What's new
The Front Row Forums

Register a free account today to become a member of the world's largest Rugby League discussion forum! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

McCracken having a crack...

Azkatro

First Grade
Messages
6,905
Kiwi said:
One thing that people are missing is. When someone gets injured at work, it's their employer that has to have them covered with insurance ect. And if memory serves me ,correctly, wasn't that the Tigers? He got injured whilst working for them, not the Storm, so there is no way he can have any claims against the Melbourne Storm.

I think the point of this whole ordeal is that this was caused by negligence. You're totally missing the reason for the lawsuit.
 

Kiwi

First Grade
Messages
9,471
Azkatro said:
Kiwi said:
One thing that people are missing is. When someone gets injured at work, it's their employer that has to have them covered with insurance ect. And if memory serves me ,correctly, wasn't that the Tigers? He got injured whilst working for them, not the Storm, so there is no way he can have any claims against the Melbourne Storm.

I think the point of this whole ordeal is that this was caused by negligence. You're totally missing the reason for the lawsuit.

How are the Melbourne Storm Negligent????
 

AuckMel

Bench
Messages
2,959
NZ Warrior said:
What's the matter, AuckMel, did SBW make your fav player look stupid??? :lol:


Nope. My favourite player has only recently returned to playing after a long injury break.
 

Pierced Soul

First Grade
Messages
9,202
Kiwi said:
Azkatro said:
Kiwi said:
One thing that people are missing is. When someone gets injured at work, it's their employer that has to have them covered with insurance ect. And if memory serves me ,correctly, wasn't that the Tigers? He got injured whilst working for them, not the Storm, so there is no way he can have any claims against the Melbourne Storm.

I think the point of this whole ordeal is that this was caused by negligence. You're totally missing the reason for the lawsuit.

How are the Melbourne Storm Negligent????

because they obviously didnt tell their players not to spear tackle..i mean dangerous throw mccracken....
 

NZ Warrior

First Grade
Messages
6,444
Everyone is going on about insurance and policies and so forth. But does anyone actually know if League players can get income insurance or protection????

I imagine if they could, the premiums would be astronomical, even higher than what I'm paying for my WRX at the mo.

This is becoming tedious. :roll:
 
Messages
3,471
McCracken has $20m real estate
By Kylie Williams
February 15, 2005

FORMER rugby league international Jarrod McCracken owns about $20 million in real estate despite claiming to have lost income due to the premature end to his career, a court was told today.

McCracken injured his spine and neck when he was spear tackled during a National Rugby League (NRL) game between his team, Wests Tigers, and the Melbourne Storm on May 12, 2000.

The former New Zealand captain claims the tackle ended his first grade career.

He is suing the two players involved in the tackle, Stephen Kearney and Marcus Bai, and the Melbourne Storm for more than $750,000 in damages and loss of income.

The 34-year-old father of four told the NSW Supreme Court today he currently owned properties to the value of about $20 million.

"What is the gross value of properties owned by you or businesses associated with you at the moment," counsel for Melbourne Storm Mark Williams SC asked.

"I'd say about $20 million," McCracken said.

McCracken said he would have between $15 million and $16 million in mortgages.

He also told the court that during his first grade career he did not tackle players by grabbing one leg, as done to him during the game against Melbourne Storm, because he knew it would result in a spear tackle.

"You get coached not to do that because it's in the rules and it results in a spear tackle," he said.

McCracken says the tackle was intentional and done with intent to cause injury.

At the time of the incident, McCracken was on a two-year contract for the 2000 and 2001 seasons on a fee of $300,000 a year.

"By reason of the injuries sustained in the subject tackle, the plaintiff was prevented from returning to playing professional rugby league football and his employer, Wests Tigers, terminated its playing contract with the plaintiff," according to his statement of claim, tendered to the court.

McCracken said earlier in the hearing that he would have continued his professional rugby league career, either in England or the NRL, if he had not been injured.

The loss of his career also caused McCracken to suffer from depression, the court was told.

The hearing continues tomorrow.


Courtesy of Fox Sports


Sell a couple of houses. he will pay hes medical bills.


This guy has got plenty of money.
 

ngap

Juniors
Messages
581
Kiwi said:
NZ Warrior said:
I don't think it's a good idea to compare a League incident with something that happens in the general workplace. I would think that a different set of criteria applies to professional full contact sport and the different insurance policies that cover it.

Tell me was it the Storms responsibility to have McCracken covered by insurance, or what ever sort of work cover was needed?

And could someoen tell me how the Storm are responsible in any way?

Storm was the employer of these two, so as the employer you are liable if your workers engage in unsafe work practices.
 

The_Savage_1

Juniors
Messages
995
a few points...

if his case relies on proving intent... good luck, he's going to need it

at work we sue people every day and it never takes years (let alone four or however many) to get to trial. granted this is rarely in the supreme court, but i'm sure it wouldnt be court delays that caused the time difference (in fact it's got to be fairly close to the statute of limitations).

i hope phil gets put in his place and the storm, kearney and bai are awarded costs
 

girvie

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
4,871
0jarrodmckracken.jpg


Maybe Lazarus should sue McCracken.
 

choisir

Juniors
Messages
232
How many careers did McCracken end with foul play again?


Fair call , but if "intent" is proven Id love to be a lawyer.Like it or not defence in footy IS about smashing the other side.A spear tackle is illegal and rightfully so ,but defence in my books should be a mixture of technique , timeing and aggression.Aggression to the point where risks dont matter as much as the aim of stopping the other bloke.
How many in the NRL [past ,present and future]whose main asset is going out belting others to the limit of the law?
 

Latest posts

Top