Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

10 former players sue NHL for concussions


  • Please log in to reply
84 replies to this topic

#41 T.Low

T.Low

    Hall-of-Famer

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,915 posts
  • Location:Bellingham, Wa

Posted 26 November 2013 - 07:04 PM

But one major problem that I see for the future of the game is that the latest testing shows people are getting concussed at a low level, low enough so they don't necessarily know they're concussed. Two of these low level concussions is enough to cause damage including CTE.

Former Pittsburgh Steeler Ctr., Mike Webster had such severe brain damage that he was homeless after retiring from football. After his death his brain showed major CTE. At the time it was a bit of a surprise because it was thought that only speed positions like RB, WR, KR, and DB would have this issue, not linemen that took lots of lower impact hits, but on a very repetitive basis.

Even soccer players are getting it from headers

If the game is to survive, there has to be major technique changes in hitting, and major equipment changes.

As for thoughts that players knew what they were getting into because hockey is a violent game, nobody imagined they'd be mentally ill or in wheelchairs unable to feed themselves or speak.

What they are finding out now is just the tip of the iceberg.

#42 kipwinger

kipwinger

    Hall-of-Famer

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,629 posts
  • Location:Mt. Pleasant, MI

Posted 26 November 2013 - 07:09 PM

But one major problem that I see for the future of the game is that the latest testing shows people are getting concussed at a low level, low enough so they don't necessarily know they're concussed. Two of these low level concussions is enough to cause damage including CTE.

Former Pittsburgh Steeler Ctr., Mike Webster had such severe brain damage that he was homeless after retiring from football. After his death his brain showed major CTE. At the time it was a bit of a surprise because it was thought that only speed positions like RB, WR, KR, and DB would have this issue, not linemen that took lots of lower impact hits, but on a very repetitive basis.

Even soccer players are getting it from headers

If the game is to survive, there has to be major technique changes in hitting, and major equipment changes.

As for thoughts that players knew what they were getting into because hockey is a violent game, nobody imagined they'd be mentally ill or in wheelchairs unable to feed themselves or speak.

What they are finding out now is just the tip of the iceberg.

 

That's a good post.  I didn't know that about Webster.  The league needs to get VERY serious about enforcing proper hitting techniques. 


GMRwings:  "Well, in other civilized countries, 16 years old isn't considered underage.  For instance, I believe the age of consent is 16 in Canada.  There's some US states where it's 16 as well.  

 

Get off the high horse.  Not like she was 10."

 

"Some girls are 17 even though they look 25."

 

 


#43 haroldsnepsts

haroldsnepsts

    "Classy"

  • HoF Booster Mod
  • 16,912 posts

Posted 26 November 2013 - 07:20 PM

Hey Kip, sorry if you took my post as trying to pick on your argument.  I just like history and had a Cliff moment (ala Cheers).  I understand what you're saying, you gave examples but they were all 'shoulds'.  I should also be rich and successful, and I also should never have any problems with anything ever in my life...but life is not that perfect.  Which is why when you buy a hockey ticket, have you ever read the back of it?  When you go to a game, you should not have to be injured in any way shape or form, but you agreed to their terms, that even an act of god will prevent you from suing them. 

 

Should a soldier sue the government for failing to provide a safe environment?  Should a boxer sue?  How about a firefighter?  Hockey players play in a violent contact sport, if you don't know you can have brain injury from it, then you should.  No one wants to take responsibility for their actions, always blaming someone else.  If you engage in risky lifestyle, expect the chances of something happening to go up.  Show me any hockey player who was never injured in their career, and I got a beach to sell you next to that probe on Mars.  Maybe all hockey players should sue because they are all injured now, and the NHL should have given them better work environments....

 

When will the class action lawsut for destroyed knees come?   How many players injected themselves and played with pain... like Marchant...when is his lawsuit coming?  Or Lidstrom playing with a bad foot?  Or Yzerman on his broken knee...or Shanahan when he played with a broken toe... where are their lawsuits and when are they coming?  Because the NHL should have protected them too, no one should be injured, ever.   (insert heavy sarc)

 

Look, don't get me wrong, it's terrible these guys are hurt, I my self am on 22 months of Post Concussion Symptoms, and it sucks, it sucks so bad, I would never wish this on anyone, but I think it's wrong that no one takes ownership for their lives and responsibilities, and it's always someone else fault for not protecting them.  You're a man, you made the decision, live with it, deal with it, stop blaming others for your decisions. :bye1:

 

The difference in your examples is that there was a much better understanding of the risks of playing with a bad knee or foot.  Players could make a more well informed decision in accepting those risks. 

 

Also, the last sentence ignores the core issues to the lawsuits.  Did the players have enough information to make that decision?  Did the league actively hide any information?  Did the league do enough to learn that information?  Did the league do enough to act on the information they had?  So the chest thumping "be a man" stuff is off the mark. 

 

To use an extreme example to illustrate the point, say they found out skating hard in 45 second shifts and then immediately sitting down greatly increases risk of heart disease.  That would put NHL players at great risk for heart disease by nature of their job.  They've accepted the risks of playing a dangerous game, but the new found risk of heart disease falls outside the generally known risks involved with the job.

 

Obviously for years everyone knew getting hit in the head wasn't great, but what we know about concussions has changed greatly.   There's a large gap between "getting your bell rung" where you maybe have a headache for a day, and having CTE with lifelong sensitivity to light, chronic headaches, memory loss, depression, mood swings, and suicidal thoughts.  

 

So it gets back to what the league knew, when, and what it did with that information.  I don't pretend to know the answers to any of those questions.  But I think they're ones worth raising. 


 

That's a good post.  I didn't know that about Webster.  The league needs to get VERY serious about enforcing proper hitting techniques. 

 

The Frontline special "League of Denial" covers Webster.  He's sort of the case that kicked it all off.  It's an interesting story, and also makes me fear for the future of the NFL especially. 



#44 Opie

Opie

    Legend

  • HoF Booster
  • 7,419 posts
  • Location:The only Henniker on Earth!

Posted 26 November 2013 - 07:39 PM

This if anything will probably be the death blow to fighting!

You can't file a suit against the league for this and still say you know best when it comes to fighting.


"The more I know about people - the better I like my dog." - Mark Twain

"A wise man once told me, ‘Don’t argue with fools. Cause people from a distance can’t tell who is who'." Jay Z, Takeover

"When I was looking for a captain, I wanted a guy with the Red Wings crest tattooed on his chest," said former Detroit coach Jacques Demers, who named Yzerman captain in 1986. "Steve Yzerman was that guy."

“Told him if he wasn't ultra-competitive he couldn't come here. If he didn't bring it every day he couldn't come here, because he was going to hate it if he didn't, dislike the coach and dislike playing here.
“It's real straightforward. If you don't do it right, you're not happy here." Babcock

#45 Frozen-Man

Frozen-Man

    Thanks for the memories

  • Gold Booster
  • 1,579 posts

Posted 26 November 2013 - 07:43 PM

 

Well unless you're a Roman Gladiator it's the responsibility of your employer to make sure you're safe at work.  That's true of every job in the civilized world, and it's true of hockey.

I am corporate counsel for a large heavy construction company and you are incorrect that "it's the responsibility of your employer to make sure you are safe at work." While the employer's responsibility for employee safety is very fact fact, industry and situation specific the most general standard is from the US Department of Labor OSHA and states that an employer "shall furnish to each of his employees employment and a place of employment which are free from recognized hazards that are causing or are likely to cause death or serious physical harm to his employees." U.S.C. 654(a)(1). The problem is that it is very fact and occupation specific, for example what is considered a recognized hazard in highway construction is very different from what is a recognized hazard for for a secretarial firm.  Hockey as a specialty occupation which is inherently dangerous will have a drastic impact on what is considered a hazard in general and when such hazard became a "recognized" hazard in the industry.

 

 

Most of us live in a country that can send a probe to Mars, clone a sheep, or harness nature to create energy, yet you act like it's unrealistic (and unreasonable) for hockey players to want to play the game they love AND be safe too.

 

It is unrealistic for professional hockey players to to want to play the game that they love AND be safe too, they can play a version of hockey but it will be a drastically different game if they are going to play hockey and be safe, there are too many injuries that occur daily from normal legal hockey plays (think about Dekeyser's separated shoulder, Eaves' concussion from a puck, or even Yzerman's eye injury). The vast majority of injuries in the NHL occur from normal legal plays, unless you are talking not about "being safe" and just about concussions from fights illegal hits. The problem is and it will be a detriment to the plaintiff's in this case is assumption of the risk, boxers are aware that injuries occur from boxing matches but the industry still continues even though their employees (i.e. the boxers) are not safe from the moment they step into the ring (and in fact not really safe even during practices). The court will have to decide if they were aware of the inherent risks of playing in the NHL and the dangers associated therewith, this is a hard line to determine and made even more so by the fact that the vast majority of NHL players in every poll taken want to keep fighting in the game. The reality in almost all cases like this is that even if legally they business is likely to prevail it is not worth the PR capital that is spent to fight it and usually they will just settle. 

 

*None of this should be taken to mean that I do not think that ALL employers should take reasonable precautions to protect their employees from unreasonable dangers of their professions. I am merely stating my take from a legal prospective.
 


"Never argue with stupid people, they will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience." - Mark Twain


#46 cusimano_brothers

cusimano_brothers

    Legend

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,612 posts
  • Location:Niagara Falls, ON

Posted 26 November 2013 - 08:01 PM

This afternoon on TSN's OTR, Steven Silverman, legal counsel of the players in this case was interviewed by Michael Landsberg. Landsberg also interviewed world renowned neurosurgeon Dr. Robert Cantu.

The NHLPA has nothing to do with the lawsuit? Interesting.


"Mess up tomorrow, don't mess up now".

- Harry James Benson, CBE.


#47 kipwinger

kipwinger

    Hall-of-Famer

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,629 posts
  • Location:Mt. Pleasant, MI

Posted 26 November 2013 - 08:04 PM

I am corporate counsel for a large heavy construction company and you are incorrect that "it's the responsibility of your employer to make sure you are safe at work." While the employer's responsibility for employee safety is very fact fact, industry and situation specific the most general standard is from the US Department of Labor OSHA and states that an employer "shall furnish to each of his employees employment and a place of employment which are free from recognized hazards that are causing or are likely to cause death or serious physical harm to his employees." U.S.C. 654(a)(1). The problem is that it is very fact and occupation specific, for example what is considered a recognized hazard in highway construction is very different from what is a recognized hazard for for a secretarial firm.  Hockey as a specialty occupation which is inherently dangerous will have a drastic impact on what is considered a hazard in general and when such hazard became a "recognized" hazard in the industry.

 

 

 

It is unrealistic for professional hockey players to to want to play the game that they love AND be safe too, they can play a version of hockey but it will be a drastically different game if they are going to play hockey and be safe, there are too many injuries that occur daily from normal legal hockey plays (think about Dekeyser's separated shoulder, Eaves' concussion from a puck, or even Yzerman's eye injury). The vast majority of injuries in the NHL occur from normal legal plays, unless you are talking not about "being safe" and just about concussions from fights illegal hits. The problem is and it will be a detriment to the plaintiff's in this case is assumption of the risk, boxers are aware that injuries occur from boxing matches but the industry still continues even though their employees (i.e. the boxers) are not safe from the moment they step into the ring (and in fact not really safe even during practices). The court will have to decide if they were aware of the inherent risks of playing in the NHL and the dangers associated therewith, this is a hard line to determine and made even more so by the fact that the vast majority of NHL players in every poll taken want to keep fighting in the game. The reality in almost all cases like this is that even if legally they business is likely to prevail it is not worth the PR capital that is spent to fight it and usually they will just settle. 

 

*None of this should be taken to mean that I do not think that ALL employers should take reasonable precautions to protect their employees from unreasonable dangers of their professions. I am merely stating my take from a legal prospective.
 

 

To respond to the first part of your argument, I agree.  It is fact and situation specific.  And the outcome of this lawsuit will determine where we draw the line concerning employer vs. employee responsibility. 

 

To respond to the second part.  Nobody is talking about separated shoulders, or eye injuries.  I agree, those are inherent risks which come with the game.  I don't think you can get those out of the game without fundamentally changing the way it's played.  But you absolutely can get rid of MOST head trauma without changing the game.  Why?  Because fighting and hitting the head are already against the rules.  Individuals ignore the rules when doing those things.  Make the penalties so stiff that players no longer ignore the penalty, and the behavior will stop.  Sure, accidental hits to the head and/or concussions resulting from the head hitting the boards or the head hitting the ice will still happen.  Nobody is talking in absolutes here.  But if those are the only means of getting head trauma, and they're accidental, then it's reasonable to say that they're accepted risks because accidents can't be avoided  Fights and head hits are not accidental, they're intentional, and they're a violation of the rules.  It's not unrealistic for players to think that they can play hockey without being punched in the face or hit in the head.  Just like they can (and should) expect to play hockey without being slew footed, or given a B.C. two-hander. 


Edited by kipwinger, 26 November 2013 - 08:07 PM.

GMRwings:  "Well, in other civilized countries, 16 years old isn't considered underage.  For instance, I believe the age of consent is 16 in Canada.  There's some US states where it's 16 as well.  

 

Get off the high horse.  Not like she was 10."

 

"Some girls are 17 even though they look 25."

 

 


#48 T.Low

T.Low

    Hall-of-Famer

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,915 posts
  • Location:Bellingham, Wa

Posted 26 November 2013 - 08:14 PM

League of denial

http://m.youtube.com...h?v=yE3m4r4_JEk

#49 LAWings

LAWings

    Rookie

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 138 posts

Posted 26 November 2013 - 09:03 PM

Look guys, a lot of you keep bringing up clean hits, no hits to the head, and no fighting as the cure to end concussions.  But getting a concussion is from your brain hitting the insided of your skull and can happen from CLEAN hits, and does not mean you need to have your head hit in any way.  Those repeated, 10 times a game clean shoulder to shoulder hits.  I mentioned earlier I'm 22 months Post Concussion, the first 6 months of last year were terrible, I never hit my head.  I fell, and the impact was so intense, creating whiplash resulting in a concussion. 

 

That video on page 2 of the wing getting checked 'clean', that guys brain got scrambled in his head.  Continued 'clean' hits like that DO scramble your brain.  Every time these players get hit hard and they fall backwards on the ice and their head whips back, their brain just got a little mushier. 

 

So the ONLY way to appease those that want to make this the Nanny Hockey League, is ban ALL contact.  No checking, no hitting, no pushing, no shoving.  But what if someone slips and falls?  Ah crap, they can get a concussion from that too, perhaps we should but foam padding around all the boards, so to make sure. :nhl_crach:

 

I mean seriously, I've known my whole life that getting repeadetly hit in my body in any way is not a good idea for my physical well being.  I didn't need an expert or anyone to tell me this.   Is it really that difficult to understand these things for oneself?  You mean to tell me that someone has to tell you some real common sense BS and you can't figure this out on your own?   We're being retarded as a society, always blaming someone else, always being the victim, it's always someone elses fault for not telling us.  It's always someone elses responsibility to make our lives better, to look out for us, to make sure we're safe.  NO, it is YOUR job to do those things.  This is 'Murica!  Why is personal responsibility for ones actions and decisions becoming someone elses problem? :1eye:

 

Reminds me of that lady who sued McDonalds because they didn't tell her that the coffee she just bought was hot, she put it between her legs and scalded herself.  Now labels have a caution hot on them because someone got a $10 million payday for being an idiot.

 

Argh....I'm amped...let's play some hockey!  lol :nhl:



#50 kipwinger

kipwinger

    Hall-of-Famer

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,629 posts
  • Location:Mt. Pleasant, MI

Posted 26 November 2013 - 09:18 PM

Look guys, a lot of you keep bringing up clean hits, no hits to the head, and no fighting as the cure to end concussions.  But getting a concussion is from your brain hitting the insided of your skull and can happen from CLEAN hits, and does not mean you need to have your head hit in any way.  Those repeated, 10 times a game clean shoulder to shoulder hits.  I mentioned earlier I'm 22 months Post Concussion, the first 6 months of last year were terrible, I never hit my head.  I fell, and the impact was so intense, creating whiplash resulting in a concussion. 

 

That video on page 2 of the wing getting checked 'clean', that guys brain got scrambled in his head.  Continued 'clean' hits like that DO scramble your brain.  Every time these players get hit hard and they fall backwards on the ice and their head whips back, their brain just got a little mushier. 

 

So the ONLY way to appease those that want to make this the Nanny Hockey League, is ban ALL contact.  No checking, no hitting, no pushing, no shoving.  But what if someone slips and falls?  Ah crap, they can get a concussion from that too, perhaps we should but foam padding around all the boards, so to make sure. :nhl_crach:

 

I mean seriously, I've known my whole life that getting repeadetly hit in my body in any way is not a good idea for my physical well being.  I didn't need an expert or anyone to tell me this.   Is it really that difficult to understand these things for oneself?  You mean to tell me that someone has to tell you some real common sense BS and you can't figure this out on your own?   We're being retarded as a society, always blaming someone else, always being the victim, it's always someone elses fault for not telling us.  It's always someone elses responsibility to make our lives better, to look out for us, to make sure we're safe.  NO, it is YOUR job to do those things.  This is 'Murica!  Why is personal responsibility for ones actions and decisions becoming someone elses problem? :1eye:

 

Reminds me of that lady who sued McDonalds because they didn't tell her that the coffee she just bought was hot, she put it between her legs and scalded herself.  Now labels have a caution hot on them because someone got a $10 million payday for being an idiot.

 

Argh....I'm amped...let's play some hockey!  lol :nhl:

 

Well clearly you've chosen to ignore the part where I said that it's not realistic to think you can get rid off ALL injuries, but it is reasonable to think you can get rid of those injuries caused by things that are already against the rules of the game. 


Edited by haroldsnepsts, 27 November 2013 - 01:25 PM.

GMRwings:  "Well, in other civilized countries, 16 years old isn't considered underage.  For instance, I believe the age of consent is 16 in Canada.  There's some US states where it's 16 as well.  

 

Get off the high horse.  Not like she was 10."

 

"Some girls are 17 even though they look 25."

 

 


#51 The Greek

The Greek

    3rd Line Checker

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 399 posts
  • Location:L-Town

Posted 26 November 2013 - 10:17 PM

@ LAwings

 

First, don't use the McDonald's coffee case as an example of a frivolous lawsuit.  That poor lady deserved every penny she got (nowhere near $10 million). 

 

On the suit at issue, I recommend that you read the complaint.  A lot of it discusses things not related to actual game play.  The complaint argues that the league breached its duty to players by not having neurologists present at games, for not changing the rules regarding high hits, waiting until 2013 to mandate soft shoulder pads, changing from flexible to rigid glass, waiting to change its protocol for concussed players, etc.   There are a lot of things the league could do that would make it safer and have ZERO effect on the game. 

 

It's crazy to me how people are so quick to jump to the defense of a multibillion dollar corporation at the expense of the little guy.  Before anyone says the players are millionaires, not everyone is able to make a lucrative living while in the league.  Several of the parties in the suit were only able to play for a year or two before their careers were cut short by concussions.



#52 T.Low

T.Low

    Hall-of-Famer

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,915 posts
  • Location:Bellingham, Wa

Posted 26 November 2013 - 10:26 PM

"So the ONLY way to appease those that want to make this the Nanny Hockey League, is ban ALL contact. No checking, no hitting, no pushing, no shoving. But what if someone slips and falls? Ah crap, they can get a concussion from that too, perhaps we should but foam padding around all the boards, so to make sure. "



Nobody here wants nanny hockey. But things cannot stay the same, since we know specific things we did not know before. --

"June 13: Pop Warner football, which registered more than 285,000 children ages 5-15 to play in 2011, bans head-to-head hits and limits contact in practice to 40 minutes a day.
That night, Terry Bradshaw, the former Steelers quarterback who now receives treatment for short-term memory loss at the Amen Clinic in Newport Beach, California, told Jay Leno: "In the next decade, we will not see football as it is."

#53 haroldsnepsts

haroldsnepsts

    "Classy"

  • HoF Booster Mod
  • 16,912 posts

Posted 27 November 2013 - 01:27 PM

Please stay on topic and discuss the content of someone's post without insulting them. 

 

Argue the topic, not the person.

 

Otherwise your post will be deleted and could result in suspension.

 

Thanks.



#54 F.Michael

F.Michael

    Old School Dynamic Duo

  • HoF Booster
  • 7,530 posts
  • Location:Wisconsin

Posted 27 November 2013 - 01:36 PM

Please stay on topic and discuss the content of someone's post without insulting them. 

 

Argue the topic, not the person.

 

Otherwise your post will be deleted and could result in suspension.

 

Thanks.

I don't think that's humanly possible here at LGW - :lol:



'Evolution' created by Offsides

#55 Playmaker

Playmaker

    1st Line All-Star

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,189 posts

Posted 27 November 2013 - 01:50 PM

Look guys, a lot of you keep bringing up clean hits, no hits to the head, and no fighting as the cure to end concussions.  But getting a concussion is from your brain hitting the insided of your skull and can happen from CLEAN hits, and does not mean you need to have your head hit in any way.  Those repeated, 10 times a game clean shoulder to shoulder hits.  I mentioned earlier I'm 22 months Post Concussion, the first 6 months of last year were terrible, I never hit my head.  I fell, and the impact was so intense, creating whiplash resulting in a concussion. 

 

That video on page 2 of the wing getting checked 'clean', that guys brain got scrambled in his head.  Continued 'clean' hits like that DO scramble your brain.  Every time these players get hit hard and they fall backwards on the ice and their head whips back, their brain just got a little mushier. 

 

So the ONLY way to appease those that want to make this the Nanny Hockey League, is ban ALL contact.  No checking, no hitting, no pushing, no shoving.  But what if someone slips and falls?  Ah crap, they can get a concussion from that too, perhaps we should but foam padding around all the boards, so to make sure. :nhl_crach:

 

I mean seriously, I've known my whole life that getting repeadetly hit in my body in any way is not a good idea for my physical well being.  I didn't need an expert or anyone to tell me this.   Is it really that difficult to understand these things for oneself?  You mean to tell me that someone has to tell you some real common sense BS and you can't figure this out on your own?   We're being retarded as a society, always blaming someone else, always being the victim, it's always someone elses fault for not telling us.  It's always someone elses responsibility to make our lives better, to look out for us, to make sure we're safe.  NO, it is YOUR job to do those things.  This is 'Murica!  Why is personal responsibility for ones actions and decisions becoming someone elses problem? :1eye:

 

Reminds me of that lady who sued McDonalds because they didn't tell her that the coffee she just bought was hot, she put it between her legs and scalded herself.  Now labels have a caution hot on them because someone got a $10 million payday for being an idiot.

 

Argh....I'm amped...let's play some hockey!  lol :nhl:

Perhaps you should actually know the whole story on this issue before mocking it.  McDonald's routinely kept the temperature of their coffee some 50 degrees higher than most others.  At 190 degrees, it could cause a 3rd degree burn in 3-5 to which McDonalds was fully aware.  But t hey chose to take the chance on hotter coffee and flimsier cups to save money. The plaintiff offered to settle out of court, only wanting help with her medical bills.  McDonald's had received thousands of other complaints about customers getting burned, but chose to ignore them.  So next time you want a frivolous lawsuit, look elsewhere.

 

I'm not sure how so many here are saying they know the dangers when NFL doctors were routinely  denying that concussions caused any danger whatsoever, let along long term brain injuries.  But I'm sure The NFL or any other sports league would intentionally hide information that might cause them to lose money?



#56 Frozen-Man

Frozen-Man

    Thanks for the memories

  • Gold Booster
  • 1,579 posts

Posted 27 November 2013 - 03:33 PM

 

To respond to the first part of your argument, I agree.  It is fact and situation specific.  And the outcome of this lawsuit will determine where we draw the line concerning employer vs. employee responsibility. 

 

To respond to the second part.  Nobody is talking about separated shoulders, or eye injuries.  I agree, those are inherent risks which come with the game.  I don't think you can get those out of the game without fundamentally changing the way it's played.  But you absolutely can get rid of MOST head trauma without changing the game.  Why?  Because fighting and hitting the head are already against the rules.  Individuals ignore the rules when doing those things.  Make the penalties so stiff that players no longer ignore the penalty, and the behavior will stop.  Sure, accidental hits to the head and/or concussions resulting from the head hitting the boards or the head hitting the ice will still happen.  Nobody is talking in absolutes here.  But if those are the only means of getting head trauma, and they're accidental, then it's reasonable to say that they're accepted risks because accidents can't be avoided  Fights and head hits are not accidental, they're intentional, and they're a violation of the rules.  It's not unrealistic for players to think that they can play hockey without being punched in the face or hit in the head.  Just like they can (and should) expect to play hockey without being slew footed, or given a B.C. two-hander. 

 

The reason that I mentioned separated shoulders and eye injuries is because your post stated:

Most of us live in a country that can send a probe to Mars, clone a sheep, or harness nature to create energy, yet you act like it's unrealistic (and unreasonable) for hockey players to want to play the game they love AND be safe too.

 

Hockey players will never be able to play hockey (in any form that is a semblance to what it currently is) AND be safe too. The game is not safe, it is violent, risky, and dangerous. I understand that your chief complaint is hits to the head and fighting but the point I was trying to make is that your definition of an employer's responsibility:

 

 

 If your employer doesn't do absolutely everything in their power to keep you safe on the job, they're liable to get sued.   

and

Well unless you're a Roman Gladiator it's the responsibility of your employer to make sure you're safe at work.  That's true of every job in the civilized world, and it's true of hockey.

 

There are many things that would completely alter the game of hockey but would be required if an employer must do "absolutely everything in their power to keep [player's] safe on the job" and if "it's the responsibility of your employer to make sure that you're safe at work."

 

The line between employer/employee responsibility and also an athlete's assumption of the risk (which even the term over simplifies it, the legal term is volenti no fit injuria which translates "to a willing person, injury is not done.") For example the illustration that most law schools use is a boxer consents and assumes the risk of the dangers of being punched repeatedly with a gloved fist but does not consent or assume the risk of being hit with a baseball bat. To boil that all down to it being the responsibility of the employer to make sure an employee is safe and that hockey players have a right to play the game they love and be safe ignores to a large degree the violence involved with the the sport/occupation even at the best of times. Whether the league knew and hid information or failed to make reasonable efforts to eliminate unreasonable hazards from the sport. 


"Never argue with stupid people, they will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience." - Mark Twain


#57 Son of a Wing

Son of a Wing

    London Lions Captain

  • Gold Booster
  • 1,756 posts
  • Location:London, Ontario

Posted 27 November 2013 - 06:55 PM

Lawsuit has grown to 200 players.

 

Link


"The leader must never close the gap between himself and the group. If he does, he is no longer what he must be. He must walk a tightrope between the consent he must win and the control he must exert."
Vince Lombardi
 
When asked who won, Babcock said, “Well it doesn’t really matter as long as you don’t lose. It’s like going bear hunting, you take a slow guy with you in case the bear is hungry.”

#58 RyaN_84

RyaN_84

    Rookie

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 168 posts
  • Location:Ontario, Canada

Posted 27 November 2013 - 06:56 PM

okay here is a link for those that want to watch that FRONTLINE special about Concussions. I watched it a couple weeks ago. Very well done documentary. really opened up my eyes.

 

http://www.pbs.org/w...ague-of-denial/



#59 Euro_Twins

Euro_Twins

    Healthy Scratch

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,174 posts
  • Location:Windsor, Ontario

Posted 28 November 2013 - 12:15 PM

Lawsuit has grown to 200 players.
 
Link


There goes the league, in other news salary cap shrinks to 50 million next year...

#60 cusimano_brothers

cusimano_brothers

    Legend

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,612 posts
  • Location:Niagara Falls, ON

Posted 28 November 2013 - 01:17 PM

The League must have known that this would eventually happen. If they truly didn't, it shows a very rare example of naivety on their part.  


"Mess up tomorrow, don't mess up now".

- Harry James Benson, CBE.






Similar Topics Collapse

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users