Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Eastshire
What happened there? The player continued playing without the shoe. Even one possession shoeless could be dangerous.
|
Nothing we do can prevent us from the possibility of being sued. Whether the suit prevails is another issue. You said it yourself - the
player is the one that continued playing without the shoe. The officials didn't
force them to play. To be considered negligent an official would have knowingly and purposely set aside a rule that precipitated a dangerous event. In this case, there is no rule that specifically states that an official must stop play immediately upon seeing a player without a shoe. So if a player is injured, the player assumes most, if not all, of the responsibility of the injury, not the official.
Injuries happen all the time in sports. Would you consider stopping the game before a player slides under an airborne shooter, just to prevent the possibility of an injury? There's a good chance that player could be injured, AND you're gonna call a foul on them?!? Oh, the indignities! Sue the refs!!
Sounds silly, doesn't it? Same as stopping the game for the shoe, because of the slight possibility the player might hurt themselves. If you stay within the rules, you will not have a problem.