Player Watch Brayden Maynard

[Kes1984]

Great summary. It raises the basic conundrum facing contact sports and those who “choose” to participate in them.

Choose. Absolutely this is the key to this current issue.

When you go in for a surgery, you sign a waiver that you know and understand the risks involved but are proceeding of your own accord and as such, waive your right to legal action. Likewise if you choose to jump out of a plane, or other activities with risks.

Can the AFL not draft up some sort of ironclad waiver they have all current and future listed players sign, stating they know and understand the risks of playing this contact sport and are choosing with a sound mind, to still play? Players can then chose not to sign that and go play in other competitions or not at all. But play in the AFL and you’ll need to sign this. Then problem solved, surely?

Let’s not be under any false illusions, litigation is all that they care about. Not player welfare. So have them sign something and leave the game alone!

It’s a contact sport. Head knocks among other injuries, are not only possible but are inevitable. The players know this.

Issue is you have players of the past who didn’t earn the big bucks, trying to get some easy money now. Like everything else in life, litigation is ruining our game!

 

[Vicky Park]

I’m convinced.

 

[gerryg400]

From behind the goals we can see that Brayshaw sidesteps into Maynards path and turns to face him.

Note that Maynard's direction of travel is always in the direction of the left edge of the centre circle. Brayshaw is initially running directly toward the camera behind the goals. Maynard was never going to collide with him. After kicking the ball Brayshaw changed direction. There is no way Maynard could know that would happen.

 

[sideswipe]

Choose. Absolutely this is the key to this current issue.

When you go in for a surgery, you sign a waiver that you know and understand the risks involved but are proceeding of your own accord and as such, waive your right to legal action. Likewise if you choose to jump out of a plane, or other activities with risks.

Can the AFL not draft up some sort of ironclad waiver they have all current and future listed players sign, stating they know and understand the risks of playing this contact sport and are choosing with a sound mind, to still play? Players can then chose not to sign that and go play in other competitions or not at all. But play in the AFL and you’ll need to sign this. Then problem solved, surely?

Let’s not be under any false illusions, litigation is all that they care about. Not player welfare. So have them sign something and leave the game alone!

It’s a contact sport. Head knocks among other injuries, are not only possible but are inevitable. The players know this.

Issue is you have players of the past who didn’t earn the big bucks, trying to get some easy money now. Like everything else in life, litigation is ruining our game!

Waivers don’t really work that well. A governing body can’t simply “contract away” their responsibilities.


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[eyeroller]

Do we trust Maynard to give evidence at the hearing? lol

 

[Kes1984]

Do we trust Maynard to give evidence at the hearing? lol

Yes. It will be genuine and sincere.

 

[jmac70]

Can we at least get a competent lawyer to handle this case PLEASE

We had a very competent lawyer for the Adams case. It’s just that the tribunal members are so bonkers that they believed Adams had the strength to sling tackle three men.

The tribunal are likely to remain bonkers for the Maynard hearing.

 

[Karma4Pies]

I’m convinced.

Convinced he'll get off?

 

[windchimes]

Waivers don’t really work that well. A governing body can’t simply “contract away” their responsibilities.


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

Come on now. The law in movies would never misrepresent how the law works in real life.

We should write a cease and desist letter to Laura Kane and tell her to suck on them apples

 

[76woodenspooners]

Choose. Absolutely this is the key to this current issue.

When you go in for a surgery, you sign a waiver that you know and understand the risks involved but are proceeding of your own accord and as such, waive your right to legal action. Likewise if you choose to jump out of a plane, or other activities with risks.

Can the AFL not draft up some sort of ironclad waiver they have all current and future listed players sign, stating they know and understand the risks of playing this contact sport and are choosing with a sound mind, to still play? Players can then chose not to sign that and go play in other competitions or not at all. But play in the AFL and you’ll need to sign this. Then problem solved, surely?

Let’s not be under any false illusions, litigation is all that they care about. Not player welfare. So have them sign something and leave the game alone!

It’s a contact sport. Head knocks among other injuries, are not only possible but are inevitable. The players know this.

Issue is you have players of the past who didn’t earn the big bucks, trying to get some easy money now. Like everything else in life, litigation is ruining our game!

Happy to be corrected by those who know more about this stuff …

… but from my understanding when you go for surgery what you’re signing is “informed consent”. ie: you’ve been informed about what will be done to you (including risks), and that you consent to that happening.

That’s a very different thing to a waiver.

There might be a waiver in some rare cases - Eg: if the procedure is experimental in nature. Dunno anything about the cosmetic space but could well imagine that there might be waivers there.

 

[domus]

What do they expect him to do in that situation? Not turn and land front on and no brace protection. Would love it if they got one of the lawyers to demonstrate the exact technique and landing position they expect him to do in that scenario and split second coming down!

I would demand a demonstration in the tribunal hearing. This would expose the utter absurdity of the charge against Maynard.

 

[FromTheBoundaryLine]

Choose. Absolutely this is the key to this current issue.

When you go in for a surgery, you sign a waiver that you know and understand the risks involved but are proceeding of your own accord and as such, waive your right to legal action. Likewise if you choose to jump out of a plane, or other activities with risks.

Can the AFL not draft up some sort of ironclad waiver they have all current and future listed players sign, stating they know and understand the risks of playing this contact sport and are choosing with a sound mind, to still play? Players can then chose not to sign that and go play in other competitions or not at all. But play in the AFL and you’ll need to sign this. Then problem solved, surely?

Let’s not be under any false illusions, litigation is all that they care about. Not player welfare. So have them sign something and leave the game alone!

It’s a contact sport. Head knocks among other injuries, are not only possible but are inevitable. The players know this.

Issue is you have players of the past who didn’t earn the big bucks, trying to get some easy money now. Like everything else in life, litigation is ruining our game!

Not sure a waiver would work that simply because when you choose to participate you are choosing to participate within certain guidelines and rules/laws and are relying on yourself and everyone else to participate within those guidelines. I guess that’s what’s being investigated by the tribunal now.
I think Gaspard (correct me if I’m wrong) was suggesting that the AFL need to fundamentally review all the rules of the game in light of concussion rather than the piecemeal approach being taken currently. They can’t shy away from the ramifications of their rulings which in this case muddy the waters on what is deemed reckless or careless for many other situations in our game.
I don’t know what the solution is really. My playing days ended due to a severe concussion and the only way you can remove them is to ban all contact or people with heads with brains inside.
Insurers seem to be able deem certain circumstances as “acts of god” and not be liable to compensate someone for said act. Perhaps something like those contracts should be in place.

 

[JB1975]

If Maynard is suspended for that 'hit' then the game has reached the point where it is not worth following anymore.

You're a crabby sort of bastard, and getting worse in your dotage, but I tend to agree with this particular piece of doom.

The game has to come to terms with brain-related injuries, but it also has to arrive at some sort of peace about what it is: a contact sport in which concussion will occur on a regular basis.

For Maynard to get suspended from finals football would suggest a game which doesn't want to know itself anymore.

 

[Kirby]

I’d be very surprised if we didn’t engage a biomechanics expert in this case.

It seems the perfect case for it.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

Is it the case that he’ll either get 3 weeks or get off?

Many of us are assuming that

 

[jmac70]

You're a crabby sort of bastard, and getting worse in your dotage, but I tend to agree with this particular piece of doom.

The game has to come to terms with brain-related injuries, but it also has to arrive at some sort of peace about what it is: a contact sport in which concussion will occur on a regular basis.

For Maynard to get suspended from finals football would suggest a game which doesn't want to know itself anymore.

He’ll get three weeks mate. Hope like hell the appeal is successful.

 

[sideswipe]

He’ll get three weeks mate. Hope like hell the appeal is successful.

Wtf are you on about? The likelihood of a success appeal is far lower than getting the charge dismissed at the Tribunal.


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[jmac70]

Wtf are you on about? The likelihood of a success appeal is far lower than getting the charge dismissed at the Tribunal.


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

I have no confidence in the tribunal.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

Really appreciate the effort you put into breaking down these visions.

Our Bruz will be playing the prelim, you'd think.

Yes it’s very good. I especially love the argument that the 6 6 6 rule is to blame for this! There’s certainly an argument for that which I hadn’t considered. A player streaming out of the clearance has by virtue of this rule been given acreage to run and carry. The defender who had given up a head start by virtue of this rule has no option but to charge at him at full pace and close the gap as quickly as possible, and attempt a smother. Then when he jumps, he had such forward momentum, he crashed into his opponent.

No 666 rule and Collingwood have a player blocking that space, Bradshaw no longer gifted a free run

Love it.

 

[JB1975]

He’ll get three weeks mate. Hope like hell the appeal is successful.

The game just can't leave itself alone. I hope you're wrong and it doesn't scratch itself to death.

 

[sideswipe]

I have no confidence in the tribunal.

Then you should be confident because these days pretty much the only way an appeal gets up is if the Tribunal makes an error


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[sr36]

I have no confidence in the tribunal.

The tribunal in recent months have shown themselves willing to accept blokes getting injured in accidents. Very confident he gets off. I think the AFL will be expecting him to get off and it's all a bit of theatre.

 

[Mostfamousclub_Pies]

Many of us are assuming that

Thanks. It’s such an unusual one, it could well go in our favour. His purpose was to smother and not to bump, despite leaving the ground.

 

[jmac70]

Then you should be confident because these days pretty much the only way an appeal gets up is if the Tribunal makes an error


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

Hopefully they rule in our favour, just don’t see it happening that way.

 

[jmac70]

The tribunal in recent months have shown themselves willing to accept blokes getting injured in accidents. Very confident he gets off. I think the AFL will be expecting him to get off and it's all a bit of theatre.

I’ll be overjoyed to be wrong.