Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="BroncsFan, post: 3088214, member: 9052"] My post was in reply to how this was different to GI. I'm not a doctor and don't know the finer points of what is happening with Burgess, but if bunnies are trying to medically retire someone when in reality they are just injured for a season then that shouldn't be grounds for a payout. I believe someone posted the actual clauses for a medical retirement earlier in this thread and it indicated something along the lines of a player not being able to play professionally for the rest of their life. If surgery could resolve the issue and he has to wait 12 months then that probably falls under that clause and should not be entitled to a payout. But there should also be consideration on the players health after football, because a player can keep getting surgery to hold themselves together and play professionally but it may come at the detriment of their long term health... it shouldn't be up to the NRL saying nah keep getting surgery or don't get paid. Maybe the RLPA should be involved here as their obligations should be to the player rather than the team and NRL looking out for themselves. I think there is also insurance involved if a player is medically retired due to an injury sustained whilst playing football. Can remember that popping up with Watmough or Matai?? [/QUOTE]

No members online now.

Total: 12 (members: 0, guests: 12)