I completed the NRL blue shirt course a few years ago. We were told head guards do nothing to protect the brain. Better investing in a quality mouth guard.

My understanding is that it's more about return to play protocols and things like that rather than red carding every high tackle etc. Agree with the earlier poster about it not being right to apply today's knowledge to past events.

Agree with other comments about Goulding. Sent off at an amateur rugby game for telling a kid he would t*** his dad, then tried to get the dismissal rescinded by saying he would make sure the ref never got another game again if it was put through.

They don't owe them a living but there's a link to professional sportsmen and mental issues once they retire going from a life of being an elite athlete with a regime and competing at the top level. So the clubs do owe them a duty of care once they have retired. Not a living but support which they didn't receive and many others.

The argument they knew what they were getting into is pretty weak. Do we really think they knew they could get some kind of brain trauma that would have serious consequences in later life ? Probably not, was there evedance that continuous high impact collisions damaged the brain ? Yes. So there's a valid argument that the rfl and clubs failed in their duty of care to ensure the games rules were as safe as possible.

I would not be surprised they are successful if they go to court, if it's more about protecting the future generations of players they would settle out of court to ensure the future generations have a professional game to play.

Get what you’re saying but does my employer owe me a duty or care when I retire after the best part of 40years toil? There’s also a link to retirement in general and MH issues, where do we draw the line? If it’s a ‘journeyman’ player which club owes that duty of care?

For me our clubs should support players coming up to retirement, get them ready for it and prepared for it. Speak to retired players who had it good and bad. It’s hardly a secret that you must work on after playing pro RL, it’s hardly a secret that the money just isn’t there to sustain a player for life. BG has peed away all his money on drugs and alcohol with the occasional scrap to boot and now wants to blame the game for his own downfall which he alone caused?

Hopefully some of the people Goulding has repeatedly punched in the face come forward and sue him. Goulding has a duty of care to all the people he has leathered over the years.

As a plumber its like me taking every firm I've worked for to court to sue for knackered knees, elbows and hearing when I'm 70. I know the risks, I wear knee pads and ear defenders.

I truly cannot think of a worse advocate for this case than Bobby Goulding. And this idea that someone like him is thinking about the welfare of other players is derisory.

Sonny Nickle?

Point 1 is a tricky one as you point out and its support I was meaning to get back to normal life not financial. I do think that elite sports people are left with a huge void once they've retired that they struggle to deal with not just in rugby league.

There are other players in the case and possibly more may come forward would we be more sympathetic if Bobby Goulding was not one of them ? Not a perticularly nice chap but let's not dismiss everyone's claim because we don't like one of them as a person ?

Get a grip !! There's only one person who has a valid claim to sue a player over a punch to the head n that's Lance hohia.

It's quite disappointing that the rugby league community has generally stood by players who have become ill Steve Prescott Rob burrow mike Gregory (except Wigan rlfc) yet your letting your dislike of a player downplay the severity of the injuries or even worse implying he deserves them !! Very sad

No it's not the same.....

Your have safe lifting courses etc to minimise risk of injury what did rugby league players have before hia and concussion protocols ?