Whitehead's court struggle ends with settlement

Effes · **Posted:** Tue Nov 28, 2006 11:16 pm

Quote:

It is understood that the Blues offered a confidential and substantial six-figure settlement to Whitehead on Monday, less than a fortnight before his damages claim was to return to the courts on December 5.

Navy Blue Horse · **Joined:** Mon Feb 28, 2005 2:39 pm **Posts:** 15848

Substantial six figure sum? Where does that leave us?

Will the bad news ever end?

mjonc · **Posted:** Wed Nov 29, 2006 7:01 am

Didn't Collo state to the members that we would win the Whitehead case? I'm pretty sure he did at the AGM. Correct me if I'm wrong.

camel · **Posted:** Wed Nov 29, 2006 7:45 am

Hopefully they included the decimal points in that 6 figures.

TheGame · **Posted:** Wed Nov 29, 2006 10:51 am

You would hope the club would learn from this about playing injured players. Whitey deserved his payout, he was cut down in the prime of his career by the club's incompetence.

DocSherrin III · **Joined:** Tue Mar 29, 2005 2:09 pm **Posts:** 17238

Quote:

You would hope the club would learn from this about playing injured players. Whitey deserved his payout, he was cut down in the prime of his career by the club's incompetence.

Whilst I feel a bit sorry for him - I'm not sure he deserved a payout. If every player took their club to court over these matters, the league and the clubs would be broke. The biggest problem Adrian had was between his ears...it should be remembered that he played fairly decent footy in the best Vic Country league - so it's not like he's a cripple.

The following is Adrian's own words on the legal case from March 2006.

[i]â€œBut to sue the doctor we had to sue the footy club, which I never wanted to do, but it had to be done and one thing led to another and it probably has become fairly sour.

â€œThe players are fine, itâ€™s more from a club perspective.

â€œI was the one who went ahead with the legal proceedings, so you have to grin and bear it some times.â€

GoldCoastBlue · **Posted:** Wed Nov 29, 2006 11:51 am

It shouldn't cost the club anything should it, as wouldn't they have insurance for these types of payouts? i.e Workcover

If so the most that could happen is an increase of the premium.

bluehotel · **Posted:** Wed Nov 29, 2006 12:45 pm

My understanding is that it is covered by the insurance of the club.

gerry atric · **Joined:** Tue Mar 01, 2005 9:35 am **Posts:** 2125

Quote:

Didn't Collo state to the members that we would win the Whitehead case? I'm pretty sure he did at the AGM. Correct me if I'm wrong.

Not sure if you can blame Collo for this mjonc as per Age article sounds like the goalposts were moved by State Gov legislation:

Quote:

In July last year, Justice David Byrne of the Supreme Court found that Whitehead was entitled to compensation but not from Carlton, and advised the former player that as a one-time employee of the football club, he should instead pursue a settlement through the Workers' Compensation Act.

This avenue, though, which had the potential to allow other former players to lodge claims for injury through the workers' compensation system and, in turn, drive the cost of insurance premiums for AFL clubs and even other professional sporting bodies up, was subsequently closed by State Government legislation passed mid-year.

Kouta · **Posted:** Thu Nov 30, 2006 12:33 am

bluehotel wrote:

My understanding is that it is covered by the insurance of the club.

The Age.

Quote:

The club contacted The Age yesterday to deny that it had paid out the sum but would not confirm or deny that a third party made the payment to settle the claim.

molsey · **Posted:** Thu Nov 30, 2006 7:40 am

http://www.theage.com.au/realfooty/news ... 53510.html

See the Carlton reference at the bottom - just denied that we paid it. Either insurance or I wouldn't be surprised if the AFL paid it given the implications for the rest of the competition.

buzzaaaah · **Joined:** Mon Feb 28, 2005 10:31 am **Posts:** 17893

I actually believe Whitehead deserved a payout.

Its all well to tell players that this injection will allow them to play out the game but if they aren't warned about the potential negatives, that is irresponsible by the doctor and the club. I dont thinkn it happens so much anymore. Players seem a lot better informed about the long term damage that may occur. They may still decide to take the injection but the choice is more informed.

Even if Whitehead played country footy, he was restricted from playing AFL and thats whre the money is. He didnt sue because the injuries stopped him playing footy, he sued over loss of income.

RoK · **Joined:** Mon Feb 28, 2005 6:31 pm **Posts:** 295

Jack told him to sue us so insurance would pay him out.Happens all the time.

bluehotel · **Posted:** Mon Dec 04, 2006 7:37 pm

If the AFL paid it would it have to come through on the end of year books or could they hide it as an incidental expense?

Whitehead's court struggle ends with settlement

Who is online