Nigel de Jong could be sued: Good or bad for the game?

[Logicalman]

The following story brings a lot of things into perspective. We've come to accept that Football is no longer considered just a sport, but big business, and it had to happen that suits of this kind are becoming more likely and frequent, but will it further diminish the beautiful game?

Marseille could take legal action against Nigel de Jong


Marseille have said they could take legal action against Manchester City's Nigel de Jong after his tackle broke the leg of Newcastle's Hatem Ben Arfa.

Ben Arfa, who is on a season-long loan from Marseille, is set for a long spell on the sidelines after suffering a double fracture last Sunday.

The French club's president Jean-Claude Dassier told TF1's Telefoot programme: "We will file a claim against De Jong.

"It's about getting rid of this type of individual from European grounds."

Even though De Jong was not booked for the incident in the 2-1 victory for Manchester City at Eastlands on 3 October, he was dropped from the Netherlands squad for their Euro 2012 qualifiers against Moldova last Friday and Sweden on Tuesday after coach Bert van Marwijk said it was "a wild and unnecessary offence".

Newcastle subsequently wrote to the Football Association asking it to take action against the 25-year-old Dutch midfielder for the tackle which it deemed to be "unnecessary and using excessive force."

The FA said it would consider the letter but may be powerless to implement any punishment.
   
De Jong's challenge has been highlighted after a string of other incidents sparked debate on the extent of tackling in the Premier League.

Wolves captain Karl Henry was dismissed on the same weekend for what he called an "horrific" challenge on Wigan's Jordi Gomez.

Henry was also involved in a challenge with Fulham's Bobby Zamora which led to the England striker breaking his leg in September, although the injury was deemed an accident.

In addition Zamora's team-mate Moussa Dembele suffered a long-term injury the same month when he was tackled by Stoke's Andy Wilkinson in the League Cup.

The spate of rash challenges led Fulham captain Danny Murphy to urge managers to take responsibility for their players' actions.

And Professional Footballers' Association chief Gordon Taylor also said he wanted to remind players they have a "duty of care" to their fellow players on the field.

Ben Arfa, 23, was playing in only his fourth game for Newcastle when he suffered the injury and the Magpies said they were putting no timescale on when the French midfielder would return.

Dassier also promised to offer support to the winger in his recovery, stating: "Ben Arfa asked our medical staff to help and we will do everything we can to help him, obviously."

[sipwell]

As clubs - and associations alike - apparently are not doing anything about it, legal action is an option in my view. De Jong (and others) make faults that just don't belong on a football pitch. As they are most certainly obsessed with dollar/pound or euro signs, only hefty fines might change their minds. Sportmanship apparently has a prize!

[AlFayedsChequebook]

If they want to make waves they should not sue De Jong but go for the FA or the Premier League as they a 'allowing' this to happen.

I think we would see a change in the rules sharpish if that occured.

[finnster01]

Indifferent. This will not change a thing only bring the issue to the forefront again (which is a good thing).

However, since when was it illegal to play football? And according to the rule book, the ref and the FA, there is absolutely F All anyone can do about it, including the courts.

The man did not break a law but a foot. The only ones who will win on this case are the attorneys. Ben Arfa, Monaco, Newcastle (and Man Citey) all have insurance so this I view as just a plot from Marseilles to try milk the insurance firms for what they are worth.

I think what De Jong, Henry, Wilkinson (and others for that matter) does not belong in football. However, taking them (especially in De Jong's case, who didn't even get a foul, never mind a card) to court is a waste of time, the system, and money. Having FIFA and the FA change the rules and allow them to be suspended properly with no pay and allow real TV review after the fact despite having a deaf and dumb referee is the only thing that will work.  :014:

[TonyGilroy]

Players whose careers have been ended by reckless tackles have sued in the past. Some won, some lost. There will have been many cases settled out of court so there are no new principles here. The bills are of course paid by insurance companies albeit probably leading to higher premiums.

If the football governing bodies had procedures in place to properly punish offenders that included seriously long suspensions for the most blatently dangerous and unforgiveable assaults and points deductions then offences simply would not happen because clubs and managers would make sure their players behaved.

It's not physical contact or hard play that's the problem - it's taking it to the extreme endangering opponents unnecessarily. "Duty of Care" is the legal phrase and the problem arises when players simply don't care about opponents safety.

DM is right.

[jarv]

Nothing will be done. When you step onto a football pitch, at any level of football, you could leave in an ambulance. You know that when you play.
A few years ago, playing in the over 50 league, I was smashed to the ground, dislocated shoulder and torn rotator cuff, resulting in surgery and 6 months of misery. I spoke with a lawyer...response,  forget it!  Whether you are a week-end warrior or a pro, you know the risks.

[TonyGilroy]

Those risks though don't include deliberate or reckless attempts to harm. Not at law, anyway.

In parks football it's some poor sod with a broken leg suing some uninsured thug. At professional level there's insurance to pay both sides costs and massive loss of earnings to be claimed if it's a career ending injury.

[mhatc]

Well deserved as he has broken 2 legs this calendar year.  :red:

[fulhamwannabe]

never anything will done about it,look at vinny jones,he became an actor,and what roles does he get?
and there has been plenty more,savage,keane,pearce,bowyer,cantona and many more

[Logicalman]

All good and sensible replies to the question posed.

The reason I made the point about football now being a business, is that in the past, as Tony stated, suits flew in the cases of lost earnings, etc, but with the advent of the Prem, the extraordinary earnings potential of players both in the UK and elsewhere on the world stage, such losses are calculated as much off the pitch in potential earnings lost whilst out injured, as well as those career-ending types, and with such businesses putting their own monies into the fray, they have a bigger investment to protect, whereas in the past, such suits were left up to the player, so I believe the battle lines have been redrawn.

I believe Alf hit on a possible scenario of the suits being directed not only at the player, but also at the authorities that may be allowing the culture to grow, whilst doing very little to stop it.

Tony, you may be able to answer this, but if, as we have seen in the past, the European employment laws might be brought to bear on football, then the duty of care should extend to the employer shouldn't it? And in this case who IS the employer?

.. just food for thought ...

[TonyGilroy]

The employer is the club and the action could be against club and/or player. In practice the club pays insurance covering both so the matter is largely academic. The same insurance company will be footing the bill.