[News] Ten former Players sue NHL over concussions

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by Corral

Proper attention to head trauma in the NHL? Are you kidding me. You come across as an idiot with this sort of post. I'm sure if someone you cared for had suffered from this - you'd be speaking a different tune.

First off you don't need to be calling anybody an idiot for an opinion. Second, are you saying these players had no idea they could suffer from head trauma from playing professional hockey? B.S. They get payed millions of dollars to play a game that has a risk for injury. How do you know I have never had a family member that suffered from head trauma? You are making it sound like these players are vegetables.

[trublmaker]

Originally Posted by Corral

Proper attention to head trauma in the NHL? Are you kidding me. You come across as an idiot with this sort of post. I'm sure if someone you cared for had suffered from this - you'd be speaking a different tune.

kettle=black

[Flames Fan, Ph.D.]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

First off you don't need to be calling anybody an idiot for an opinion. Second, are you saying these players had no idea they could suffer from head trauma from playing professional hockey? B.S. They get payed millions of dollars to play a game that has a risk for injury. How do you know I have never had a family member that suffered from head trauma? You are making it sound like these players are vegetables.

1) Just in general, the money that those players made is irrelevant *if* there was negligence. Also, it's rather evident that most of those 10 players listed didn't make "millions." Gary Leeman and Rick Vaive are the ones I recognize, but the relative obscurity of the other players suggests they didn't cash in millions.

2) Your dismissal seems to rely on the players' negligence in assessing the severity of their own injuries. Otherwise, if a team doctor sees you in the tunnel for 30 seconds then tells you to get back out there and no one from the team follows up, what would you as a medical laymen think? Having just seen a doctor, most people would reasonably think that there isn't much to be alarmed about. Blaming those people for not being aware of medical knowledge that was not available back then is a nonstarter.

Note that this is no different than you going into a doctor's office and the doctor telling you that you can go home... if something later emerges that could have been pointed out by the doctor you visited, are you saying that the onus is on you to have known that *something* must have been wrong despite the doctor not saying anything?

The concussion issue is important to the league and the players. This suit may or may not have merit based on the claims of these specific players. But this is an important issue, and some of the comments in this thread are just horribly ignorant.

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

First off you don't need to be calling anybody an idiot for an opinion. Second, are you saying these players had no idea they could suffer from head trauma from playing professional hockey? B.S. They get payed millions of dollars to play a game that has a risk for injury. How do you know I have never had a family member that suffered from head trauma? You are making it sound like these players are vegetables.

I'm pretty sure Morris Titanic and most of these other guys (if any) didn't make millions of dollars. What's the difference even if they did? They aren't suing because they didn't get paid enough.

“The NHL’s active and purposeful concealment of the severe risks of brain injuries exposed players to unnecessary dangers that could have been avoided had the NHL provided them with truthful and accurate information and taken appropriate action to prevent needless harm,” says the lawsuit, filed in a Washington, D.C., court on Monday.

Now I don't know if its true or not, but if it is, I hope the NHL gets taken to the cleaners.

If you or I get injured/sick from work because management decided not to tell us about the risks they knew about, we wouldn't shrug our shoulders and keep our mouths shut just because they paid us while we worked there.

[Zevo]

Originally Posted by cam_wmh

This.

This is going to evolve in to an enormous lawsuit. Precedence was the NFL.

Fighting is going to be scrutinized like its never been before. I fear it being abolished as part of the NHL's settlement.

Curious, how many concussions in the past 20 years are from fights and how many are from other means? I would argue most are from other means like dirty hits or big open ice hits. If the arguement is really about concussions and how they were downplayed, fighting isn't going to be the main focus or at least it shouldn't be.

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

I'm pretty sure Morris Titanic and most of these other guys (if any) didn't make millions of dollars. What's the difference even if they did? They aren't suing because they didn't get paid enough.

“The NHL’s active and purposeful concealment of the severe risks of brain injuries exposed players to unnecessary dangers that could have been avoided had the NHL provided them with truthful and accurate information and taken appropriate action to prevent needless harm,” says the lawsuit, filed in a Washington, D.C., court on Monday.

Now I don't know if its true or not, but if it is, I hope the NHL gets taken to the cleaners.

If you or I get injured/sick from work because management decided not to tell us about the risks they knew about, we wouldn't shrug our shoulders and keep our mouths shut just because they paid us while we worked there.

Really? The NHL was hiding information they had that might have helped protect players from concussions? Does anybody else see tinfoil hats in that? And if our jobs were playing pro hockey are you saying if management did not hold your hand and tell you there is a possibility you might get injured playing hockey that you would have no idea that could happen? Come on. This is lawyers simply trying to get a cash grab after those lawyers for the NFL guys got theirs.

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

Really? The NHL was hiding information they had that might have helped protect players from concussions? Does anybody else see tinfoil hats in that? And if our jobs were playing pro hockey are you saying if management did not hold your hand and tell you there is a possibility you might get injured playing hockey that you would have no idea that could happen? Come on. This is lawyers simply trying to get a cash grab after those lawyers for the NFL guys got theirs.

Well, that is what the lawsuit is about. See the handy-dandy quote I put in my last post, and you may notice that I also said I don't know if it's true or not.

As for the "lawyers cash grab", I'm not an expert on lawsuits, but I would be surprised if these lawyers searched out a bunch of obscure NHL players from decades ago and convinced them to sue the NHL. Maybe a lawyer on the board can tell us if that's how these things work.

Anyway, Kypreos (whose career was famously ended by a concussion) was just on Connected and he was talking about this and, while I rarely agree with that guy, he said (roughly) "back in those days, nobody knew about the consequences, and I don't think they were hiding anything from me", and that's kinda the way I look at it.

He did go on to say that he would look into it and possibly get involved himself if it seemed like the right thing to do.

Of course I didn't play in the NHL and I (again) don't know what the truth is. That's for the judge to figure out. The NHL certainly had an interest in keeping these guys playing and it's not outside the realm of possibility that they would downplay the effects, but it seems unlikely to me.

[Beatle17]

It will be interesting to see when the NHL presents their defence of the suit with information of player safety issues they brought forward only to be rebuffed by the NHLPA. Simple things like longer suspensions for head shots, softer padding on equipment etc., that the players shot down. Fighting may be allowed in hockey but no player was forced to fight by the league.

Players hitting each other from behind, head shots, elbows to the head etc., are coworkers in the union doing it to each other. Maybe they need to respect each other enough to not do it, or the union to not step up and defend the players when they do it.

[Beatle17]

Originally Posted by automaton 3

$765M NFL settlement reached earlier this year:

More than 4,500 former athletes -- some suffering from dementia, depression or Alzheimer's that they blamed on blows to the head -- had sued the league, accusing it of concealing the dangers of concussions and rushing injured players back onto the field while glorifying and profiting from the kind of bone-jarring hits that make for spectacular highlight-reel footage.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap100...ncussions-suit

I am pretty sure that the NFL screwed themselves by admitting to the family of Mike Webster that continued blows to the head caused his health issues in writing when they allowed his disability claim. I don't think the NHL has ever done anything like that.

[cam_wmh]

Originally Posted by Zevo

Curious, how many concussions in the past 20 years are from fights and how many are from other means? I would argue most are from other means like dirty hits or big open ice hits.

The big names are Lindros, Primeau & Kariya. From there it's Pandora's box.

Fighters that suffered affects directly from fighting that led to their demise.
Rick Rypien
Derek Boogard
Bob Probert

Originally Posted by Zevo

If the arguement is really about concussions and how they were downplayed, fighting isn't going to be the main focus or at least it shouldn't be.

Not necessarily, as it suggests "every blow to the head is dangerous". I'm not a proponent for the banning of fighting. I prefer to keep it in the game, but there are going to be concessions given by the defense, and I fear surrendering fighting may be one.

See Introduction Point 2 of the Introductiont:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/187100521/...omplaint-Filed

Every blow to the head is dangerous. Both repeated concussions and sub-concussions cause permanent brain damage. During practice and games, a player can sustain close to one thousand or more hits to the head in one season without any documented incapacitating concussion. Such repeated blows result in permanently impaired brain function.

[Stay Golden]

List of Grimers in the law suit Loser Leeman, Vaive and Dunn are the only players that i remember.

• Gary Leeman, 667 NHL games from 1982 to 1997.
• Darren Banks, 20 NHL games from 1992 to 1994.
• Curt Bennett, 580 NHL games from 1970 to 1980.
• Richie Dunn, 483 NHL games from 1977 to 1989.
• Warren Holmes, 45 NHL games from 1981 to 1984.
• Bob Manno, 371 NHL games from 1976 to 1985.
• Blair Stewart, 229 NHL games from 1973 to 1980.
• Morris Titanic, 19 NHL games from 1974 to 1976.
• Rick Vaive, 876 games from 1979 to 1992.

[undercoverbrother]

I am sure a lawyer type can speak to this better than I, but isn't the core idea of negligence reasonable care should be exercised to ensure action(s) or the lack or action(s) don't cause injury/damage?

The big question for me isn't did the league know, but should the league have known. Was the information/research/opinions on head injuries out there, even in 1970's/1980's that there could be long term issues arising from continued and repeated hits to the head, and or head injuries, and that if not treated/approached properly the issues could be debilitating for the person(s).

While the NFL out of court settlement is not binding on the NHL, it makes me think/wonder the reason for the settlement. Was there the research out there and the NFL just didn't do it's due diligence?

[Beatle17]

Originally Posted by undercoverbrother

While the NFL out of court settlement is not binding on the NHL, it makes me think/wonder the reason for the settlement. Was there the research out there and the NFL just didn't do it's due diligence?

Also, the NFL negotiated a settlement out of court and by doing so admitted no wrongdoing. The players are getting money spread out over 20 years but they didn't win a suit. As I stated earlier the NFL admitted in the Mike Webster situation that repeated blows to his head caused his problems so it was better for them to settle so that this didn't come out in court. If the players had pursued it to the end they MAY have come out of it with a lot more based on that statement alone. I think it will be tough to prove negligence in court but if they do good for them.

[Stay Golden]

It will be interesting to see how many players that played less than 2 seasons gloss onto this lawsuit that really couldn't cut it in the NHL because they were terrible.

[troutman]

Lawyers normally take these types of cases on contingency. They only get paid if the Plaintiff is successful. They must believe the players have a strong case.

I don't know why the NHLPA isn't being named as a defendant too.

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by troutman

Lawyers normally take these types of cases on contingency. They only get paid if the Plaintiff is successful. They must believe the players have a strong case.

I don't know why the NHLPA isn't being named as a defendant too.

At what point in the procees can they be third partied in?

[Stay Golden]

Originally Posted by troutman

Lawyers normally take these types of cases on contingency. They only get paid if the Plaintiff is successful. They must believe the players have a strong case.

I don't know why the NHLPA isn't being named as a defendant too.

great point JMO the NHLPA hasn't been an advocate of player safety. On the outside it appears to be an organization more interested in players salaries and maintaining their membership cut.
JMO the modern NHLPA has been the organization really that has neglected player's health, irony their own members.

[Parallex]

I don't know why the NHLPA isn't being named as a defendant too.

They can be added later no? Perhaps during the discovery process?

Originally Posted by cam_wmh

Not necessarily, as it suggests "every blow to the head is dangerous". I'm not a proponent for the banning of fighting. I prefer to keep it in the game, but there are going to be concessions given by the defense, and I fear surrendering fighting may be one.

Well yeah... if the suit doesn't get dismissed I would assume that the NHL would likely seek a settlement and that said settlement would include the NHL agreeing to adapt stricter penalties in regards to Rule 46 and Rule 48 (along with a reasonable cash settlement of course).

[kermitology]

Originally Posted by troutman

Lawyers normally take these types of cases on contingency. They only get paid if the Plaintiff is successful. They must believe the players have a strong case.

I don't know why the NHLPA isn't being named as a defendant too.

I made mention of that on twitter and Ryan Pike (Freeway I think) mentioned that had the NHLPA been named, and as participating members of the NHLPA, they might be admitting that they should have known as well.

Except for the notion that the NHLPA is a body not entirely made up and governed by it's membership, that there should have been people, not players, who should have known and informed the membership of the risks, or fought for player safety rights.

But I don't understand at all why player safety is entirely under the responsibility of the NHL not both the NHL and NHLPA.

[Zevo]

Originally Posted by cam_wmh

The big names are Lindros, Primeau & Kariya. From there it's Pandora's box.

Fighters that suffered affects directly from fighting that led to their demise.
Rick Rypien
Derek Boogard
Bob Probert



Not necessarily, as it suggests "every blow to the head is dangerous". I'm not a proponent for the banning of fighting. I prefer to keep it in the game, but there are going to be concessions given by the defense, and I fear surrendering fighting may be one.

See Introduction Point 2 of the Introductiont:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/187100521/...omplaint-Filed

Didn't Rypien have a history of depression? I would imagine it would be next to impossible to say fighting was the culprit if that's the case. Boogard accidently o.d.ed after being over-prescribed by several doctors including a family member, if I'm not mistaken.

I agree there will be concessions, but I don't think fighting will be outright eliminated(yet) and hopefully they will address the other areas that contribute to the majority of concussions like equipment, rink size, dirty plays, etc.