Lance Hohaia - Life with concussion

[zorquif]

Legally, they are responsible for the actions of their employees. I would also ask whether this sort of action is encouraged. After all, the head coach Shaun Wane was filmed in early 2014, in the dressing room saying to his players "knock people out, I cant give you more of a free reign that that."

I'm glad that it has been pointed out that Flower started the incident, which Hohaia then retaliated to, which Flower then retaliated further.

As for the statement from St Helens, I'm staggered that we have released that. It reads like something Derek Beaumont or Marwan Koukash would say. It's almost like a transcript of what was said when we heard the story, as opposed to carefully drafted legal statement. It appears rushed.

Firstly, we put the words concussion symptoms in speech marks, implying that Lance Hohaia is either lying or exaggerating his symptoms. Since St Helens (I assume) have had no medical dealings with Hohaia since his retirement, I'm not sure how they are aware of his symptoms.

Secondly, we disclose that this matter has already been in the hands of lawyers, which is unprofessional to disclose.

When Saints usually release statements, they are calm, reasoned and well-thought through. And that's because they are usually attributed to Eamonn McManus, who is a very bright individual. I would be surprised if that statement was written by Eamonn McManus, as it varies so far from our usual stance. I would also be surprised if a lawyer had written that statement. We have hardly played our cards close to our chest, it appears as though we have revealed our full hand at this early stage, which is foolish.

The statement should have been brief. It should have merely stated that we refute his allegations, pride ourselves on care offered to our players, and will seek redress. That's all that needed to be said at this moment. As I said earlier, we come out of this looking very bad.

Hohaia and Shaun Briscoe have now both alleged that they have been pressurised to play, when they do not feel medically able. Surely this should warrant a wide-ranging investigation from the RFL.

You don't know what was said before the grand final. Also, I don't see how Wigan is legally responsible for Flower's actions.

[Chris22]

You don't know what was said before the grand final. Also, I don't see how Wigan is legally responsible for Flower's actions.

 

Correct, but if Wigan have been encouraged to knock players out in the past, and later this occurs, questions do have to be asked. Wane may never have repeated these statements, but he has said them in the past.

 

As the legal responsibility: "In a workplace context, an employer can be liable for the acts or omissions of its employees, provided it can be shown that they took place in the course of their employment"

 

Source: http://www.acas.org.uk/index.aspx?articleid=3715

[zorquif]

I think you'd struggle to show that what flower did took place in the course of his employment.

[Chris22]

You could make an argument either for or against that point. However, it's a moot point as Hohaia has said he isn't contemplating any action against Flower or Wigan.

[Saintslass]

You could make an argument either for or against that point. However, it's a moot point as Hohaia has said he isn't contemplating any action against Flower or Wigan.

He also said he wasn't contemplating any action against Saints either.  He just decided to smear their reputation in the press instead.  It is Saints who appear to say they are contemplating legal action, presumably for libel.

[Saint Toppy]

I wonder if Saints legal action will include fraud - after all Hohia masqueraded as a stand-off for seval years displaying no evidence he actually was one.

[Bod]

http://www.saintsrlfc.com/news/page/5793

[Padge]

He also said he wasn't contemplating any action against Saints either.  He just decided to smear their reputation in the press instead.  It is Saints who appear to say they are contemplating legal action, presumably for libel.

 

Saints can try suing for defamation but to win tha the club will have prove that the defamation caused them serious financial loss, they could go for compensation for damage to their reputation as a club, but that is even more difficult to win.

[Angelic Cynic]

after all Hohia masqueraded as a stand-off for seval years displaying no evidence he actually was one.

 

   It must have been good judgement,or just wishing to remain inside the salary cap,that prevented Dr Koukash from signing a World Cup winner.

 

  There was me thinking the evil Dr himself was the only one who fell out with players.

[shrek]

http://www.saintsrlfc.com/news/page/5793

A far more considered and apporpriate response, in my humble opinion.

[Old Frightful]

The verbal tennis continues...

[GeordieSaint]

Interesting response from Hohaia...

 

His assertions about management seem to support Briscoe's claims about management posted earlier in this thread. I still think Saints' response has been a poor one, including McManus bringing up Hohaia's studies... a much simpler response stating the club was seeking legal advice would have been more measured and credible to Hohaia's allegations.

[Saint Toppy]

Reading back through Hohia's original statement to the NZ Herald  and subsequent verbal exchanges between him and the club there's a few things that stand out.

 

Hohia clearly hid the extent of his pain & injuries from the medical staff (probably out of bravado as most players do). If he was having complete memory losses and dizzy spells he wouldn't have passed the various head tests he undertook. I seriously doubt any doctor would just prescribe a few painkillers had they known the full extent of his injuries.

 

His gripes about not being paid aren't completely true. Even after his resignation Saints continued to pay all his bills, rent and educational costs to allow him to stay in the UK and finish his studies, so they hardly walked away and just abandoned him financially. They're certainly under no obligation to pay him anything once he'd resigned and served his notice period.

 

The only questions that really still needs clearing up is whether the club did actually put pressue on Hohia to continue playing or not and if (as Hohia has claimed and McManus denied) the player was ever given any sort of ultimatum about play or leave.

 

Hohia's assertions now that he's been misinterpreted and only really wanted to raise concerns about player welfare appear to be something of a bit of back-tracking and ###### covering. He obviously has an axe to grind with someone and no doubt spurred on by some litigation loving American bottom feeding lawyer is trying to go after the club rather than an individual (Flower) as he knows that his best chance of any sort of pay out.

 

I hope the club do take this forward through the courts and lets get the true facts out. If there's any truth in what Hohia has claimed and the club are at fault then so be it, they'll rightly pay the price, and that will then probably lead to changes to player welfare rules.

If however it turns out that there's been some 'embelishment' of the truth (not exaxtly unheard of once the press get a story) then Hohia should suffer the consequences of making any false or misleading statements.

[John Rhino]

He also said he wasn't contemplating any action against Saints either. He just decided to smear their reputation in the press instead. It is Saints who appear to say they are contemplating legal action, presumably for libel.

Indeed. And I would expect any SL club to have detailed procedures and record keeping in place.

If, and it looks increasingly like when, it goes to court all the facts of his assessment, advice and medication will be revealed.

I hope his recollection is not impaired as he will not have any of these documents and I know from personal experience it's impossible to argue in court a year later against people and their lawyers who do.

[Tonka]

SNIFF SNIFF

 

I smell lawyers.

 

It has f all to do with player welfare blah blah. Its about the legalistas seeing money

Funnily enough, I would have expected a much more careful statement from Saints if lawyers saw the statement before it went out.  It reads to me that with some advice on the law around reputational issues Saints have then led with their chins.  I'd keep quiet now if I were them.