Docaster to 'sue us' over tackle?

[paddy]

Absolute rubbish. No way has this Ryan chap taken legal advice. If he had I''m sure they'd have pointed out:

Elliot v. Saunders - Drake J held no liability arising from a two footed challenge which ended the claimant's career since he could not prove the other player intended to jump at him rather than the ball

Cauldwell v. Maguire - for liability there must be something more serious than an error of judgement, oversight or lapse of skill

Wooldridge v. Sumner - Diplock LJ: The participant can be expected to be concentrating fully on winning and will have to make decisions in ‘the agony of the moment'

 

[The_Viper]

Oh my days.

 

[Spearritt of the Albion]

So Doncaster Rovers think Billy Sharpe was targeted do they? Send them the video of our game against Exeter City (I think it was them) at Withdean. Nine of their ten outfield players, plus one sub, were booked during that game and every single one was for a foul on Bobby Zamora! After getting booked each player was moved from 'Bobby duty' to another area of the pitch and somebody else took over. Now, that's being targeted!! As already mentioned in this thread, the player to feel sorry for is Lewis Dunk. He is being shot down and ridiculed for what was no worse than a bookable tackle. It was one footed but from behind so it was a justifiable booking but it wasn't nasty and it would probably have been fair if Sharpe hadn't put himself between Dunk and the ball after the tackle had been started.
We might as well all stay at home and let football die if they are successful. Everyone will be at it and the only winners will be the lawyers.
One more thing, send Doncaster the video of the tackle by Payne of Gillingham on Vincelot. Now, that was a bad tackle!

 

[seagullsovergrimsby]

If they thought the tackle was bad I dread to think what will happen when they play Pompey. Hayter was also stretchered off late on in the game with an injury but the replay showed he actually smacked his boot into Calde's forehead.

 

[The Large One]

There are some truly thick-as-pigshit Doncaster fans on that board.

What respect I had for them once has largely evaporated. What is evident is that they don't not have a clue as to what they're on about.

Embarrassing.

 

[Tooting Gull]

The elbow by Chris Morgan on Ian Hume was the worst thing I've ever seen on a football pitch - pre-meditated, and almost certain to cause serious injury. But even that hasn't resulted in a successful legal action.

Dunk's tackle, though bad, simply wasn't in that league. He could have seen red on another day, but it wasn't even the worst tackle in the match.

I'm surprised at Ryan, I thought he was a decent chairman. I think it's just the disappointment coming through. Sharp was worth to him either a) 20 goals, or b) £3.5million. He now risks getting neither.

 

[The Large One]

It all sounds to me like someone wasn't insured properly.

 

[Deleted User X18H]

It all sounds to me like someone wasn't insured properly.

How do you define being properly insured? You are either indemnified or you're not. Do you perhaps mean adequately insured?

 

[Easy 10]

So I guess this "special relationship" between us and Donnie is now dead in the water then ?

Meh.

 

[Sir Nigel of Eagleshire]

I think this is the picture and clearly shows one foot behind Dunk whilst the other makes the tackle.

Its a bit naughty but F*** me i tackle my boy in the garden harder than that... silly sods

 

[jmsc]

My my, whilst I won't condone Dunk's challenge, the tackle on Ashley Barnes was a hell of a lot worse!

It would be interesting if it do go to court to see what it would think of the tackles on Barnes & KLL in the 1st half!

 

[DanielT]

there's a tech expression: those who can't innovate litigate. maybe their chairman thinks that only way they can do well is in a court, not on the pitch

 

[bristolseagull]

Players have an absolute defence to causing injuries to others while plying their trade. Any legal action would most certainly fail.

 

[bristolseagull]

Absolute rubbish. No way has this Ryan chap taken legal advice. If he had I''m sure they'd have pointed out:

Elliot v. Saunders - Drake J held no liability arising from a two footed challenge which ended the claimant's career since he could not prove the other player intended to jump at him rather than the ball

Cauldwell v. Maguire - for liability there must be something more serious than an error of judgement, oversight or lapse of skill

Wooldridge v. Sumner - Diplock LJ: The participant can be expected to be concentrating fully on winning and will have to make decisions in ‘the agony of the moment'

Good post, interesting cases too.

 

[Elvis]

Its a bit naughty but F*** me i tackle my boy in the garden harder than that... silly sods

And I bet you wear a Brighton shirt!!

 

[pishhead]

I thought Naylors tackle, plus Tommy Spurr on Lua-Lua were as bad as Dunks. 99 tiimes out of a 100 Sharp would've dusted himself of and continued playing on. To say he was targeted is ridiculous, I don't remember a single other foul against him all game. Smacks of absolute desperation by Donny realising they have lost their most saleable asset for a sustained length of time.

 

[Mr deez]

I've watched this tackle quite a few times, and I still find it unreal that Donny fans think is was a red and 'assault'. Ref got it right.

 

[upthealbion1970]

Smacks of absolute desperation by Donny realising they have lost their most saleable asset for a sustained length of time.

With just a hint of "the Brighton chairman is loaded" behind it IMHO

 

[Mr deez]

I also think they should go ahead and sue. ZERO of winning and would hopefully set a precedent to stop this nonsense in future.

 

[Sir Nigel of Eagleshire]

And I bet you wear a Brighton shirt!!

Only when i'm mucking out the horses old boy ;-)