Sunderland fan sues club after being hit by stray Djibril Cissé shot

That_Guy

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2011/apr/07/sunderland-fan-sues-club?CMP=twt_gu

A Sunderland fan is suing his club after being knocked out by a stray Djibril Cissé shot while watching a training session.

Sunderland's chairman, Niall Quinn, revealed the legal action had started while appearing on a BBC radio phone-in. Quinn was asked by a caller on BBC Newcastle's Total Sport programme whether the club would allow fans to watch the team train, which had been allowed previously.

Quinn replied: "We had a supporter who got a bad injury. I think it was one of Djibril Cisse's misses where he had a shot from 20 yards.

"I'm making fun of it now, but it knocked a supporter out. It was quite serious. That supporter is in the process of suing us right now."

The show's presenter, Simon Pryde, expressed his surprise that legal action was being taken. "It was one of those things," said Quinn. Sunderland declined to comment when asked for more details.

Cissé, now registered at Panathinaikos, played for Sunderland 38 times in the 2008-09 season, scoring 11 times, while on loan from Marseille.

Wasn't April Fool's last week?

Pepe LeFrits

Here we have Cisse, right wing, attempts to take a shot, BANG! Hits the supporter, again, BANG! Hits the supporter, BANG! Off the supporter again, and once more, BANG! Smacks the supporter again! I mean...what's he trying to do to the supporter here, kill him?

I'd say he has a case!

stovelid

Maybe they could pay the supporter to sit behind the goal in future.

DrumSteve

Lol this is unbelievable buit it was only a matter of time I guess.

Time for someone to man up I think.

That_Guy

DrumSteve wrote: »

Lol this is unbelievable buit it was only a matter of time I guess.

Time for someone to man up I think.

Aye. Cisse should just quit now.

Ebbs

Should be suing for having to watch Cisse for a season tbh.

Paully D

It's an absolute disgrace and the person should be ashamed.

It happened a couple of years ago and as a result ALL supporters have been banned from watching training sessions at the club and that won't change now.

It's a sad indication of the society we live in today that someone would sue because of getting hit by a football at training and the worst thing is that the person will probably win their case.

Disgraceful.

That_Guy

Paully D wrote: »

It's an absolute disgrace and the person should be ashamed.

It happened a couple of years ago and as a result ALL supporters have been banned from watching training sessions at the club and that won't change now.

It's a sad indication of the society we live in today that someone would sue because of getting hit by a football at training and the worst thing is that the person will probably win their case.

Disgraceful.

Aye, bit of a joke alright.
Should be outed.

Paully D

Ebbs wrote: »

Should be suing for having to watch Cisse for a season tbh.

To be fair, his goals kept us up and for the most part his contribution on the pitch was good.

Frisbee

The guy who is suing is definitely the guy in the pub that floats around group to group, never staying at one too long because everyone hates him and walks off.

Paully D

The "victim" :rolleyes: was a woman, not a guy. I remember the report doing the rounds at the time and eyewitnesses said it was a woman who was hit with the ball.

That_Guy

Paully D wrote: »

The "victim" :rolleyes: was a woman, not a guy. I remember the report doing the rounds at the time and eyewitnesses said it was a woman who was hit with the ball.

A woman got hit with Cisse's ball.... Poor lass.

Daemos

Surprised it hasn't happened sooner to be honest, though the fan in this case is just an idiot. But when Rio hit it into the crowd, now that fan had a genuine claim.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ub842qIfVZQ

Helix

pathetic stuff from the 'fan' involved. Shameful

CoalBucket

Fulham must be bricking it with all the cases they'd have to face with Bobby Zamora.

to the tune of "thats amore"

"When the ball hits your head and your sat in row z, thats zamora"

monkey9

This could open the floodgates for a few thousand law suits from season ticket holders on the Kop!!! :eek::eek:

Blatter

This is on a par with fat people suing McDonalds.

It's just funny, they should be laughed out of the courtroom.

monkey9

CoalBucket wrote: »

Fulham must be bricking it with all the cases they'd have to face with Bobby Zamora.

to the tune of "thats amore"

"When the ball hits your head and your sat in row z, thats zamora"

Zamora's brilliant!!! Lay off the great man!!

Neil3030

This shouldn't affect incidents at matches going forward, as clubs will just need to include these "risks" in the t&c on their tickets.

Mars Bar

That's madness.

A golf fan gets hit by a frickin' golf ball and they are only hoping it is Phil Mickelson so they get his glove!

Paully D

Neil3030 wrote: »

This shouldn't affect incidents at matches going forward, as clubs will just need to include these "risks" in the t&c on their tickets.

AFAIK such a condition is already on match tickets or else it would be near impossible for a club to get a safety certificate, but this issue is a bit of a grey area as it occurred at a training session which was away from the ground.

As I said before, it's a sad indication of the ambulance chasing society we now live in. No doubt it'll be some unemployed charver that will spend the money (if she wins her case) on cans of Fosters and a new 80 inch TV to watch her sister on Jeremy Kyle in HD :rolleyes:

I'd love to post what I really think about this ''fan'', but I'd get a ban if I did. What I will say though is that it's such a shame that one ''fan'' has ruined the open training sessions, which was a great source of club and supporter interaction, which is something that's becoming less and less frequent these days.

Melion

I was at the Sunderland game at Anfield 2 years back, as the teams were warming up Cisse(by then, at Sunderland) took a shot and sent it flying into the Anfield Rd end, it hit an old man sitting about 4 rows infront of me. Broke the mans nose and glasses, he was a mess. Had to be carried out by the stewards.

kippy

Paully D wrote: »

. No doubt it'll be some unemployed charver that will spend the money (if she wins her case) on cans of Fosters and a new 80 inch TV to watch her sister on Jeremy Kyle in HD :rolleyes:

You've just described 60% of football fans.......


Back on point - Yep, its a disgrace that this can happen and that more than likely the fan will actually get a pay out. I have very strong feelings about the compensation and "blame someone else culture" that pervades. Its the cause of massive costs for sporting organisations and business in insurance cover and it effects every single person, whether they are of the type to sue or not, the costs being passed on to everyone.

Paully D

Melion wrote: »

I was at the Sunderland game at Anfield 2 years back, as the teams were warming up Cisse(by then, at Sunderland) took a shot and sent it flying into the Anfield Rd end, it hit an old man sitting about 4 rows infront of me. Broke the mans nose and glasses, he was a mess. Had to be carried out by the stewards.

That the game that Kenwyne Jones missed a one-on-one after a few minutes? N'Gog had a really good game and it ended up 2 or 3-0 to Liverpool IIRC?

Sad to hear about that old man, but the risk is always there and I'm sure everyone knows it too. If people were to be awarded compensation based on being hit with a football at a game clubs would spend more money on said compensation each season than they do on transfers.

Neil3030

Stick up a fence and have all visitors sign a waiver for injuries sustained while visiting the training ground. I reckon it's still possible.

mikemac

Ha, I watch photographers and camera men at American football games get absolutely flattened by 220lb players running or falling at full speed across the sideline
Now that can cause some pain.

But for this Sunderland fan? Just ruining it for everyone and teams will block public access to training grounds

DOC09UNAM

Neil3030 wrote: »

Stick up a fence and have all visitors sign a waiver for injuries sustained while visiting the training ground. I reckon it's still possible.

Surely just a sign on the entrance

"You enter at your own risk" blah blah blah would be all that's needed no?

Soby

Think the fan has some cheek tbh.That poor Woman with Rio though.That was a bit stupid on his part

mikemac

Daemos wrote: »

Surprised it hasn't happened sooner to be honest, though the fan in this case is just an idiot. But when Rio hit it into the crowd, now that fan had a genuine claim.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ub842qIfVZQ

I agree, this fan does have a case. Not a money pay off but maybe match tickets and hospitality in a corporate suite for themself and some friends.
It would be good PR and show the club turned the situation around

Xavi6

Just do what they do in Aussie Rules and stick a disclaimer on the seats behind the goal - "Warning: Watch out for flying footballs". Sit there and it's tough shit.

RandolphEsq

Daemos wrote: »

Surprised it hasn't happened sooner to be honest, though the fan in this case is just an idiot. But when Rio hit it into the crowd, now that fan had a genuine claim.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ub842qIfVZQ

hahahahaha!


It's like suing Dominos if your pizza burns you

kippy

I dont think those "enter at your own risk" etc signs are of any use to be honest - not in a legal sense anyway - the law can be warped to push the favour back towards the "victim".
The issue is, in my opinion, legal. We have a legal system (perhaps in the UK as well) that has been allowed to be manipulated by certain solicitors and more to allow for cases for almost anything to be won by "victims" - more importantly we have a society whereby more and more people see no issues for anyone in blaming someone else for their own actions.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occupiers'_liability_in_English_law
This law, I believe has been around for years, yet I think only in the last 10-20 has there been a massive increase in the amount of cases. (Perhaps someone a bit more familiar with the area could give an opinion on this)

Sad to see to be honest. This has stopped Sunderland having open training sessions and reserve games are now behind closed doors. Have been down to Sunderlands training ground a few times and its a great spot. To me it should be at your own risk if you do go down to training especially when you see how often our strikers miss !

pickarooney

What's she suing for? If it's just her medical expenses it would be perfectly normal to claim off Sunderland's insurance but I guess Quinn wouldn't have made a mention of a tupenny ha'penny hospital bill.

kippy

pickarooney wrote: »

What's she suing for? If it's just her medical expenses it would be perfectly normal to claim off Sunderland's insurance but I guess Quinn wouldn't have made a mention of a tupenny ha'penny hospital bill.

Why not the norm be to claim off her own medical insurance?
It was her who put herself in the potentially "dangerous" situation of going onto a property whereby she could get hit with a ball.........

pickarooney

kippy wrote: »

Why not the norm be to claim off her own medical insurance?
It was her who put herself in the potentially "dangerous" situation of going onto a property whereby she could get hit with a ball.........

It's called public liability and is applicable to all owner/occupiers and it's the reason public liabilty insurance exists. It's like if someone hits you when driving - you claim off their insurance rather than your own. Putting yoursekf in a potentially dangerous position by driving on a public thoroughfare doesn't come into it.

GavRedKing

I just feel sorry for the other Sunderland fans that cant go to see their team due to one numpty claiming. Just goes to show that people will take any opportunity to make a quick buck.

kippy

pickarooney wrote: »

It's called public liability and is applicable to all owner/occupiers and it's the reason public liabilty insurance exists. It's like if someone hits you when driving - you claim off their insurance rather than your own. Putting yoursekf in a potentially dangerous position by driving on a public thoroughfare doesn't come into it.

There is a difference between public liability, car insurance and this situation.
In the case of car insurance - there has to be some assessment as to who was at fault for the accident and indeed if multiple cars were involved and assessment as to who was most at fault and what portion of the blame/costs be split.
I have zero issues with an organisation being claimed off whereby they themselves have been negligent in insuring their property is maintained and in safe upkeep. (Eg if this woman was suing sunderland because a fixture fell on her/because she cut herself badly on some exposed metal etc. The organisation themselves need to have been at fault.
However she has gone to a training ground where one of the inherent risks are getting hit by a football.
One could argue that Sunderland didnt do enough to protect her (by putting up netting etc) however is that a reasonable request for the club (bearing in mind the cost for them?)
I don't know - you may be right but to me it smacks of being wrong - whether it is technically legally right or not.

kippy

gavredking wrote: »

I just feel sorry for the other Sunderland fans that cant go to see their team due to one numpty claiming. Just goes to show that people will take any opportunity to make a quick buck.

Perhaps they should sue her for emotional distress?

pickarooney

kippy wrote: »

There is a difference between public liability, car insurance and this situation.
In the case of car insurance - there has to be some assessment as to who was at fault for the accident and indeed if multiple cars were involved and assessment as to who was most at fault and what portion of the blame/costs be split.
I have zero issues with an organisation being claimed off whereby they themselves have been negligent in insuring their property is maintained and in safe upkeep. (Eg if this woman was suing sunderland because a fixture fell on her/because she cut herself badly on some exposed metal etc. The organisation themselves need to have been at fault.
However she has gone to a training ground where one of the inherent risks are getting hit by a football.
One could argue that Sunderland didnt do enough to protect her (by putting up netting etc) however is that a reasonable request for the club (bearing in mind the cost for them?)
I don't know - you may be right but to me it smacks of being wrong - whether it is technically legally right or not.

Without knowing more about the case, I'd agree with you on moral grounds but it's hard to argue that the cost of some netting would be prohibitive to a club paying millions of pounds a week to squad players. It could be that the woman suffered broken teeth or other injuries that would cost an awful lot to repair and would not be affordable to her and, knowing that the club would be insured for this kind of thing, made a legitimate claim. Or she could be a chancer with a black eye...

Edit: Fan was knocked unconscious, won the case, got a 4-figure settlement. It doesn't sound entirely unreasonable to me.
http://www.mirrorfootball.co.uk/news/A-Sunderland-fan-has-sued-the-club-after-being-knocked-unconscious-by-astray-training-ground-shot-from-Djibril-Cisse-article721112.html

ectoraige

I was at a Civil Defence training class the other evening discussing risk assessments, and our group were speculating on the risks involved in stewarding a football match. I was almost going to make the joke that you could be hit by a football, but didn't bother as I thought it too ridiculous. Little did I know...

Melion

Paully D wrote: »

That the game that Kenwyne Jones missed a one-on-one after a few minutes? N'Gog had a really good game and it ended up 2 or 3-0 to Liverpool IIRC?

Sad to hear about that old man, but the risk is always there and I'm sure everyone knows it too. If people were to be awarded compensation based on being hit with a football at a game clubs would spend more money on said compensation each season than they do on transfers.

Thats the one, finished 2-0 IIRC

kippy

pickarooney wrote: »

Without knowing more about the case, I'd agree with you on moral grounds but it's hard to argue that the cost of some netting would be prohibitive to a club paying millions of pounds a week to squad players. It could be that the woman suffered broken teeth or other injuries that would cost an awful lot to repair and would not be affordable to her and, knowing that the club would be insured for this kind of thing, made a legitimate claim. Or she could be a chancer with a black eye...

Edit: Fan was knocked unconscious, won the case, got a 4-figure settlement. It doesn't sound entirely unreasonable to me.
http://www.mirrorfootball.co.uk/news/A-Sunderland-fan-has-sued-the-club-after-being-knocked-unconscious-by-astray-training-ground-shot-from-Djibril-Cisse-article721112.html

It's not so much about Sunderland being able to afford it in my opinion, it is the precedent it sets.(perhaps that isnt relevant here - again I amnt in the legal profession)
Say for example this was at a local GAA/Soccer/Hurling/Golf event and the spectators were in a ground far smaller than the stadium of light owned by an organization with far fewer resources what would happen in that instance - (Now I get the point that this was a training ground incident but again, assume this happened at an under 16's match in this country where the spectator stands on the sideline........)
Theres lots of areas this kind of incident could be applied to which would make the costs of insuring organisations (especially small ones) overly prohibitive.
Sunderland probably could put up some netting because of their resources - but is that just admitting liability for balls hitting people and opening up a whole different can of worms?

I dunno.

It does look like a serious "incident" but again - it's the precedent it sets in my opinion that is more worrying.

aidan24326

SOCCER4LIFE wrote: »

This is on a par with fat people suing McDonalds.

It's just funny, they should be laughed out of the courtroom.

To be fair though the fan who was hit by Ferdinand would almost have a case. What the fcuk was he thinking blasting the ball at his own fans? Idiot. He hit it with fierce power too, could really have hurt somebody.

major bill

Paully D wrote: »

The "victim" :rolleyes: was a woman, not a guy. I remember the report doing the rounds at the time and eyewitnesses said it was a woman who was hit with the ball.

all the more reason why women shouldnt be allowed near a football pitch or stadium.;)

Soby

I think we should be suing her for being out of the kitchen and not making sandwiches :P

BeanFlicker

Absolute crazy b***, hope she gets pelted with stones in court by the judge.

Very sad state of affairs with that carry on,

x43r0

I was at Anfield a few years back for Liverpool Vs West Ham (the game where Agger scored from god knows how many yards out) and during the warm up after all the drills had been completed, Gerrard and Alonso each took a net full of balls and went to opposite corners putting in crosses to the rest of the players who were taking them on the volley from the edge of the box by the 'D'. It came Riise's turn and he leathered it over the bar and smacked a woman. She walking to her seat with a pint in each hand. Ended up covered in beer but gave a thumbs up and the crowd cheered.


A good day was had by all

Yakult

Note to self; Dont sit behind the goal if all your gonna do is sue from being hit by a stray shot.

enfant terrible