Where does a clubs responsibilities start & stop?

[Tipps]

Radwan Hamed was unaware of his abnormal heart function when he signed for Tottenham Hotspur's youth team
A Tottenham Hotspur youth player has agreed to damages, believed to be £7m, after he was left brain damaged from a cardiac arrest on his debut.
Radwan Hamed collapsed during a game in Belgium in 2006. Last year a judge ruled Spurs breached its duties to him.
In a screening prior to signing for the club, an electrocardiogram test showed his heart was "unequivocally abnormal" but he was not stopped from playing.
The club regretted a former employee had been remiss in their duties.
'Potentially fatal'
In a statement, the family of Mr Hamed, who is now 27, said they were "relieved" a settlement had been reached, following a decade-long legal battle .
"Just as Radwan had no choice but to start his difficult journey towards recovery, we had no choice but to start the difficult journey to obtain justice," they said.
"We risked losing our home and faced personal financial ruin in order to pursue justice for our son.
"The club did not tell us or Radwan about his potentially fatal condition. Had they done so, Radwan would not have continued to play football."
The teenager collapsed during the game against Cercle Bruges on 4 August 2006 and was rushed to an intensive care unit but suffered oxygen starvation to his brain.
In the 2015 hearing, Mr Justice Hickinbottom ruled the club was 70% liable or Mr Hamed's injuries and Dr Peter Mills, the Football Association's regional cardiologist for South East England, was 30% liable.
Recruit screening
The Premier League club will not be hit with a fee directly as their 70% portion was incurred by physicians they previously employed, who have agreed to indemnify the club.
Football Association rules require all football academy recruits to be referred to a cardiologist to help identify those prone to potentially fatal heart conditions.
Mr Hamed's MRI scan showed no obvious signs of hypertrophic cardiomyopathy, but Dr Mills wrote to Spurs saying the condition could not be excluded on these findings alone.
Eleven months later, the teenager, who was unaware his tests had revealed an "abnormal" heart condition, signed a contract with Spurs.
A spokesman for Spurs said: "The club wholeheartedly regrets that a former employee, as adjudged, was remiss in their duties to Radwan.
"This judgment will hopefully now secure the best possible treatment and care for him."

[Meh]

Seems fair to me - should have been more and Tottenham officials given suspended sentences under duty of care HSE regulations.

I have average intelligence and know nothing of human biology but if I was at the club and read a report that said "unequivocally abnormal" against a heart reading would I :-

a) stop the player playing until the meaning was clarified OR

b) ignore it and let him play whilst wondering where my bottle of Dr Pepper is?

Bearing in mind of course that I work for the same club that witnessed the tragic events of Muamba so know fully you don't take risks with the heart !!

[22A]

Other side of the coin Late 60s/early 70s; Asa Hartford was one of the best players at WBA. A club bid for him, but at the medical it was discovered Asa had a hole in the heart, so the transfer didn't happen. Asa continued playing for WBA for a few more years.

Heart conditions were checked for back then, so are they no longer conducted, or was it missed in this one instance?

[Guest]

To the question in the title feeling in these situations almost invariably falls to, well, who has insurance or should have insured: hence the physicians indemnifying the club no doubt from their own cover. 

[LondonBristolian]

Ultimately any business has a responsibility to keep their employees safe.  That involves, in a physically intensive role like professional football, to monitor players' health.  Ultimately any player will see the club doctor and fitness staff regularly and those medical professionals have to be responsible for the players' well being.  The only exceptions to this are things that the club could not reasonably have foreseen and situations where players have withheld or failed to dlsclose vital info.

 

The judgement is entirely correct and it's great that the club have accepted this, and (if my reading is correct and they did it after the event) that the physicians involved have accepted responsibility and agreed to indemnify).  If this was agreed after the event, it suggests that there is no dispute that the medical staff (and by extension the club they were representing) is responsible. 

[Maesknoll Red]

1 hour ago, Neo said:

 

Bearing in mind of course that I work for the same club that witnessed the tragic events of Muamba so know fully you don't take risks with the heart !!

Are you Nostradamus?