Only if the employer has been negligent. I imagine he will have received full pay whilst not playing, had access to very high level private medical assistance and investigations. If he could show that the club knew he was vulnerable or sent him back on or suggested he played again when still complaining of an issue then maybe that would be negligent. Playing rugby, suffering a concussion, failing return to play protocol and then not playing again is as far as I can see not negligent in any way.

Agreed, the players who are allegedly chasing down the kicker, are actually intimidating him (legal) by the knowledge of them simply running into him after the kick has gone (illegal).

Funny one this - because I think we both agree on the fundamental points - the game should protect players from foul play, particularly that involving the head or neck.... we are far too soft on deliberate and repeated attacks to the head/neck. A player like McIlorum should be penalised out of the game - with his rap sheet, any head contact, whether deliberate or reckless should result in a minimum of 150% of his previous sanction. So if he got 4 games last time, a minimum of 6 for his next offence, and then 9 for his next, 15 the next, 23 the next and so on - that would guarantee the repeat offenders fix their problem or they’ll be worthless to any club.

What I don’t think we should do is make the game powderpuff like removing shoulder charge entirely, stopping a bit of fisticuffs every now and then (O accept there is some risk here, but rarely have I ever seen a rugby fight end with any real damage) other than a shiner or cut.

Also, in terms of claims, the only way I could ever agree with a player making a claim is if the club forced the player to break head injury protocols, or were implementing training or match day techniques that they knew were dangerous. With the whole concussion stuff being very new, I don’t believe there will have been instances of this. To punish the sport for something they didn’t know about isn’t right - particularly when players enter contact sport knowing their is an inherent risk.

I think so too.

On the head injury stuff and law suits, it's more likely the governing bodies will be the target of major actions, unless as you rightly say an individual club has breeched safety protocols. The evidence on TBI and concussion has been available for some time and if the governing bodies have been presented with medical opinion and failed to act they could be seen as negligent. This is the case with Steve Thompson and others, they are suing the governing bodies and are gathering players for a class action suit. Something like that could potentially bankrupt RL.

Just on shoulder charges, I don't agree with the RU interpretation of the "armless tackle", that's stupid, but I gave up on shoulder charges when I saw the picture Luke Burgess posted showing his jaw split in half down the middle after that big dopey Cas **** hit him in the face with a "shoulder charge".

If you're going to ban contact with the head though it has to work both ways, any handoff by an attacking player /raised elbow that makes contact with the head should also be punished.

And this is the dangerous route it goes down when you start altering the fabric of the game - it starts getting silly. Absolutely clamp down on the illegal contact with the head - make it so that players daren’t swing their arm into a tackle (as they can’t control where it ends up if the player steps/slips etc), make it so they daren’t go for a blindside shoulder charge that could go wrong, coz if they get it wrong and collect the head, they’re out of the game for a LONG time. Make it so that they don’t get paid whilst banned, that’ll soon sort it. But don’t about with the fabric of the game to make it ‘safer’ - that will just ruin the sport IMO (and already is doing).

Look at boxing - boxing simply can’t survive if the doctors and solicitors have their way, infact I don’t think any contact sport can, because if you remove the head injuries, the solicitors will then go for arthritis.... it won’t end.... we have to be. If and strong enough to say ‘we know our sport comes with risk, if you want to play it, never mind earn a living from it, you do so knowing the risks’ and take our chances legally. Contracts should be worded to protect the sport on this front.

I know HSE laws are designed to protect workers, but for mine, contact sport has to have different definitions, sport ultimately is a hobby, and people choose to do it knowing the risks. If I decide to climb a tree in the park, and fall out and hurt myself, I shouldn’t be allowed to sue the park for having climbable trees and no signs saying ‘don’t climb the trees’, but I bet I could find a solicitor willing to take on the case based on that.