew about

 

[Hello, I'm The Doctor]

This puts the debates about the Shoulder charge ban and "one-punch = sinbin" rule into perspective, hey....

 

[Knight76]

Well they are certainly not going to win the case with a shrug of the shoulders and a plea of "nobody knew sir!".

There would be plenty of sports documentation from other sports that will show concussion, and repeated concussion causes damage.

So that defense is out.

I doubt they can defend based on them following the rules the NRL sets out either, as if it is shown that it was a known fact the concussions and repeated concussions cause damage at all outside of the NRL, then they will be in hot water.

 

[Perth Red]

Well yes they can. If there was no evidence that concussion in rl had to be dealt with in a certain way then there is no negligence on the part of the nrl or knights. Reading the incident above he is clearly going after the Knights because he doesn't believe they followed the nrl's guidelines on dealing with concussed players.

 

[Knight76]

Whats to stop him rocking up to the hearing and arguing that the Knights (his employer) breached their duty of care to him by allowing him to play on, given existing studies about long term damage from concussions, and repeated concussions.

It took me bugger all time to find this: http://indianasportsconcussionnetwork.com/recurrentriskofdepressionnfl.pdf

That study from 2005, published 2006 clearly stated TBI can cause brain lesions, and increased chances of long term mental health conditions. I doubt it matters that the knights followed the rules of the NRL to the letter. Having rules does not absolve you of your duty of care.

 

[Perth Red]

Are you suggesting any player who has played since 2000 and has headaches or depression can sue the NRL or their former club for letting them play the game? That was when the first strong direct evidence started to come out about the role of concussions and ABI in contact sport such as NFL and RL. It would take an awfully good legal team to argue that is the case. When the evidence became strong enough to start to base clinical guidelines that led to practice guidelines for sports on is very debatable. The NRL started to put out guidelines around 2010/11 from what I can see and gradually firmed them up as the consolidated evidence started to show the potential harm and the risk of litigation following the NFL cover up became greater.

Again we have to be clear, you cannot sue them for getting concussions during a game. Only if they didn't tell you the risk, didn't do everything "reasonably" possible to minimise the risk, and you could have an argument around duty of care to provide follow up medical support at the time.

We have known repeated concussions to the brain cause brain damage since the early 1950;s, this is nothing new. What we have only recently found out is the more detailed events that can lead to long term damage, ie how many times, how often, repeated short time concussions etc. If this info is shared with any potential player and they decide to continue to play then it would be very hard to argue negligence by the NRL or a club, especially if every attempt has been made to minimise these risks.

 

[Perth Red]

Seems clubs still haven't learnt. Broncos player clearly concussed and left on the field. Geez you do wonder why the message isn't sinking in?

 

[Timbo]

Unfortunately it's the mentality of this sport.

Despite the fact we know it dramatically increases the risk of mental illness and suicide, there are still 'can't let your mates down, this is a game for men' types at all levels of the game.

 

[LineBall]

Seems clubs still haven't learnt. Broncos player clearly concussed and left on the field. Geez you do wonder why the message isn't sinking in?

Genuine question: Whose responsibility is it to take them off the field? The on-field trainer? The Club doctor? Somebody from the NRL? Alex Glenn obviously had a blow to the head last night, and yet didn't have a HIA until the 1/2 time break.