52 minutes ago, Little Goffy said:

That's the one they give to customers.

The internal manual is only 30 pages.

The executive summary is only three words; "Be a [censored]"

Dispute, doubt, delay.

Just now, Previously known as LITD. said:

Dispute, doubt, delay.

Then deny.

On 10/09/2025 at 16:13, Diamond_Jim said:

Not strictly on the Zurich issue but the Supreme Court today handed down a big impact decision in the world of AFL and concussion.

Justice Keogh approved that allegedly concussed players formed a class and did not as argued by the AFL and Geelong need to sue the AFL and clubs on an individual basis.

This is big to say the least.

MFC can expect quite a few claims. In his judgment the Judge noted that Geelong alone could face up to 300 claims.

Court documents do not name the players who have joined Rooke, or the 90 overall registered group members, but they did confirm that Margalit Lawyers is also representing AFL great Gary Ablett snr in his separate concussion case against the AFL, Cats and Hawthorn.

While the class action still covers players who took to the field from January 1, 1985 to March 14, 2023, the initial trial will focus on the period Rooke played in the AFL from 2002 to 2010, helping to provide clarity for those who played before and after those dates.

In his analysis of earlier arguments, Keogh delivered a sobering warning for the AFL and the Cats, stating that “there are almost 300 players who played AFL games for Geelong during the claim period and who potentially suffered concussions and brain injury”.

“There is a real prospect of Rooke establishing that concussion is not an unusual injury for players to sustain during AFL games or training. Further, the class of group members in this proceeding includes persons who are in a close relationship with injured players and have suffered psychiatric illness because of injury to those players,” Keogh said.

https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/afl-cats-fail-in-bid-to-quash-concussion-class-action-20250910-p5mtup.html

This is perhaps a world first and will be closely watched

Eight new players have joined the multimillion-dollar concussion class action led by former Geelong star Max Rooke against the AFL, alleging they have had their lives impacted by serious head knocks.

The former players named as plaintiffs in the document are ruckman Jack Fitzpatrick (Hawthorn and Melbourne 2010-2015), midfielder Nick Stevens (Port Adelaide and Carlton 1998-2009), midfielder Gary Frangalas (Richmond 1986-1989), defender Michael Richardson (Collingwood and Essendon 1983-1986), forward Ian Fairley (North Melbourne 1983-1996), Rod MacPherson (Footscray 1982-1986), Dylan Roberton (Fremantle 2010-2012) and Brendan Littler (St Kilda 1986).

And of course the thumbnail : Jack Fitzpatrick in his Demons playing days

I assume Nick Stevens' defence to his regular and ongoing legal issues will be to blame a history of concussions.

Unless rapid advancements in head trauma science happen then the sport's long term future is cloudy.

8 minutes ago, layzie said:

Unless rapid advancements in head trauma science happen then the sport's long term future is cloudy.

Soccer has this issue with the heading of the ball. Heading has been eliminated from younger age soccer and without an advance in ball technology (softer and lighter but still functions) it may be increasingly limited.

Rugby (both League and Union) face similar challenges

13 minutes ago, layzie said:

Unless rapid advancements in head trauma science happen then the sport's long term future is cloudy.

Yes, if this class action is successful then not only will it cost the League (and therefore the clubs) a small fortune, then there is the aftermath

A new batch of players could take another class action and then there is the game itself and how it is played

Tackle-free footy like Gaelic football? And what about all the 10's of 1000's of suburban & country footballers (both past and present)

It's noticeable that with American football, there are very few leagues below the NFL (apart from College)

18 minutes ago, Diamond_Jim said:

Soccer has this issue with the heading of the ball. Heading has been eliminated from younger age soccer and without an advance in ball technology (softer and lighter but still functions) it may be increasingly limited.

Rugby (both League and Union) face similar challenges

Absolutely and I often say this to people who argue that Soccer is a squeaky clean long term sport.

Repeated head trauma over a long period of time is the concern there. A little bit like being jabbed in the head with 10 oz gloves in boxing over a long period of time.

We all love these sports but some kind of breakthrough will need to happen for them to survive long term.

26 minutes ago, layzie said:

Absolutely and I often say this to people who argue that Soccer is a squeaky clean long term sport.

Repeated head trauma over a long period of time is the concern there. A little bit like being jabbed in the head with 10 oz gloves in boxing over a long period of time.

We all love these sports but some kind of breakthrough will need to happen for them to survive long term.

You have to wonder about Pucovski and the like, in cricket

This whole mess makes me wonder how I feel about all of those insurance brokers showing off their money on social media.

I hope they help their customers when they need them the most, which in Angus's case he is clearly not being helped.

4 hours ago, Diamond_Jim said:

Soccer has this issue with the heading of the ball. Heading has been eliminated from younger age soccer and without an advance in ball technology (softer and lighter but still functions) it may be increasingly limited.

Rugby (both League and Union) face similar challenges

My father in law in England was a professional in the 60's and 70's there. Now suffering from dementia. Not sure if it is football related, but high chance it is.

3 hours ago, ElDiablo14 said:

This whole mess makes me wonder how I feel about all of those insurance brokers showing off their money on social media.

I hope they help their customers when they need them the most, which in Angus's case he is clearly not being helped.

Having previously worked in insurance (not claims) I constantly heard them on the phone denying claims using the ambiguity of sentences in a PDS to deny.

1 hour ago, Nate said:

My father in law in England was a professional in the 60's and 70's there. Now suffering from dementia. Not sure if it is football related, but high chance it is.

Sorry to hear that.

Dementia is such a horrible infliction on both the inflicted and their loved ones.

The AFL and their cohort of concussion deniers down at the Tribunal , would do well to consider their immunity from being "thrown under the bus"

If he was still playing, I have little doubt that Gus would be our captain atm (and a damn good one at that).

How Zurich has treated him is disgraceful, but unsurprising given they are an insurance company. That they remain one of our principal sponsors is a massive slap in the face to Gus from the MFC.

This is not how we should treat one of our favourite sons.

Wowee

24 minutes ago, whatwhat say what said:

Wowee

if this club has any 🍒 we will be wearing tape over their logo on sunday

29 minutes ago, 2029_brownlow_medalist said:

if this club has any 🍒 we will be wearing tape over their logo on sunday

If the club wanted to make a stand we’d renounce them tomorrow.

I for one would applaud them. The game is bigger than money, Gus as a past player is more important to the MFC than Zurich ever could be.

Stand for something Melbourne, have some moral fortitude and stick up for one of our own. I reckon such action would not see us without a principal partner for very long.

this is so much bigger than gus brayshaw

19 minutes ago, Demon Disciple said:

I reckon such action would not see us without a principal partner for very long.

in this economy?

34 minutes ago, Demon Disciple said:

If the club wanted to make a stand we’d renounce them tomorrow.

I for one would applaud them. The game is bigger than money, Gus as a past player is more important to the MFC than Zurich ever could be.

Stand for something Melbourne, have some moral fortitude and stick up for one of our own. I reckon such action would not see us without a principal partner for very long.

yep absolutely this is much bigger than football. judging by our latest ig and fb story this will never happen, hope someone gets stuck into some of our higher ups at the game sunday they need a good old fashioned spray….

Kick

Them

To

The

Curb

Now

Not only do we need a principal partner. We need a principled partner.

You can all use that

Email to the club tomorrow

Ive cracked. I'm putting tape over their logo when I whack on my guernsey on Sunday.

Yes I'm 42 and wear a footy jumper to the footy. What of it

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-03-27/afl-players-to-lose-insurance-coverage-for-brain-injuries/106503280

Absolutely disgusting and infuriating.

I learnt my lesson during the South Australian Callington floods in 1993. Lots of houses damaged by flood waters, but the insurance companies said the old dry river banks were strengthened by used tyres after the WW2 to give ex-soldiers employment, and it was this that caused the damage, not the water.

No surprise that Gus is being treated this way.

I know it is difficult to get major sponsors, but this is bigger than $ so I can only hope the MFC makes a strong stance and exits the contract on some legal ground.

Is there a Demonlander who knows if there is a moral/behavioural clause in many sponsorship contracts? We exited from iSelect over a decade ago because we discovered they were shady.