Irish schoolboy awarded €2.75m damages after rugby training head injury (sad story)

http://www.rte.ie/news/2014/0324/604269-student-secures-2-75m-damages-after-rugby-injury/

This is quite a sad story so dont read if you have the Monday blues.

Was following it in the papers over the last few weeks. The school and the hospital were idiotic in everything they did. How in gods name did that coach (after being warned by the mother) put him on the pitch.....jebus wept.

Its not a sad story, its a story of neglect and stupidity by people who should have known better instead of ruining a young mans life and prospects...

It is a tragedy.

One of the things which confuses me about the report is that it seems to imply that the school would have been blameless if they had waited 4 more days before playing this lad.

The outcome would have been exactly the same. Four days was not going to be enough for his subdural to vanish.

People with head injuries need to be properly assessed and properly treated, not just allowed back on the pitch after a "one-size-fits-all" rest.

Im not familiar with irish money but a 2.75 million settlement sounds a hell of a lot to me, it would never happen in New Zealand.

£2.25m or NZD 4.4m?

Well it is a lot of money but this guy is only 22 and he will need care for the rest of his life.

aucklandlaurie wrote:
Im not familiar with irish money but a 2.75 million settlement sounds a hell of a lot to me, it would never happen in New Zealand.

No amount of money could compensate for what happened to him in my opinion.

Of course it couldn't but this is surely about covering the costs of future care rather than trying to "make up" for the errors?

Lots of people made lots of mistakes in this case, the individual himself included.

Firstly, it appears the original injury itself was not treated seriously enough in the first place. Should not the player have been taken to hospital... if only to be checked over.... by the school team physio..?

Secondly, when he took himself to the hospital because of the headaches and eye problems, he should have been given a scan. The words "head injury caused playing rugby" should have made the doctors wary enough to order a scan immediately. It appears it didn't.

Thirdly, even though I would agree that the three week rest protocol wasn't enough, this was seemingly ignored because seventeen days later, the player was on the bench for a competitive match..... some four days before the protocol expired. I'm not suggesting the four days would have made much difference anyway, but it suggests a rather cavalier attitude to this sort of injury by the club.

Fourthly, the player himself. He knew he shouldn't play. He knew he was under a three week protocol, but he willingly and knowingly ignored it, firstly agreeing to be a replacement for the match and then coming on to the field.

This is not the fault of the sport of rugby. It is a question of multiple errors by grown ups who know the risks involved in the game and treated a situation in an, at the very least, cavalier manner, if not downright neglectfully.

Lucas Neville isn't the first player to suffer serious brain trauma from playing rugby and he won't be the last. I don't mean to sound unsympathetic, but it's a hard game and injuries will occur regardless of what measures are put in place. But once they do occur they should be properly treated and all involved.... coaches, physios, doctors and the players themselves.... really have to make sure that players firstly get the proper initial treatment and follow the correct follow up procedures.

Sad thing. Situations like this are the reason why we need to implement better concussion procedures. Surely no match is ever important enough to risk a player's life, is it?

The Fourth Lion wrote:Lots of people made lots of mistakes in this case, the individual himself included.

Firstly, it appears the original injury itself was not treated seriously enough in the first place.  Should not the player have been taken to hospital... if only to be checked over.... by the school team physio..?  

Secondly, when he took himself to the hospital because of the headaches and eye problems, he should have been given a scan.  The words  "head injury caused playing rugby" should have made the doctors wary enough to order a scan immediately.  It appears it didn't.

Thirdly, even though I would agree that the three week rest protocol wasn't enough, this was seemingly ignored because seventeen days later, the player was on the bench for a competitive match..... some four days before the protocol expired.  I'm not suggesting the four days would have made much difference anyway, but it suggests a rather cavalier attitude to this sort of injury by the club.

Fourthly, the player himself.  He knew he shouldn't play.  He knew he was under a three week protocol, but he willingly and knowingly ignored it, firstly agreeing to be a replacement for the match and then coming on to the field.

This is not the fault of the sport of rugby.  It is a question of multiple errors by grown ups who know the risks involved in the game and treated a situation in an, at the very least, cavalier manner, if not downright neglectfully.

Lucas Neville isn't the first player to suffer serious brain trauma from playing rugby and he won't be the last.   I don't mean to sound unsympathetic, but it's a hard game and injuries will occur regardless of what measures are put in place.   But once they do occur they should be properly treated and all involved.... coaches, physios, doctors and the players themselves.... really have to make sure that players firstly get the proper initial treatment and follow the correct follow up procedures.

 

your post is particularly stupid nay moronic rather than unsympathetic and is the type of thinking that causes these in the first place.

In what way?

ME-109 wrote:

The Fourth Lion wrote:Lots of people made lots of mistakes in this case, the individual himself included.

Firstly, it appears the original injury itself was not treated seriously enough in the first place.  Should not the player have been taken to hospital... if only to be checked over.... by the school team physio..?  

Secondly, when he took himself to the hospital because of the headaches and eye problems, he should have been given a scan.  The words  "head injury caused playing rugby" should have made the doctors wary enough to order a scan immediately.  It appears it didn't.

Thirdly, even though I would agree that the three week rest protocol wasn't enough, this was seemingly ignored because seventeen days later, the player was on the bench for a competitive match..... some four days before the protocol expired.  I'm not suggesting the four days would have made much difference anyway, but it suggests a rather cavalier attitude to this sort of injury by the club.

Fourthly, the player himself.  He knew he shouldn't play.  He knew he was under a three week protocol, but he willingly and knowingly ignored it, firstly agreeing to be a replacement for the match and then coming on to the field.

This is not the fault of the sport of rugby.  It is a question of multiple errors by grown ups who know the risks involved in the game and treated a situation in an, at the very least, cavalier manner, if not downright neglectfully.

Lucas Neville isn't the first player to suffer serious brain trauma from playing rugby and he won't be the last.   I don't mean to sound unsympathetic, but it's a hard game and injuries will occur regardless of what measures are put in place.   But once they do occur they should be properly treated and all involved.... coaches, physios, doctors and the players themselves.... really have to make sure that players firstly get the proper initial treatment and follow the correct follow up procedures.

 

your post is particularly stupid nay moronic rather than unsympathetic and is the type of thinking that causes these in the first place.

This part is extremely objectionable to me. He was 17 and in effect a minor. I will give the poster some slack for not reading the reports properly but one of the things to note is that in Ireland the Schools rugby is extremely intense and to a lot of the kids it is the be all and end all of their school life. The player was part of the senior squad he had just had a brain injury but was put on the bench. Now in the lead up to this besides the hospital doing a less than stellar diagnosis the coach put him on the bench after his mother had phoned the school and informed the school of the issues with him. It is in no way the young mans fault here in any meaningful sense of the word.

The last part of the post is just some silly hard man its a mans sport shoite. The protocols are in place to protect people against themselves (and these are adults). In the case of a child which is what the young man was, he was failed by a chain of events and people in a position of responsibility. To suggest otherwise makes my blood boil...

ME-109 wrote:

ME-109 wrote:

The Fourth Lion wrote:Lots of people made lots of mistakes in this case, the individual himself included.

Firstly, it appears the original injury itself was not treated seriously enough in the first place.  Should not the player have been taken to hospital... if only to be checked over.... by the school team physio..?  

Secondly, when he took himself to the hospital because of the headaches and eye problems, he should have been given a scan.  The words  "head injury caused playing rugby" should have made the doctors wary enough to order a scan immediately.  It appears it didn't.

Thirdly, even though I would agree that the three week rest protocol wasn't enough, this was seemingly ignored because seventeen days later, the player was on the bench for a competitive match..... some four days before the protocol expired.  I'm not suggesting the four days would have made much difference anyway, but it suggests a rather cavalier attitude to this sort of injury by the club.

Fourthly, the player himself.  He knew he shouldn't play.  He knew he was under a three week protocol, but he willingly and knowingly ignored it, firstly agreeing to be a replacement for the match and then coming on to the field.

This is not the fault of the sport of rugby.  It is a question of multiple errors by grown ups who know the risks involved in the game and treated a situation in an, at the very least, cavalier manner, if not downright neglectfully.

Lucas Neville isn't the first player to suffer serious brain trauma from playing rugby and he won't be the last.   I don't mean to sound unsympathetic, but it's a hard game and injuries will occur regardless of what measures are put in place.   But once they do occur they should be properly treated and all involved.... coaches, physios, doctors and the players themselves.... really have to make sure that players firstly get the proper initial treatment and follow the correct follow up procedures.

 

your post is particularly stupid nay moronic rather than unsympathetic and is the type of thinking that causes these in the first place.

This part is extremely objectionable to me. He was 17 and in effect a minor. I will give the poster some slack for not reading the reports properly but one of the things to note is that in Ireland the Schools rugby is extremely intense and to a lot of the kids it is the be all and end all of their school life. The player was part of the senior squad he had just had a brain injury but was put on the bench. Now in the lead up to this besides the hospital doing a less than stellar diagnosis the coach put him on the bench after his mother had phoned the school and informed the school of the issues with him. It is in no way the young mans fault here in any meaningful sense of the word.

The last part of the post is just some silly hard man its a mans sport shoite. The protocols are in place to protect people against themselves (and these are adults). In the case of a child which is what the young man was, he was failed by a chain of events and people in a position of responsibility. To suggest otherwise makes my blood boil...

Couldn't have put it better ME - there's far too much blather about rugby being a man's game. I started a thread a few months ago before this case hit the headlines, mainly arising from Luke Marshall's series of concussions and the well-publicised concussions suffered by BOD and George Smith (when both of them played on when it was clear they had got a bad bang on the head and should have been taken of). Players, no matter how eminent they are, have to be be protected from themselves as much as anything else.

And to the NZ posters who questioned the size of the damages award, bear in mind that this young man is now brain-damaged at a very young age as a result of actions/inactions when he was a minor - the €2.5 million is going to have provide for him for the rest of his life which could be another 70 years. I p1sses me off when I see multi-million awards for libel but in this case and in other cases where medical negligence has been proven, I've no problem with the size of the award

He should have got a hell of a lot more in "punitive damages" if you ask me. These types of cases just make me so angry....

ME-109 wrote:He should have got a hell of a lot more in "punitive damages" if you ask me. These types of cases just make me so angry....

He couldnt get "a lot more in punitive damages" because it was an agreed settlement between the Plaintiff and the Defendants.

I know it was. The offer was made and they went with it. As liability wasn't an issue the hearing was about damages.