Jump to content

Wesley Moraes


Tomaszk

Recommended Posts

7 minutes ago, mikeyp102 said:

I highly doubt it. You’d have to prove that Mee meant it. The fact that he didn’t get a red card, would be too easy a mitigation.

Maybe he could sue VAR or the Premier League

Expose the VAR corruption 😛

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Zatman said:

Maybe he could sue VAR or the Premier League

Expose the VAR corruption 😛

Sheffield United fans ears just perked up

Best we leave it... Lol

VAR and goal line technology are perfect! 👀

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, mikeyp102 said:

I highly doubt it. You’d have to prove that Mee meant it.

This isn't true. Proven intent would make for a much stronger case, but people are sued for accidents all of the time. You don't need intent, negligence is more than sufficient. Not sure sports injuries have ever been tested though.

I'm not saying I think it's clear that it's a case Wesley wins, but you certainly don't need to mean to harm someone to be liable for their injuries caused by your action or inaction.

Edit: Some interesting reading here:

https://www.harpermacleod.co.uk/insights/sports-injuries-a-risky-business-how-does-the-law-look-at-negligence-in-the-sporting-world/

Quote

To succeed in an action of negligence, the victim must be able to prove three things:

  1. That he was owed a duty of care
  2. That that duty of care was breached
  3. The damage suffered was caused by that breach

The Cases

Vicarious Liability and Likely Damages

Ben Collett (Manchester United FC) v Gary Smith & Middlesborough FC (2008)

18 year old Collett was playing for Manchester United in a match against Middlesbrough FC. In the course of the game, he was tackled by the first defendant. The tackle was high and over the ball and, as a result, Collett sustained a fracture of the tibia and fibula of his right leg.

Collett pursued damages for injury, loss and damage caused by the negligence of Smith. Collett chose to pursue Middlesbrough FC (rather than Smith himself) arguing that they were liable for their employee’s actions, given that he was connected to the club and acting in the course of his employment as a professional footballer. In particular, Collett claimed for future loss of earnings as a result of not being able to pursue a successful career as a professional footballer and thereafter, as a football manager or coach.

Middlesborough FC admitted liability and it was for the Court to determine the final settlement figure.

Held:

Award in excess of £4.3 million including:

General Damages: £35,000

Past Loss of Earnings: £456,095

Future Loss of Earnings: £3,854,328

It'd be a more difficult case for Wesley as he can still play, and he'd need to be able to convincingly argue, on top of the above, that he's still incurred future loss of earnings even though he's still able to play as a professional.

Edited by Davkaus
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Davkaus said:

This isn't true. Proven intent would make for a much stronger case, but people are sued for accidents all of the time. You don't need intent, negligence is more than sufficient. Not sure sports injuries have ever been tested though.

I'm not saying I think it's clear that it's a case Wesley wins, but you certainly don't need to mean to harm someone to be liable for their injuries caused by your action or inaction.

Edit: Some interesting reading here:

https://www.harpermacleod.co.uk/insights/sports-injuries-a-risky-business-how-does-the-law-look-at-negligence-in-the-sporting-world/

 

Fair point re negligence.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really hope him the best, like hoping for everyone, but for him he was really unfortunate. Although I didn’t rate him, and we would’ve been much better by trying Davis rather than him 90 minutes each game. He had three very good games, Everton, Norwich and Burnley. From what I can remember. Somehow his best one was his last. I’m not sure which Wesley we’d have seen, but I really feel for him after all. Wish him the best.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 22/07/2022 at 11:39, mikeyp102 said:

I highly doubt it. You’d have to prove that Mee meant it. The fact that he didn’t get a red card, would be too easy a mitigation.

Gary Mabbutt took John Fashanu to court in mid 90s, think he claimed he got deliberate elbow in one aerial challenge.

Might be wrong but surprise surprise think Kevin Muscat got sued once for a tackle that finished off another players career.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, VillaChris said:

Gary Mabbutt took John Fashanu to court in mid 90s, think he claimed he got deliberate elbow in one aerial challenge.

Might be wrong but surprise surprise think Kevin Muscat got sued once for a tackle that finished off another players career.

That was whilst Fashanu played for us wasn’t it? 
 

Easy to forget that he did play for us mind.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 20/07/2022 at 08:19, Demitri_C said:

So every year he will be loaned out until he leaves us on a free. Fantastic.  22m down the drain

Fine by me. I think his career is effectively over when that deal ends.

He'll do absolutely nothing at Levente.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, KevinRichardsonsMoustache said:

'When was the last time you were in England? Five years ago?!' How long do they think he's been on out loan?!!

He is actually an ex blues player Nafti 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Zatman said:

Looks like an Office temp with his schoolbag and Simpsons tshirt 

Funnily enough, that stupid Simpsons shirt costs about 600 pounds!

Balenciaga, I only know this because i've seen it advertised, madness.

Edited by JAMAICAN-VILLAN
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...
Â