Muddiemoose
Moderator
- Aug 24, 2017
- 26,452
- 95,857
- AFL Club
- Richmond
- Moderator
- #776
The AFL has insurance for that kind of situation
How many weeks for Mackay?
- Thread starter CrowInFiji
- Start date
- Tagged users None
- Mar 1, 2010
- 23,185
- 16,586
- AFL Club
- Richmond
Have you got stats on that???
I would have thought most concussions or serious ones are not from marking contests
Do we have a break down for this year?
- Mar 1, 2010
- 23,185
- 16,586
- AFL Club
- Richmond
- Sep 25, 2011
- 1,660
- 1,633
- AFL Club
- Sydney
Eat s**t David King and all the other ex player hypocrites out there.
- May 12, 2015
- 10,040
- 19,307
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
I don't have a strong opinion on the incident itself but the fact that s**t for brains luke darcy mistook mackay for doedee makes me chuckle every time it's replayed
The way the AFL have operated here is disgusting. The language they used and the argument they made were absolute crap. They should be embarrassed and Hocking should be walked out of his role immediately.
Meanwhile, any chance the media get over this distraction and apply the same level of hysteria to the AFL sanctioned salary cap cheating of Collingwood?
Meanwhile, any chance the media get over this distraction and apply the same level of hysteria to the AFL sanctioned salary cap cheating of Collingwood?
- Mar 1, 2010
- 23,185
- 16,586
- AFL Club
- Richmond
I am not a legal eagle but I suppose he could sue both.
If the AFL suspended Mackay he would need to get more compo from Mackay because he was unreasonable within the confines of what is acceptable.
With the AFL saying its okay, he theoretically can get more compo from the AFL
Brereton is talking about outcome now. If Clark long term outcome is bad the suit makes it relevant in terms of collecting compo.
See Clark could sue Berry to possibly because he pushed him into it a little supposedly
J.Brown. happened a few times in his career... contact sport. There has to be some allowances for incidental contact.
- Mar 27, 2019
- 12,135
- 10,301
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
Some media overblowing it, media seem to be very selective with the incidents they highlight each week
- Jul 28, 2012
- 11,077
- 10,428
- AFL Club
- Geelong
- Other Teams
- QPR, Buffalo Bills
He got none. But the change is coming to the game, Australian Rules Football is going to change again. Players will be coached differently from 2022, maybe even earlier? The Bump is in trouble and i suspect it will be a casualty in the wash-up of this incident. Mackay played by the rules , for him to be rubbed out those rules have to be changed, so therefore the right decision was made. Players must expect contact while this game is a contest based contact sport. Maybe the answer is to slow it down a little? Has the AFL's obsession to make it a fast-paced action-packed game come back to bite them on the backside? If they change the rules regarding the bump then the entire game needs a rules overhaul? It ain't over yet?
- Mar 1, 2010
- 23,185
- 16,586
- AFL Club
- Richmond
Some of Jonathan Browns efforts was courageous, some stupid and self-inflicted.
I do not want JR's recent effort stopped nor do I think it would have been stopped by the verdict in this case.
Nick Reiwoldt was a more reckless mark
I think some people are jumping at shadows. I hear Riccuito worrying about restricted rules on AFL360 and thats fair enough. Thats why its based on outcome so the onus is on the player and if he is reckless he faces the lawsuit rather than all the players and participants through the AFL coping the lawsuit
Should have just stopped there, as everything else you've said is entirely wrong.
- Mar 1, 2010
- 23,185
- 16,586
- AFL Club
- Richmond
Lets see from the law cases in the years ahead.
Its a win for the legal eagles, they have played this well.
Plenty of work to come for them now
A lot of this will come from USA, they love to sue over there
- Mar 27, 2019
- 12,135
- 10,301
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
AFL will eventually become a non contact sport, and all will get is players chipping the ball around.
Yep, because every time players collide on a footy field they're entitled to sue each other
Do you need to look forward? Precedent is that players with concussion seek compensation from the AFL, not individual players.
Daniel Bell - Had an incident with Ben Johnson (who was suspended for 6 weeks), Bell sought compensation with the AFL.
- Mar 1, 2010
- 23,185
- 16,586
- AFL Club
- Richmond
Yep, because every time players collide on a footy field they're entitled to sue each other
Who is to say Clark returns to play footy?
He has nerve damage. What will the effects be? Will he be like Greg Williams and lose memory, will he have worse issues
- Mar 1, 2010
- 23,185
- 16,586
- AFL Club
- Richmond
It depends on what the players feel the loss is I suppose.
suppose more intelligent people will not play footy to avoid the risks
Could the family of a player inflicted sue?? I will not mention instances but head issues are prevalent these days
The AFL, and indeed all contact sport codes, should create very clear rules that pertain to all aspects of contact between players, especially surrounding the potential for contact to the head of a teammate or an opponent, that readily inform the decisions players should make in a clearly defined set of circumstances on the field. These would need to be extensive and highly detailed, especially for Australian Rules Football given the 360 degree and relatively full-contact nature of the game.
Any injuries sustained during play or training within the bounds of those rules should be featured in a clause that each player signs as a legal acceptance of them taking a reasonable amount of risk of sustaining injuries during the course of their career.
Accidents happen.
And it logically follows that incremental changes to the rules of contact sport that seek to mitigate the risk of injury have got to stop at some point before the contact sport becomes a non-contact sport.
Thus, it is incumbent on each code finding highly intelligent and well-informed arbiters to draw those lines as soon as possible.
Otherwise, we are destined to have rule changes every single year with no end in sight, or risk the viability of the code going forward (ie. from financial ruin associated with a spate of lawsuits/compo claims).
Someone needs to take a firm level of control for this to happen and to be effective.
Any injuries sustained during play or training within the bounds of those rules should be featured in a clause that each player signs as a legal acceptance of them taking a reasonable amount of risk of sustaining injuries during the course of their career.
Accidents happen.
And it logically follows that incremental changes to the rules of contact sport that seek to mitigate the risk of injury have got to stop at some point before the contact sport becomes a non-contact sport.
Thus, it is incumbent on each code finding highly intelligent and well-informed arbiters to draw those lines as soon as possible.
Otherwise, we are destined to have rule changes every single year with no end in sight, or risk the viability of the code going forward (ie. from financial ruin associated with a spate of lawsuits/compo claims).
Someone needs to take a firm level of control for this to happen and to be effective.
Last edited:
Not sure if this was mentioned earlier
www.theage.com.au
David Mackay found not guilty in landmark tribunal case
The incident in the second quarter of Adelaide’s game with St Kilda left Hunter Clark with a fractured jaw in two places. He will miss at least six matches, St Kilda’s medical report said.
jim boy
Umpires Association Head
- Admin
- #799
Far too early to say - and it is extremely speculative to say that he is a) has developed a chronic injury and b) wants to take it to court.
But if it does go to court, the AFL judgement today effectively apportions a lot of the blame to Clarke - mcKay played by the rules, Clarke is a professional, it is his responsibility to protect himself when an opposition player acts in a way that is entirely consistent with a) the nature of the game and b) was within the rules.
For all those talking about duty of care etc, does a footballer have a duty of care to his teammates ? If an opposing player hits another, then they say ge had a duty of care but they never talk about that if a player injures his teammate , it’s just friendly fire . If you are going to say players cannot attack the ball , then it should apply equally to teammate and opponent
Similar threads
