A second concussion class action has been commenced.

[Slartibartfast]

But is it years of 'she'll be right'?

The AFL has been guilty of plenty of shady practices over the journey, but in this space they have appeared to follow the science and protocol as it's arisen.

If this was about strengthening the current protocols or creating a transition period for players from playing career to outside life who have shown any previous symptoms of concussion in their careers then I applaud it.

If it's ex-players looking for a payday, some of which continue to play at a local level where there is less access to decent physios on gameday should a serious injury occur, then I don't know why more people aren't questioning it.

Moving forward I think the AFL is trying but with regard to past years it has less than transparent . They do seem more intent on mitigating responsibility. The OP article touched on this directly.
It still may be a fact the game itself is inherently dangerous with regard to concussion which the AFL is still liable for regardless of any efforts made to prevent head knocks.

As for those that continued to play, it will be difficult to show the AFL culpable . I know an defence will claim any other injuries, Head contact, car crashes or other accidents etc as possible causes which would limit their chances of success .
Might be as a class action (one of 60) that a group settlement may be the aim meaning no evidence given in court. It’s day one today and a long way to go.

 

[Sherrinator]

The lads should’ve played the game a bit smarter to avoid those head knocks

 

[Sherrinator]

Moving forward I think the AFL is trying but with regard to past years it has less than transparent . They do seem more intent on mitigating responsibility. The OP article touched on this directly.
It still may be a fact the game itself is inherently dangerous with regard to concussion which the AFL is still liable for regardless of any efforts made to prevent head knocks.

As for those that continued to play, it will be difficult to show the AFL culpable . I know an defence will claim any other injuries, Head contact, car crashes or other accidents etc as possible causes which would limit their chances of success .
Might be as a class action (one of 60) that a group settlement may be the aim meaning no evidence given in court. It’s day one today and a long way to go.

If they don’t mitigate responsibility, there will be no game at any level

 

[Strange Cat]

And these 60 have ruined the sport forever more….

Well done all

Idiotic take , the saftety of the players should take priority over entertainment

 

[Slartibartfast]

If they don’t mitigate responsibility, there will be no game at any level

So AFL dodging responsibility is more important than player welfare??? The game will survive even if it takes a fiscal hit which effects how it moves forward.

 

[Strange Cat]

The lads should’ve played the game a bit smarter to avoid those head knocks

Concussion and brain injury can occur without a head knock , every tackle or body contact can rattle the brain

Piss poor comment

 

[Sherrinator]

Concussion and brain injury can occur without a head knock , every tackle or body contact can rattle the brain

Piss poor comment

Well you better sue your state’s education system, every junior club you’ve played for, the states road department, the car manufacturers and all the local governments who looked after the parks you might have bumped your head in.

 

[Sherrinator]

So AFL dodging responsibility is more important than player welfare??? The game will survive even if it takes a fiscal hit which affects how it moves forward.

Are you for real? These players will get their payout but going forward, if a waiver can’t be signed, nothing will stop the AFL being sued. Current protocols are reactive…I thought that one concussion is brain threatening. Can you not see that these contact sports will not be viable?

 

[Obeanie1]

Are you for real? These players will get their payout but going forward, if a waiver can’t be signed, nothing will stop the AFL being sued. Current protocols are reactive…I thought that one concussion is brain threatening. Can you not see that these contact sports will not be viable?

There will need to be some serious lawyering done for this competition to survive long term in its current form.

Waivers signed etc.

Just wait for the next wave being the female AFL players with serious injuries suing the AFL. With pretty much no revenue stream to pay for it. The AfLW Comp would be bankrupt instantly.

Heard an AFL spokesman saying they are confident they have exercised their duty of care and can prove it by referencing all the rule changes protecting the head plus tribunal penalties on high contact etc.

But really the AFL has fallen short and they inow it. Its only a matter of time that a player gets a knee to the back of the head in a perfectly legal and AFL endorsed marking contest that their house of cards will fall. Its their worst case senario by far.

 

[Strange Cat]

Oh well if contact sport is not viable im sure us plebs can move on and find some other forms of entertainment…I would rather the players have a healthy life than potential crippling post football life for entertaining me a few hours per week

 

[Slartibartfast]

Are you for real? These players will get their payout but going forward, if a waiver can’t be signed, nothing will stop the AFL being sued. Current protocols are reactive…I thought that one concussion is brain threatening. Can you not see that these contact sports will not be viable?

Not sure why your saying that to me.
My early post said the whole fabric of the game will be changed by these law suits. It’s obvious .
Get use to the idea, the game will change and player as welfare is put first.

I am surprised there are people who think player welfare should come second to the game.

 

["The Roar Is Back"]

What’s the relevance of those involved in the class action playing from 1985 ?

 

[Pure_Ownage]

Idiotic take , the saftety of the players should take priority over entertainment

Those two things arent mutually exclusive though.

 

[RAPPA]

And the real winners - the lawyers

 

[The 747]

Are you for real? These players will get their payout but going forward, if a waiver can’t be signed, nothing will stop the AFL being sued. Current protocols are reactive…I thought that one concussion is brain threatening. Can you not see that these contact sports will not be viable?

Yeah that is right in the longer term. But maybe protective gear improves as a result to make them viable.

 

[jim boy]

What’s the relevance of those involved in the class action playing from 1985

If a player is permanently injured from playing AFL then I don't see it as unreasonable to try and obtain some funds to help them cope with their decreased quality of life, even if decades later.
From what I understand, the thing about this class action though is though while they are suing the AFL, the expectation is that insurance will pay the damages. Maybe less so that the AFL was negligent (which would be hard to prove before the 2000's) and more that the players simply were injured at work whilst performing their duties so should be compensated, just a work-cover claim effectively

 

[Mitchell Madness]

This exercise is futile.
Concussion is caused from whiplash, and the brain rattling around in the head.
You can literally get concussion from sitting up too quickly when you wake up in the morning

 

[Partridge]

Former Cat Rooke to lead concussion class action against AFL in Supreme Court

Dual Geelong premiership player Max Rooke is the lead plaintiff in a landmark class action against the AFL lodged in the Supreme Court of Victoria, seeking compensation for alleged damage to former players due to concussion.

www.theage.com.au

Not sure what to feel here. West Coast have had Dean Kemp and Daniel Venables for example who have suffered serious damage from concussions or repeated concussions that were obviously as a result of incidents during their AFL careers, as such they should receive support. However, this article suggests that Max Rooke was playing local football as late as 2021 with some Geelong premiership teammates, over a decade after his AFL retirement. Why would you do that?

Not only that, his retirement at the end of 2010 was due to knee tendonitis. Not concussion. Interesting that it wasn't mentioned at all.

 

[kaiserchief13]

Yeah, tell me about it, imagine sooking when your brain is ****ed and you can’t function anymore?

Absolute soft ends.

Some of them sure, others taking the piss for a free payday like Max Rooke

 

[MC Extra Dollop]

Some of them sure, others taking the piss for a free payday like Max Rooke

If his claim is baseless then the court will decide that.

It's sad to read and especially to think back on some of the stories of Rooke that are part of club folklore, like the time he came off after a heavy collision to get patched up and then told the medicos "I'm right to go; I just can't see."

 

[Free Agent]

Head knocks happen in all sports. Why is this directed at AFL. Boxing UFC basically is just hitting people in the head. Does every single boxer make class actions after there career has ended aswell. How's this any different in other sports. NRL is worse with head knocks then the AFL. Why is there no take about NRL.

 

[Gough]

Head knocks happen in all sports. Why is this directed at AFL. Boxing UFC basically is just hitting people in the head. Does every single boxer make class actions after there career has ended aswell. How's this any different in other sports. NRL is worse with head knocks then the AFL. Why is there no take about NRL.

Players accept that there's an inherent risk of injury playing the game but they also have a right to expect the club to act in good faith when treating them and in the case of Picken's allegations this may not have been the case.

 

[Free Agent]

If his claim is baseless then the court will decide that.

It's sad to read and especially to think back on some of the stories of Rooke that are part of club folklore, like the time he came off after a heavy collision to get patched up and then told the medicos "I'm right to go; I just can't see."

Question is medical advancements from that time. Surely that has to be said.

It's like someone today claiming class action on the way medical procedures were done back in time, they would throw out the case and say stop wasting my time.

I can't recall medical advice on concussion a few years back. Maybe the doctors didn't have the knowledge as there was none in that period of time. Likewise there was no knowledge in the 1920s for example.

You could only really argue the most recent players with concussion in this case. Ones from the past 3-5 years. Pickens is just in that timeframe. And they would have to prove they were given the all clear to go back on with a concussion.

Anything after 5 years in time well sorry but it's ridiculous to even suggest when no medical knowledge was known in that time. Concussion has only recently been advanced in the medical field.

 

[MC Extra Dollop]

Question is medical advancements from that time. Surely that has to be said.

It's like someone today claiming class action on the way medical procedures were done back in time they throw out the case and say stop wasting my time.

I can't recall medical advice on concussion a few years back. Maybe the doctors didn't have the knowledge as there was none in that period of time. Likewise there was no knowledge in the 1920s for example.

You could only really argue the most recent players with concussion in this case. Ones from the past 3-5 years. And they would have to prove they were given the all clear to go back on with a concussion.

Anything after 5 years in time we'll sorry but it's ridiculous to even suggest when no medical knowledge was known in that time.

The defendant has every right to defend itself.

I'm not going to go back to precise years, but I'd suggest that for those who follow US sport (especially the NFL) it's around the 15-20 year range when we started hearing about the long-term impacts of CTE on former NFL players and that it wasn't a huge leap of logic to think that something like this would come up in the AFL sooner or later.

 

[Partridge]

If his claim is baseless then the court will decide that.

It's sad to read and especially to think back on some of the stories of Rooke that are part of club folklore, like the time he came off after a heavy collision to get patched up and then told the medicos "I'm right to go; I just can't see."

Maybe. It's a physical, contact sport. If any professional player seriously acts like they didn't expect to get hurt they're unbelievably naive. And personally, lying through their teeth.

There may be players who were absolutely concussed, and forced to take the field when everyone knew they weren't right, that's one thing - and a legitimate concern. Players quite happy to keep playing - or even who insisted on playing - and no one knew at the time, no one can be blamed for that.

Can't help but think more than a few are there for a payday. As I mentioned, Rooke's retirement was because of his knee. I'm curious to see if any journalist dare do some actual journalism and uncover what it takes 5 seconds to find out.