Alex McKinnon

Who should he be able to sue? (successfully)

  • Jordan Mclean

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Melbourne Storm

    Votes: 1 4.5%
  • Newcastle Knights

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • NRL

    Votes: 6 27.3%
  • No one

    Votes: 15 68.2%

  • Total voters
    22
Ex-NRL player turned lawyer backs Alex McKinnon’s case against Jordan McLean
5f5d643d9f99407a03606a1c8c86972f

MICHAEL CARAYANNIS, The Daily Telegraph
December 20, 2016 9:00pm
Subscriber only
5f5d643d9f99407a03606a1c8c86972f

A FORMER NRL player turned sports lawyer predicts Alex McKinnon will be successful in his claim against Jordan McLean but faces a tougher ask to defeat the NRL over the tackle which left him wheelchair bound in 2014.

Tim Fuller, a lawyer with more than a decade of legal experience who played first grade for South Sydney and the Gold Coast in the 1990s, also called on the NRL to ban any sort of lifting in tackles.

McKinnon has launched a lawsuit against the NRL and McLean, sending legal letters to instigate legal proceedings. Melbourne prop McLean is being personally sued for his role in the tackle.

GALLEN: McKinnon suit ‘a can of worms’

MARATHON MEETING: Grant survives as ARLC Chairman

“Historically claims against governing bodies for similar types of career ending injuries in sports such as rugby union have failed,” Fuller said. “Based on previous cases there is a higher likelihood of success against McLean than the governing body. If it is found that McLean was negligent in his actions it is likely that McKinnon’s claim will succeed.

f43d80d35cb393cffcb4f57efc2c823a

NRL CEO Todd Greenberg and former rugby league player Alex McKinnon. Picture: Adam Taylor
“If the matter proceeds to court, it will be for the court to decide whether the NRL breached their duty of care to the participants. That will be interesting and a bit harder to say.

“It’s long been established that the governing body owes a duty of care to the players, that won’t be an issue. It will be interesting to see if the NRL contests the charge or not and whether they make any admissions of liability. When we draw comparisons with other sport claims — such as the NFL concussion class action — the issue of liability is central and any admission of liability and responsibility for what occurred.

“It is entirely foreseeable that the NRL may decline to accept any form of responsibility in the McKinnon matter”.

Fuller pointed to the NRL’s decision to publicly crackdown on lifting tackles following McKinnon’s injury as a significant development in the game.

McLean was banned for seven games.

Fuller also called on the NRL to ban lifting tackles or face possible further litigation, following their decisions to ban punching and shoulder chargers in recent years.

“While the onus is on players’ to put in a safe position, we all know the only way you’ll get a broken neck in rugby league is being dumped on your neck,” Fuller said. “Accordingly, it is incumbent on the NRL to ban lifting. I’m not talking about a driving tackle, we’re talking about when an attacking player is standing there and another player comes in and starts to lift him.

0492b04524af3be0edfd4e33feb786bf

Ex-NRL player turned lawyer backs Alex McKinnon’s case against Jordan McLean.
“It’s a half-baked situation at the moment. Based on the McKinnon case the NRL will have to go a step further and ban lifting. Failure to do so will place the NRL at enormous risk if similar incidents were to occur in the future.”

Fuller played down fears McKinnon’s legal action could prompt a floodgate effect.

“No doubt players will consider legal options at times but you have generally have nothing to fear as a player if you play within the rules,” Fuller said.

He considered the reported $10 million claim for McKinnon as entirely possible.

http://www.couriermail.com.au/sport...n/news-story/5f5d643d9f99407a03606a1c8c86972f
 
This lawyer clearly has no idea ... the NRL has banned lifting tackles.
 
I hope he loses.

He decides to sue etc when his contract with the Knights is about to finish.

McLean got an extra 4 weeks, because of the injury Alex got.

Alex ducked his head to try & get a penalty & unfortunately for him it backfired.

If he does win, I hope they put the money in a trust fund & when he wants to use some of it, he has to get permission.
 
At first I thought it was a dog act, but the more I think about the more I move to Alex's side. Part of the reason why the guy is currently a quadriplegic is due to the Storm's wrestling tactics (they have, or did have in the past, designated wrestling coaches, so it ain't hard to prove that they trained their players to put others in dangerous positions), so full power to him to chase the Storm. Hopefully the NRL gets serious about wrestling in the game as a result of this, I couldn't believe that it wasn't made a big deal of after the incident first happened, and it's only getting worse.
 
At first I thought it was a dog act, but the more I think about the more I move to Alex's side. Part of the reason why the guy is currently a quadriplegic is due to the Storm's wrestling tactics (they have, or did have in the past, designated wrestling coaches, so it ain't hard to prove that they trained their players to put others in dangerous positions), so full power to him to chase the Storm. Hopefully the NRL gets serious about wrestling in the game as a result of this, I couldn't believe that it wasn't made a big deal of after the incident first happened, and it's only getting worse.

The tackle had nothing to do with wrestling tactics.

It was a lifting tackle, Jordan appeared to lift one of McKinnon's legs.

Alex ducked his head to get a penalty. (that's when the problem happened)

Also he isn't chasing the Storm, he is chasing the player.
 
Which in a court of law will come under massive scrutiny. This will not end well, mentally, for McKinnon IMO.

I hope for his sake he can just let it go and accept the fact that some of the fault is his.

It isn't going to go well for him. A good lawyer would tear him apart about the tackle and his actions which led to the outcome.

He is just going to turn people against him and it also opens the door for McLean to fight back.

At first I thought it was a dog act, but the more I think about the more I move to Alex's side. Part of the reason why the guy is currently a quadriplegic is due to the Storm's wrestling tactics (they have, or did have in the past, designated wrestling coaches, so it ain't hard to prove that they trained their players to put others in dangerous positions), so full power to him to chase the Storm. Hopefully the NRL gets serious about wrestling in the game as a result of this, I couldn't believe that it wasn't made a big deal of after the incident first happened, and it's only getting worse.

That would be fine if he was going after the club and all players involved and the wrestling coach. But he isn't.

He is going after an individual. Which says it's not about trying to get wrestling out of the game. It's because he blames McLean for being in a wheelchair and that this is personal.

Besides, wrestling or not, the tackle was not illegal and it did not actually break any rule.

Why should someone be sued over something that was not illegal and didn't break any rule?

Remember, the stricter lifting tackle rules were not introduced until after this incident.
 
Does the fact the NRL punished McLean for 7 weeks actually work against them in this regard?
 
Tim Fuller, a former Souths and Gold Coast player seems to think he will be successful against McLean.

A FORMER NRL player turned sports lawyer predicts Alex McKinnon will be successful in his claim against Jordan McLean but faces a tougher ask to defeat the NRL over the tackle which left him wheelchair bound in 2014.

Tim Fuller, a lawyer with more than a decade of legal experience who played first grade for South Sydney and the Gold Coast in the 1990s, also called on the NRL to ban any sort of lifting in tackles.

McKinnon has launched a lawsuit against the NRL and McLean, sending legal letters to instigate legal proceedings. Melbourne prop McLean is being personally sued for his role in the tackle.

“Historically claims against governing bodies for similar types of career ending injuries in sports such as rugby union have failed,” Fuller said. “Based on previous cases there is a higher likelihood of success against McLean than the governing body. If it is found that McLean was negligent in his actions it is likely that McKinnon’s claim will succeed.

“If the matter proceeds to court, it will be for the court to decide whether the NRL breached their duty of care to the participants. That will be interesting and a bit harder to say.

“It’s long been established that the governing body owes a duty of care to the players, that won’t be an issue. It will be interesting to see if the NRL contests the charge or not and whether they make any admissions of liability. When we draw comparisons with other sport claims — such as the NFL concussion class action — the issue of liability is central and any admission of liability and responsibility for what occurred.

“It is entirely foreseeable that the NRL may decline to accept any form of responsibility in the McKinnon matter”.

Fuller pointed to the NRL’s decision to publicly crackdown on lifting tackles following McKinnon’s injury as a significant development in the game.

McLean was banned for seven games.

Fuller also called on the NRL to ban lifting tackles or face possible further litigation, following their decisions to ban punching and shoulder chargers in recent years.

“While the onus is on players’ to put in a safe position, we all know the only way you’ll get a broken neck in rugby league is being dumped on your neck,” Fuller said. “Accordingly, it is incumbent on the NRL to ban lifting. I’m not talking about a driving tackle, we’re talking about when an attacking player is standing there and another player comes in and starts to lift him.

“It’s a half-baked situation at the moment. Based on the McKinnon case the NRL will have to go a step further and ban lifting. Failure to do so will place the NRL at enormous risk if similar incidents were to occur in the future.”

Fuller played down fears McKinnon’s legal action could prompt a floodgate effect.

“No doubt players will consider legal options at times but you have generally have nothing to fear as a player if you play within the rules,” Fuller said.

He considered the reported $10 million claim for McKinnon as entirely possible.

“While the onus is on players’ to put in a safe position, we all know the only way you’ll get a broken neck in rugby league is being dumped on your neck,” Fuller said. “Accordingly, it is incumbent on the NRL to ban lifting. I’m not talking about a driving tackle, we’re talking about when an attacking player is standing there and another player comes in and starts to lift him.

Except McKinnon wasn't going to land on his neck. He was going to land on his chest.

I also find that untrue. There are quite a few ways for your neck to be broken. Being dumped on your neck is not the only way.
 
Watch the PC outrage as soon as the defense lawyers tell it like it is, and put most responsibility on McKinnon...
 
I think if players were able to contest the charge in an actual court of law then McLean would have got nothing.
 
4 of those weeks were because of the injury.

Yeah that's what I mean, will the courts take it as an admission of liability from the nrl?
 
Yeah that's what I mean, will the courts take it as an admission of liability from the nrl?

I think that's the angle his legal team would be aiming at.
 
Stating the obvious, this is a very sensitive issue. I really do feel for Alex and his family. But from personal experience, I don't believe he should be able to sue the player, club or the NRL. Let me add some context.
I used to build sheds for a living. Got a bit of experience and went from residential sized sheds to full on commercial buildings. They involved sheeting roofs logically. But on the bigger jobs, there's a fair degree of risk. Yes we have all kinds of safety measures to minimise the dangers but shit can still happen. I was not an NRL player on good coin but as I became more skilled at roofing, my work load, pay and level of risk all increased.
One of the first things I did was check insurances and see what my principal concractor, super fund, insurance company etc would pay out. It wasn't enough for my family to survive, let alone support me if the worst case happened. So I decided to cover my arse, pay more for better coverage and ensure that if all the precautions failed and worst case occurred then I had my shit sorted.
Maybe as a minimum this is what the NRL should require. Bad things happen to good people all the time but when it comes down to it, accident or not, only one person has your back.
 
Stating the obvious, this is a very sensitive issue. I really do feel for Alex and his family. But from personal experience, I don't believe he should be able to sue the player, club or the NRL. Let me add some context.
I used to build sheds for a living. Got a bit of experience and went from residential sized sheds to full on commercial buildings. They involved sheeting roofs logically. But on the bigger jobs, there's a fair degree of risk. Yes we have all kinds of safety measures to minimise the dangers but shit can still happen. I was not an NRL player on good coin but as I became more skilled at roofing, my work load, pay and level of risk all increased.
One of the first things I did was check insurances and see what my principal concractor, super fund, insurance company etc would pay out. It wasn't enough for my family to survive, let alone support me if the worst case happened. So I decided to cover my arse, pay more for better coverage and ensure that if all the precautions failed and worst case occurred then I had my shit sorted.
Maybe as a minimum this is what the NRL should require. Bad things happen to good people all the time but when it comes down to it, accident or not, only one person has your back.

Definitely agree. It might not be that easy for NRL players though.

I can't remember exactly the details, but I think in the latest CBA they looked at universal insurance for players, and one of the sticking points was its cost. Frankly, if I was an insurance company, I'd look at NRL players and determine there is a massive risk. I think they managed to sort it out, but that may be where the $500k max comes from. Having that cap was potentially the only way to make it affordable.

Now remember, the underwriter would have all of the policies, and as we know, the more people buy in to a policy, the more the risk is spread and the more costs come down. If a player were to source insurance off their own bat, I would expect it would be far more expensive for a like-for-like policy, let alone for one with increased cover.

So yeah, even if a player did try to cover themselves, it may well be far too expensive to justify.
 
I'm genuinely sorry for the bloke being paralyzed, but he got given 2.2 million dollars and a job for life, then sues?

Nothing but a dickhead
 
I'm genuinely sorry for the bloke being paralyzed, but he got given 2.2 million dollars and a job for life, then sues?

Nothing but a dickhead
Couldn't agree more. It just seems so ridiculous that suing is even a possibility. Being tackled is part of the game. It wasn't an act of violence or anything so it should be fine. Players have been banned for bringing the game in to disrepute, so why not ban Mckinnon for his constant bashing of the NRL and the storm?
 
Couldn't agree more. It just seems so ridiculous that suing is even a possibility. Being tackled is part of the game. It wasn't an act of violence or anything so it should be fine. Players have been banned for bringing the game in to disrepute, so why not ban Mckinnon for his constant bashing of the NRL and the storm?

When have players been banned for bringing the game into disrepute?
 

Active Now

  • MrTickyMcG
  • Organix
  • Mr Fourex
  • Foordy
  • Broncosgirl
  • Brocko
  • BroncoFan94
  • Morkel
  • bazza
  • LittleDavey
  • Nerd
  • broncsgoat
  • winslow_wong
  • bb_gun
  • Xzei
  • Waynesaurus
  • pennywisealfie
  • marw
  • Skyblues87
  • Aldo
... and 25 more.
Top
  AdBlock Message
Please consider adding BHQ to your Adblock Whitelist. We do our best to make sure it doesn't affect your experience on the website, and the funds help us pay server and software costs.