Sam Shaw legal action against AFC

Nov 24, 2007
25,849
54,730
DTC Frat House
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
Team Lambda Variant
Gee, I'm hesitant to develop an opinion on this one yet.

FSM Stabby, this is BF, you have to be rabidly for or against the position regardless of the evidence

Best of luck to Sam :thumbsu:
 
Sep 16, 2011
1,906
3,759
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
Norwood
Isn't this like the druggers suing essendon when they had to sit out a year. more or less an agreed course of action by both players and the club to get some cashloa to smooth things over, paid for by insurance, not out of the clubs coffers.

wouldnt surprise me if this was done in consultation with the club to get the kid some more cash for whatever he's obviously going through.
 
May 16, 2015
12,787
16,945
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
WWTFC,Chelsea,Glasgow Celtic,Lech Poznan
Really, Sam has a serious problem that will stay with him for a long time. I do not begrudge him suing just like any worker in any workplace. If I was injured in the workplace I would expect something to cover my lifestyle, family and medical ongoing. He should be actually suing the AFL as well. They set the rules at the time what is allowed and what is not.
 

marvin

Premiership Player
Oct 24, 2000
4,213
3,461
Tired old hack in Melb
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
Adelaide
Im glad Rehn did, it was negligent to have placed a disc in the centre of the ground to help umpires to bounce the ball. That is what actually caused his ACL.

Absolutely. I slipped on the disc in the centre of Kardinia Park having a post game kick to kick. Completely stupid idea to have that on the playing surface.
 

marvin

Premiership Player
Oct 24, 2000
4,213
3,461
Tired old hack in Melb
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
Adelaide
IIRC the "extra year" is a bit of a furphy. I thought it had to do with allowing him to qualify for more generous post-football support (through a new CBA?) rather than it being a way the club could directly help Sam.
 

ChilliP

All Australian
Nov 8, 2018
920
2,271
Goolwa
AFL Club
Adelaide
You would think after Scott Stevens our medical department would be one of the most educated about concussions in the league. I could not imagine how any of the medical staff could have possibly have been negligent after we had already had one player retire due to head knocks. It would be incredibly disappointing if it's true and they didn't learn anything from Scott Stephens and would deserve to get taken to the cleaners.
 
Jun 6, 2010
19,570
19,397
Viana do Castelo (Portugal)
AFL Club
Adelaide
I don't blame any employee for seeking compensation for being injured and mismanaged by a workplace. I don't know the exact details of what care he thinks was mismanaged but AFL clubs not just the Crows has very strict rules to follow these days. The question is whether Sam is comparing his care to the current rules. I do think however, in what is a contact sport, players need to acknowledge a personal risk exists that is beyond the control of the club and the AFL to fix.
 

Next Gen Rookie

Club Legend
Aug 15, 2017
1,132
1,496
Hiding in Bacon8's roofspace
AFL Club
Adelaide

The only 'fantasy' is us delisting him.

He signed a 2 year deal in 2015, meaning he was under contract.

https://www.adelaidenow.com.au/spor...e/news-story/6b1d48106c8c38a0cfc99ae60558eee8

Players can retire of their own free will - even this mentioned his year remaining.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-11...haw-retires-due-to-concussion-worries/8009512
 
May 24, 2006
76,777
149,828
Car 55
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
Redbacks, Sturt, Liverpool, Arizona
Was he under contract, we delisted him and put him on as a rookie as Anus is claiming?
He was contracted for the following season so I assume that was the deal we arranged with him at the time

He retires/gets delisted, we re-rookie him, doesn't take up a main list spot, we pay him less (I assume) but he qualifies for those health benefits
 

jo172

Brownlow Medallist
Sep 23, 2004
16,786
15,478
Adelaide
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
San Antonio, Redbacks
The only 'fantasy' is us delisting him.

He signed a 2 year deal in 2015, meaning he was under contract.

https://www.adelaidenow.com.au/spor...e/news-story/6b1d48106c8c38a0cfc99ae60558eee8

Players can retire of their own free will - even this mentioned his year remaining.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-11...haw-retires-due-to-concussion-worries/8009512

That's my point.

The insinuation that we did something insidious or somewhat underhanded doesn't bear out in reality.
 

mattymac

Why no midfield crowz?
10k Posts
Jul 9, 2009
18,167
32,188
Yes
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
No
This is how you get to the insurance policy. The action enlivens the indemnity.
So is every civil action brought against an insured defendant just an action "in name only"?

Of course the insurer will pay but it's us and our doctors who will suffer reputationally.

Of course, if we did mismanage his treatment he has every right to claim damages. However, if we didn't mismanage his treatment I'm not sure why he would take an action claiming we did.

I can't see at this point how this is equivalent to an aunty sueing her nephew to activate an insurance policy. In this case a finding for the claimant will surely result in reputational damage to the club and its medical professionals.
 

maxlilly

Premiership Player
Aug 15, 2009
4,598
7,915
over here
AFL Club
Adelaide
So what happens now if a sanfl player cops a bad concussion ?
Are they able to sue the sanfl. What about amateurs ?
At what level of footy does the responsibility go back on the player
 
Jan 6, 2018
10,660
12,193
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
Norwood
So what happens now if a sanfl player cops a bad concussion ?
Are they able to sue the sanfl. What about amateurs ?
At what level of footy does the responsibility go back on the player
At amateur levels perhaps everyone will have to start signing disclaimers (maybe they do already)?
 
Jun 7, 2011
58,386
60,426
Mount Gambier
AFL Club
Adelaide
Isn't this like the druggers suing essendon when they had to sit out a year. more or less an agreed course of action by both players and the club to get some cashloa to smooth things over, paid for by insurance, not out of the clubs coffers.

wouldnt surprise me if this was done in consultation with the club to get the kid some more cash for whatever he's obviously going through.

You can’t agree with another party to extract insurance money. If we’ve done that, our insurance company will come after us. There would be no agreement and our insurance company won’t shelve out any cash that they aren’t forced to.
 

CH Jazz

Team Captain
May 15, 2017
535
1,596
AFL Club
Adelaide
Feel like a scummy money grab to me. What’s more likely, Shaw said to the club “don't feel well, have concussion symptoms” and the club said “* off and play sanfl you flog” OR a fringe player didn’t fess up to symptoms hoping to play his way into the seniors and a new contract?
 

mattymac

Why no midfield crowz?
10k Posts
Jul 9, 2009
18,167
32,188
Yes
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
No
Peter Jess: the AFL may not be named as co-defendants on the writ because Maurice Blackburn are major sponsors of the AFL
 

mattymac

Why no midfield crowz?
10k Posts
Jul 9, 2009
18,167
32,188
Yes
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
No
You can’t agree with another party to extract insurance money. If we’ve done that, our insurance company will come after us. There would be no agreement and our insurance company won’t shelve out any cash that they aren’t forced to.
Yep the assertion that this is an arrangement to get Sam an insurance payout can't be serious
 

jo172

Brownlow Medallist
Sep 23, 2004
16,786
15,478
Adelaide
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
San Antonio, Redbacks
I think there's a bit of misunderstanding about insurance and litigation interposed throughout this thread.

1. Maurice Blackburn would be well aware of what insurance policies the defendants (including the AFC) would have. By the way their claims operate they are geared towards obtaining payment from insurers. This is their business model. They particularly understand insurance policies medical professionals have. Put a different way, by operation of the Court's Rules, prior to filing the action Maurice Blackburn are well aware of the insurance policies, and interaction between, of all defendants.

2. Upon making a claim for which we are insured, the AFC insurer has a right of subrogation which it will exercise and effectively becomes the "real" defendant.

3. Contracts of insurance have a duty of utmost good faith. That is, any act which would have the effect of undermining the AFC's insurer, in favour of someone suing us would constitute a breach of the AFC's policy and the AFC would not be indemnified. There would be no acting in concert with Shaw.

It's a tad more nuanced that what people seem to understand in this thread.
 

Jack McKraken

All Australian
Jan 19, 2009
698
1,435
Adelaide
AFL Club
Adelaide
I think there's a bit of misunderstanding about insurance and litigation interposed throughout this thread.

1. Maurice Blackburn would be well aware of what insurance policies the defendants (including the AFC) would have. By the way their claims operate they are geared towards obtaining payment from insurers. This is their business model. They particularly understand insurance policies medical professionals have. Put a different way, by operation of the Court's Rules, prior to filing the action Maurice Blackburn are well aware of the insurance policies, and interaction between, of all defendants.

2. Upon making a claim for which we are insured, the AFC insurer has a right of subrogation which it will exercise and effectively becomes the "real" defendant.

3. Contracts of insurance have a duty of utmost good faith. That is, any act which would have the effect of undermining the AFC's insurer, in favour of someone suing us would constitute a breach of the AFC's policy and the AFC would not be indemnified. There would be no acting in concert with Shaw.

It's a tad more nuanced that what people seem to understand in this thread.
Good post.

Add no. 4: insurers (and their advisors) are inherently commercial. Every action raised will be assessed based on its merits as well as the costs of defending. Where the costs of defending (even with a high chance of success) outweigh the cost of settling, they will generally settle - it’s a numbers game. And Plaintiff lawyers are well aware of this.
 
Mar 21, 2016
73,845
116,772
Down South Corvus Tristis
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
Sturt, White Sox
Feel like a scummy money grab to me. What’s more likely, Shaw said to the club “don't feel well, have concussion symptoms” and the club said “**** off and play sanfl you flog” OR a fringe player didn’t fess up to symptoms hoping to play his way into the seniors and a new contract?
You seem like you have your finger on the pulse. What should we do with Selwood?
 

John Who

Norm Smith Medallist
Apr 16, 2017
8,722
7,093
AFL Club
Adelaide
I think there's a bit of misunderstanding about insurance and litigation interposed throughout this thread.

1. Maurice Blackburn would be well aware of what insurance policies the defendants (including the AFC) would have. By the way their claims operate they are geared towards obtaining payment from insurers. This is their business model. They particularly understand insurance policies medical professionals have. Put a different way, by operation of the Court's Rules, prior to filing the action Maurice Blackburn are well aware of the insurance policies, and interaction between, of all defendants.

2. Upon making a claim for which we are insured, the AFC insurer has a right of subrogation which it will exercise and effectively becomes the "real" defendant.

3. Contracts of insurance have a duty of utmost good faith. That is, any act which would have the effect of undermining the AFC's insurer, in favour of someone suing us would constitute a breach of the AFC's policy and the AFC would not be indemnified. There would be no acting in concert with Shaw.

It's a tad more nuanced that what people seem to understand in this thread.
I don’t know much about the legal side of things, but I wouldn’t even be surprised that Sam might not even be the instigator of this legal action. It might well be spurred on by his manager and/or some scummy lawyer who has an interest in winning money by helping Sam file a complaint.

It’s going to set a chain reaction of more complaints and I can foresee even more rule changes down the track. Let’s hope in the future, not all footballers are enforced to wear helmets and knee straps!
 
Back