[imagesource: Dave Hunt / EPA]

Whilst Handrè Pollard has locked down the Springbok flyhalf position for the foreseeable future, there was a time when the number 10 spot caused Springbok coaches many sleepless nights.

One man touted as a potential Springbok great at 10 was Johan Goosen, and former professional referee Jonathan Kaplan, who spent a good 36 years taking charge of schoolboy matches, named the Grey Bloem flyhalf a schoolboy prodigy.

Over the past few years, however, Goosen’s career seems to have derailed slightly, with his 2016 ‘retirement’ a starting point, and his current Montpellier contract mired in controversy.

There’s also the small matter of the incident that took place on January 24, 2017, when Armandt Stoman, Goosen’s friend and employee, was shot in his left leg.

The incident occurred on the Aliwal North, Eastern Cape farm owned by Goosen, via his company, G10 Bonsmara Stoetery.

Stoman has now filed a R9 million civil claim against Goosen, along with his company, and says he has undergone 11 operations, along with other procedures, in order to try and regain full use of his leg.

The claim includes costs related to loss of future earnings and general damages.

News24 reports:

At the time of the incident…Goosen [below, with Stoman] was handling a new hunting rifle when a shot went off..

Image: Netwerk24

In a special plea, Goosen – who lives in France where he is contracted to play for rugby club Montpellier – and the company state that as an employee, Stoman should instead claim from the Compensation Commissioner. Stoman was on duty on the morning of the shooting accident and it occurred during working hours, they claim.

This has been rebutted by Stoman, who says the accident occurred inside the house he was living in at the time, which was on Goosen’s farm, and that “the incident took place among friends and not during the execution of Stoman’s duties”.

Stoman’s legal team claims that Goosen admitted that it was his negligence which led to the shooting, and agreed to cover any medical expenses incurred that were not covered by Stoman’s medical aid plan.

According to Stoman, they paid his salary until the end of August last year, as well as some of his legal costs. They undertook to pay future costs and damages. However, since 1 September last year, this agreement has not been honoured, he claims.

According to Goosen and the company’s plea, they deny the existence of the agreement, saying it was merely settlement talks without prejudice to their rights.

It remains to be seen how this one plays out, but these are not the kind of headlines you hoped Goosen would make when he debuted for the Springboks back in 2012.

[source:news24]