Lawsuits & Legal Matters

[h]The damage hockey did to my brain: NHL star Bernie Nicholls explains why he's suing the league[/h]

I had a pretty spectacular 17-year career playing in the National Hockey League. Who would have thought a kid from a small town in Canada would have 475 career goals in 1,127 games? Yet despite these great seasons, as I look back on my career 36 years after it began, I have come to realize that the NHL, although satisfying and enjoyable at the time, led to permanent brain damage and has irreparably damaged my health.

Getting the call to play in the NHL was a pivotal moment in my life. I am from a small town in Ontario, one of no more than 100 people. While we only have one garage, one store, one laundromat and one restaurant, we have a lot of hockey. And when I heard I was going to the Los Angeles Kings, it felt like I was going from the smallest place in the world to the biggest city. And although it was a culture shock at first, the move allowed me to play the sport at a higher level than I ever imagined.

However, the dream I was living after getting drafted quickly turned to reality as I began to understand the rigors, and consequences, of playing in the NHL. On one hand, my hockey career was thriving, and I had the opportunity to play alongside legends like Wayne Gretzky, and in places from the West Coast to New York, New Jersey, Chicago and Edmonton.

But at the very same time, I was taking serious and severe hits to the head, many of which were concussions that teams and the league ignored and failed to document.

Some of these hits would leave me woozy, some dizzy; others felt more severe. Instead of examining me for possible brain damage, trainers and coaches demanded to know when I could go back in to play.

When I broke a bone or sprained a muscle, I always knew exactly how I was going to feel afterwards. But when I got a blow to the head, I never had anyone tell me that if I continued to play, I might sustain permanent brain damage.

If the NHL had told me about the risks of continued head trauma, I would have never gone back onto the ice as quickly as I usually did. When I joined the NHL, I knew I would be injured, but at the end of the day, I did not expect to have problems, that would last a lifetime.

The NHL did not just wake up recently and say, ?these guys are going to have long-term problems.? They knew then ? they had to ? and didn?t do anything about it. They never even told us what the long-term costs of these hard hits might be, and how our lives might be altered forever.

Today, I have a hard time remembering games I played in and even the names of people I played with for many years. Though my concussions took place 20 and 30 years ago, I still get extremely dizzy and am plagued by headaches. Since becoming involved in NHL alumni groups, I have seen firsthand how many other players also have memory and anger issues.

The NHL is a brotherhood; we protected each other on and off the ice. I joined the NHL concussion lawsuit for myself and for those who I know are hurting even more than I am. I have encouraged all those I played with and against to support this effort ? if not for yourself, for your former teammates who protected you.

I had a tremendous hockey career, but it was extremely detrimental to my health and mental well-being. Ultimately, the league only seemed to care about marketing and promoting the game, and the hard hits we all took fueled the game?s success and tremendous growth it is experiencing today.

It?s long past time for the NHL to come to terms with its past, care for its alumni and ensure the game is safe and prosperous for years to come.

(BY BERNIE NICHOLLS NEW YORK DAILY NEWS Saturday, July 18, 2015, 5:00 AM)

 

There you go... are you on board with this stuff? I have mixed feelings. I would sure like to see if there is an NHL cover-up on head trauma just to get body's back on the ice.
_____________________________________________________

Should I be suing the whiskey manufactures who didnt put a message on their bottle?
_____________________________________________________

Are Nicholls and others just piss poor at money management and want an easy buck to cover their butts now for passed mistakes they made?
_____________________________________________________

I sure hope this story and story's like it get continued coverage... i really am curious as to what people actually knew back in the day about brain and the game...

 

If the league knowingly withheld information they suspected or knew about concussions, they have to pay for that.

Generally speaking, I'm not all that sympathetic to former players that handled post game life poorly or saying that they would have done something differently had they known more. Still, it doesn't change my opinion on the bigger picture. Ultimately, if the league withheld any medical evidence about head injuries, they were profiting off of players' injuries and risk unfairly. If the league wants to make money off of injuries, which they do, they are obligated to inform the players of what they know about the risks. Let them make up their own mind. Makes the league look worse, all they had to do was tell the whole truth, or suspected truth, and everything would have turned out fine for them based on how current PA members look out for their own head safety.

I agree with all the stuff about sour grapes, money grab, etc. but that's still smaller than what the league did (if true) in my opinion. If they're making money off of labor's health risks, they have to be upfront with them. It appears they haven't been. My opinion may change as the cases are made known to the public.

 

generally speaking I'm on board w/ the players. bob pointed out the huge question here- did the NHL knowingly withhold any info? another question here that will be hard to prove or disprove depending on your stance- who's to say that the damage that was done was done in the NHL? not like Bernie Nicholls wasn't taking head shots in Jr and before that.

 

----------------------------------
If the NHL had told me about the risks of continued head trauma, I would have never gone back onto the ice as quickly as I usually did. When I joined the NHL, I knew I would be injured, but at the end of the day, I did not expect to have problems, that would last a lifetime.

The NHL did not just wake up recently and say, ?these guys are going to have long-term problems.? They knew then ? they had to ? and didn?t do anything about it. They never even told us what the long-term costs of these hard hits might be, and how our lives might be altered forever.
----------------------------------------

These two paragraphs stand out in particular. In the first one, Nicholls is "guessing" that he would've chosen to stay off the ice longer. This statement is said based on what he knows NOW. Let's go back to when he was 28 yrs old, and had that competitive spirit, it probably would've taken an outside party to convince him to sit a bit longer. That's my opinion based on how I perceive professional athletes. In the second paragraph, Nicholls is not sure whether the league actually knew about long term issues due to repeated head injuries. As a reasonably intelligent person, you SHOULD know that if you bang your head against the wall repeatedly, you very likely COULD suffer some long term effects. Why would this not apply to playing hockey. The ONLY issue that I see going against the league in this matter, is the phasing in of mandatory helmets and visors. These moves are based on liability of the league/ownership and player safety. Otherwise, the league would still be helmet free.

I feel bad for Bernie that he is dealing with these issues now, but if you go into the time machine and there is no third party strapping him down to a chair, he would try to run out onto the ice even in a zombified state. I'll bet a large sum of cash on that. In retrospect, he would make a more rational decision and know that there WAS/IS life after hockey and choose to sit a while longer. We all have regrets and we all have to live with them. Sorry Bernie.

Out of respect to everyone's opinion on this topic, you all get a thumbs up. Thanks Will. Good find.

 

That's a good point too. I'm sure the NHL will use that in their defense.

For me, that's another detail. The big question, for me, remains about whether or not the NHL was making money and withholding info. The rest should just be considered when awarding damages imo. If the league didn't knowingly keep anything back, that's on the players, maybe the PA will grow up and start taking care of their own then.

 

probably a safe bet frank. probably true for most NHLers and for the reason that you gave.
that still doesn't help the NHL any if it's proven that they knew what the long term problems would be though.

 

It would be interesting to see a subpoena on the NHL's offices and see how far back the league was considering this issue. It could be very challenging to get that info, as far as any documentation goes. You would probably have to rely mostly on sworn testimony from current and/or former personnel to say, "yes, we knew about this decades ago." Good luck with that.

 

I do think players really thought helmets protected their head/brain and I have little doubt they thought they were putting their knees at risk more than their brains. I can understand some of that.

I wonder how they're going to make their case, I saw the complaints for some of these suits, seems pretty gray.

 

Yep, who shows up at former team doctors' house with bags of cash or a bucket of Jesus first?

The league didn't have a functioning office before Bettman was there, can't imagine there were documents and secret files.

 

Boo hoo, what about all the miners that didn't live past 50 because of all the krap they had to inhale. Every concrete worker and tile setter knows that their back will be done by 55, who should they sue?

 

in memoriam: personal responsibility

may it rest in peace.

 

This an important topic and I may give a more studied response later. In fact, I have only glanced at the others' comments. This is not being disrespectful as even a quick read reveals several cogent points. I would rather that my initial response be extemporaneous so my current thoughts on the matter are put out there. I have zero doubt that I will have a more informed position because of this message thread.

First, I want to thank Will. This will not be fun like most threads, and I appreciate your uncertainty in posting it. It is a valuable thread; thanks again.

I did not wake up this morning and start thinking about this for the first time. Brain injuries in sports has been a huge issue for years. The NFL has reached a settlement, (not necessarily the final settlement), on this with former players.

It is anachronistic to apply the science of today to the circumstances when Nicholls played. It is equally anachronistic to apply today's societal standards to those of the 1980's. Both have evolved at a remarkable pace.

Even nascent knowledge of the risks associated with brain injuries has been known for many decades. There was, however, a lot less knowledge of the long term damage, (by definition, that takes a long time to determine).

The crux of Nicholls' case is that the NHL was reckless, even cavalier, when it came to dealing with players' health. That they rushed "recovery" for immediate competitive and financial self-interest without regard to the individual. This is going to be difficult to prove based on the anachronistic comments above.

The smoking guns (intentionally plural) will be the documents that no doubt exist. Some vanguards on this unquestionably began to challenge their team on the seriousness of the matter. I do not doubt that initially many of them were dismissed as alarmists or even kooks. Once those in authority are aware of a risk they are required to mitigate the risks, or face the probable consequences.

But, in the 1980's society, especially sports, had a different attitude. Shake it off, play through it, etc., were the normal responses.

Long term health problems do not begin for an individual do not begin at the point they reach the NHL. It begins in youth hockey. That is an age when we're particularly vulnerable to peer pressure, and when the body is much more adept at rapid recovery. This serves to reinforce societal norms; there's empirical "proof" that shrugging off injuries is the proper response.

I believe that eventually the NHL will reach a settlement with the players. Today they are motivated to own their complicity since that will stem even more costly long term loses. That is to say that they're equally aware of the large number of youth that are choosing not to play football. Their "benevolence" will be a good investment assuring a greater talent supply in the future. (Consider that the move into non-traditional markets was somewhat/largely based on this motive. And, the NHL as proven prescient on this. They do not want youngsters in AZ, as an example, moving on to other sports.)

Finally, the long term benefit of this suit will be to force changes in how youth health & injuries are treated. It will also accelerate the science of training & conditioning at the junior and professional levels.

I have no idea if this has been coherent, it has been by intent off-the-cuff. I retain the right to retract anything, but I expect that subsequent comments will help me articulate my view more effectively.

 

You bring up good points, we're talking about turning back the clock to a different era and how things were handled back then. It would be like a 75 year old man who can't hear that good complaining about the fact his company never supplied ear safe headphones back in the 60's. What precedent would this set for the league if he wins this case and every ex-player were to follow the same steps?

 

I lived that. It was everything our coaches and fathers taught us - walk it off, shake it off, get back in there, 'get up, your alright'... Winning always has been everything in spite of all the other stuff people may say about sports. Our very own characters and manhood were challenged in sports all the freekin time. Point being - Back in the day, as far as im aware, there was no hesitation, consideration or second guessing... if you could play, get in there... got a headache?... suck it up, take 2 aspirin. It was the mentality and the norm back then.

Maybe everything will boil down to liable. Like riding the bull on a Saturday Night at the bar. 'Hey kid, wanna play hockey? You might bust your coconut, but i'll pay you big bucks.... here sign this release from liable'. I think you will always find the guy who will take the risk no matter the consequences.

 

They do sue, they have sued.

That's why they have disability and why there are occupational safety reqs. It's for both parties.
Yes, regionally there are severe issues of one side fucking over the other blah blah blah but those are just details.

The employers ignore it often and get hammered. Employees ignore it and they end up eventually losing their 100% disability and are fucked for the rest of their days.

There shouldn't be any direct comparison of celebrity athletes in the entertainment business to the regular labor force.

 

ummmm - why not?

 

Yes, they do sue and have sued, and that's in this day and age. What about someone suing for long term damages that they directly hold responsible to another era and set of rules?

 

I guess I'm sick of the suck-it-up-cupcake mantras.

People live to long and the health bills are too expensive and too easy for employers, like the owners, to pass onto everybody else. They only answer to money as a rule, so if they don't want to be ethical about disclosing risk to young people, fuck them...at least until people start dying faster again. Then I'll jump back on board the personal accountability train I ditched a while ago.

 

That's part of why the system is in place.
Once the rule set is in place, the liability is hedged.

When these players today sue, it will be because of the league doing something else that hasn't been covered in the rule.

Bottom line the owners are making a killing off of athletes hurting themselves. There is a tipping point where the owners are exploiting players and where the players are exploiting the system. Fortunately, I don't have to find that line.