Concussion clauses

The increased publicity and understanding about concussion in sports is likely to change sport forever. Studies focused on contact sports are revealing the risks that players are exposing themselves to. Unfortunately, impacts suffered by players are being found to increase the likelihood of them suffering long-term neurodegenerative diseases, such as dementia, Chronic traumatic encephalopathy (CTE) and Parkinson’s.

With this new understanding in mind, a host of sports have moved to increase safety measures for players while attempting to maintain the integrity of their sports. In soccer, changes such as concussion substitutes have been introduced. Rugby has published guidelines stipulating that professional teams should limit full-contact training to 15 minutes a week and even cricket has discussed the removal of the bouncer. 

With legal action brought against The Welsh and English Rugby Football Unions as well as World Rugby, the sports may be forced to protect themselves. This could see the introduction of concussion clauses in professional contracts. This has been discussed recently in an article in The Australian. In the story, concussion expert Dr Pearce says major codes such as the AFL, NRL, rugby and cricket, may be forced to include clauses formally outlining the risks footballers and cricketers face, because of the increasing likelihood of legal action.

“I believe there is definitely going to be a contractual point, so players will be signing up to acknowledge they may suffer a long-term brain injury from the sport, like dementia,”.

The way it is described by Dr Pearce points to a waiver type clause whereby the players would acknowledge they understand the risks of playing a contact sport and therefore agree not to seek damages in the future. However, a concussion clause could work in a number of different ways. 

One scenario could see players forced to retire if they suffer repeated head injuries. Another may be that players have to use measurement technologies like HITIQ’s mouthguard and app or other concussion management technology while training and playing. But what about if the clauses worked the other way, putting more focus on the clubs and organisations to protect the players. 

Clauses that protect the players could include access to independent screening, minimum standards of care, ongoing monitoring, or post-retirement support. Another area for consideration could be forcing clubs and governing bodies to adopt appropriate findings and technology into their protocols to support player welfare.

The aim for all involved should be to make sport safer. The complication with contractual waivers is that often players are willing to take the risk. The article in The Australian quotes rugby league legend Andrew Johns as saying “if someone lined me up when I was in my early twenties and said, look here‘s what could happen later in life; mate, I would sign the contract”. 

Players often say they know what they signed up to. Maybe that is true now. A generation ago, the long term implications of repeated head impacts were far from understood. Additionally, understanding the risks doesn’t remove the duty of care clubs and governing bodies have towards players. If concussion clauses are introduced, those tasked with protecting the players must ensure that they don't allow the progress being made in protecting players via rule changes, protocols and technology to be blunted.