Volkman & Allan gone

[Maximus]

I'm not sure that's true. The club will have 3rd party person insurance to cover anyone for an accident that occurs on their property - that may apply. Also, I used to work for a construction company, we'd trial boilermakers in the workshop where they'd have to prove their competencies, and that was before they got an offer of employment. They were still covered by the company's insurances somehow. NRL clubs may have something similar.

You would have to know what was in the insurance policies to know if this was an issue or not. None of us will know that.

Except we know you have to be contracted to be covered by insurance. There were multiple stories about players potentially missing out on the world cup because they were uncontracted and uninsured.

This means that players currently without a club for 2023 – like Marty Taupau – risk playing without insurance if a deal cannot be struck, which means that they could face a significant financial cost themselves should they suffer an injury in the tournament.

Multiple stars could be forced out of World Cup by admin issue

It threatens to rule some big names out of the upcoming tournament.

www.zerotackle.com

Lets say Corey Allan didn't have a contract when he did his ACL? Not only does he have to get surgery and go through rehab without the support of a club, he loses income for a year and since he's without a game for a year, doesn't get to prove himself to other clubs so he could struggle to get another NRL contract. Who do you think he goes after for loss of income?

The rules are there for a reason, and they protect both player and club. We broke the rules, it's as simple as that. I don't understand why so many people feel the need to argue against that.

 

[JohnnoMcJohnno]

Except we know you have to be contracted to be covered by insurance. There were multiple stories about players potentially missing out on the world cup because they were uncontracted and uninsured.

This means that players currently without a club for 2023 – like Marty Taupau – risk playing without insurance if a deal cannot be struck, which means that they could face a significant financial cost themselves should they suffer an injury in the tournament.

Multiple stars could be forced out of World Cup by admin issue

It threatens to rule some big names out of the upcoming tournament.

www.zerotackle.com

Lets say Corey Allan didn't have a contract when he did his ACL? Not only does he have to get surgery and go through rehab without the support of a club, he loses income for a year and since he's without a game for a year, doesn't get to prove himself to other clubs so he could struggle to get another NRL contract. Who do you think he goes after for loss of income?

The rules are there for a reason, and they protect both player and club. We broke the rules, it's as simple as that. I don't understand why so many people feel the need to argue against that.

For actually playing games, for sure. But he wasn't playing a game, he turned up for training. Is that the same insurance policy? Who knows. And as I said, there are similar scenario's where people do attend workplaces and do workplace things without a contract of employment, and they're still covered by the insurance policy. Unless we know what is in the Insurance policy, we're just guessing.

 

[Saints Forever]

The one thing that needs to be recognised is that those rules are in place to protect the club as much as the player. I think the Dragons have left themselves in an exposed position.

Pre-existing injury

Dragons have no liability

 

[Maximus]

For actually playing games, for sure. But he wasn't playing a game, he turned up for training. Is that the same insurance policy? Who knows.

Is this a serious question? Do you think they have different insurance policies for playing vs training?

And as I said, there are similar scenario's where people do attend workplaces and do workplace things without a contract of employment, and they're still covered by the insurance policy. Unless we know what is in the Insurance policy, we're just guessing.

Good luck getting workers comp to pay out for someone who isn't an employee.

 

[St Tangles]

Is this a serious question? Do you think they have different insurance policies for playing vs training?



Good luck getting workers comp to pay out for someone who isn't an employee.

You do understand he was insured when he was injured.
He will be covered by the insurance.
There is proof of when he got injured.
It will get sorted.
He was not injured at Saints training so they have no liability.
No matter how much spin you put on it.
It's really simple.

 

[St Tangles]

Pre-existing injury

Dragons have no liability

I don't get how people don't understand this.
If he got injured with us then we would have something to worry about.

 

[JohnnoMcJohnno]

Is this a serious question? Do you think they have different insurance policies for playing vs training?



Good luck getting workers comp to pay out for someone who isn't an employee

I'm saying they might well have a separate policy for people who turn up and do things in the workplace, as long as it's not actually playing a game. And as I said in the Construction industry, it was not uncommon for some tradespeople to come to the workplace and do minor work to confirm their competencies, all covered by the companies insurances. The thing is I don't know what is in their Insurance policies. I'm confident you don't know either.

 

[SnowDragon]

2 issues getting mixed up.

1) as St Tangles clearly states, he wasn’t injured with us, so that isn’t an issue.
2) theoretically, if he was injured. Then we may have an issue. It would depend on if they had alternate insurance. E.g. if somebody slips in the hallway while visiting the club, if someone hurts themselves doing a medical…

there is the 3rd issue
3) there is a clear rule to stop people training without a contract. Did we breach this? Some say yes it’s clear, webby says it was part of the medical. I’ll accept the later as it helps my club ( also it’s seems clear to me that you need to run thru some non contact drills to determine the injury status, just maybe not as part of a training event) , but I’d also accept if the NRL or legal system determines Otherwise.

the last point
4) we issued a premature press release. I recall many pushing for this as soon as there is a rumour. I see it as a mistake, that made the club look stupid, but as others have indicated, not a Real issue.

 

[St Tangles]

2 issues getting mixed up.

1) as St Tangles clearly states, he wasn’t injured with us, so that isn’t an issue.
2) theoretically, if he was injured. Then we may have an issue. It would depend on if they had alternate insurance. E.g. if somebody slips in the hallway while visiting the club, if someone hurts themselves doing a medical…

there is the 3rd issue
3) there is a clear rule to stop people training without a contract. Did we breach this? Some say yes it’s clear, webby says it was part of the medical. I’ll accept the later as it helps my club ( also it’s seems clear to me that you need to run thru some non contact drills to determine the injury status, just maybe not as part of a training event) , but I’d also accept if the NRL or legal system determines Otherwise.

the last point
4) we issued a premature press release. I recall many pushing for this as soon as there is a rumour. I see it as a mistake, that made the club look stupid, but as others have indicated, not a Real issue.

Good summary

 

[Maximus]

You do understand he was insured when he was injured.
He will be covered by the insurance.
There is proof of when he got injured.
It will get sorted.
He was not injured at Saints training so they have no liability.
No matter how much spin you put on it.
It's really simple.

Why are you arguing against something I never said? I haven't spun anything, you just lack the ability to read.

 

[JohnnoMcJohnno]

2 issues getting mixed up.

1) as St Tangles clearly states, he wasn’t injured with us, so that isn’t an issue.
2) theoretically, if he was injured. Then we may have an issue. It would depend on if they had alternate insurance. E.g. if somebody slips in the hallway while visiting the club, if someone hurts themselves doing a medical…

there is the 3rd issue
3) there is a clear rule to stop people training without a contract. Did we breach this? Some say yes it’s clear, webby says it was part of the medical. I’ll accept the later as it helps my club ( also it’s seems clear to me that you need to run thru some non contact drills to determine the injury status, just maybe not as part of a training event) , but I’d also accept if the NRL or legal system determines Otherwise.

the last point
4) we issued a premature press release. I recall many pushing for this as soon as there is a rumour. I see it as a mistake, that made the club look stupid, but as others have indicated, not a Real issue.

I'd like to add a point:

5) There are an awful lot of supporters who are quick to jump on the club and assume they have done the wrong thing, despite not all the facts being known.

 

[Maximus]

I'm saying they might well have a separate policy for people who turn up and do things in the workplace, as long as it's not actually playing a game.

They don't. That's not how insurance works.

And as I said in the Construction industry, it was not uncommon for some tradespeople to come to the workplace and do minor work to confirm their competencies, all covered by the companies insurances. The thing is I don't know what is in their Insurance policies. I'm confident you don't know either.

Who told you the people that were on trial were covered by workers comp? Because they are wrong.

I work in the construction industry by the way. And we don't put uninsured people at risk of injury. That's a lawsuit waiting to happen.

 

[JohnnoMcJohnno]

They don't. That's not how insurance works.



Who told you the people that were on trial were covered by workers comp? Because they are wrong.

I work in the construction industry by the way. And we don't put uninsured people at risk of injury. That's a lawsuit waiting to happen.

I didn't say they were covered by workers comp, but they were covered by insurance. Don't ask me the details. I wasn't that interested at the time, I was just told they were covered.

And yes, I still think it's entirely possible that Volkman was covered by some form of insurance.

 

[The Silverdale Phantom]

Warriors CEO defends club amid Volkman fiasco

The New Zealand Warriors find themselves at the centre of controversy surrounding the release of promising playmaker Ronald Volkman, who now faces an uncer

www.newstalkzb.co.nz

Not much Anzac spirit from the orcs.

Methinks they protest too much. I smell the middle earth rat but can’t see it.

 

[Maximus]

2) theoretically, if he was injured. Then we may have an issue. It would depend on if they had alternate insurance. E.g. if somebody slips in the hallway while visiting the club, if someone hurts themselves doing a medical…

A business will generally claim on public liability insurance for someone slipping and falling. Since the club was in breach of a rule where if they had complied, the player would have been covered by the correct insurance, there's a good chance the insurer would reject liability.

And if they did accept liability, the likely result is that when it comes time to renew, they put the club in the highest risk bracket, and premiums skyrocket. A business that deliberately breaks rules that result in injury is hard to insure.

there is the 3rd issue
3) there is a clear rule to stop people training without a contract. Did we breach this? Some say yes it’s clear, webby says it was part of the medical. I’ll accept the later as it helps my club ( also it’s seems clear to me that you need to run thru some non contact drills to determine the injury status, just maybe not as part of a training event) , but I’d also accept if the NRL or legal system determines Otherwise.

Whether it was part of a medical or not, they had him training with the squad, hence the vest that says don't tackle him. The rules say that the only players allowed to participate in training are players who have a registered contract. He didn't have one.

 

[St Tangles]

Why are you arguing against something I never said? I haven't spun anything, you just lack the ability to read.

I think you need some lessons in comprehension.

You were sprouting rubbish and still are.

 

[St Tangles]

I didn't say they were covered by workers comp, but they were covered by insurance. Don't ask me the details. I wasn't that interested at the time, I was just told they were covered.

And yes, I still think it's entirely possible that Volkman was covered by some form of insurance.

Don't waste your time with him

 

[Maximus]

I think you need some lessons in compression.

You were sprouting rubbish and still are.

If you are going to suggest someone needs lessons in how to understand, it's best to understand that the word is comprehension.

 

[St Tangles]

If you are going to suggest someone needs lessons in how to understand, it's best to understand that the word is comprehension.

No argument so you resort to be a spelling Nazi

Auto correct got me i fixed it

 

[The Silverdale Phantom]