Quote:
|
Originally Posted by David Emerling
The coach should not have been arguing this call. But nobody is going to get injured as a result.
The coach should not have tried to turn the umpire around to continue arguing. But nobody is going to get injured as a result.
The coach should not have put his face in the umpire's face. But nobody is going to get injured as a result.
The umpire should not have head butted the coach, using his face mask as a weapon. NOW SOMEBODY COULD GET INJURED!
The coach's final reaction was clearly in response to getting a piece of rigid metal shoved into his face. But even that was nothing more than a "girlie shove" that couldn't have injured a 6-yr-old.
I'm not condoning anything this coach did. I'm only pointing out that the only thing that happened that had the potential for bodily injury was the umpire's head butt.
If I were an attorney, I wouldn't want to defend either one of them. From a bodily harm aspect, however; I would think the coach's actions would be easier to defend than the umpire's. I don't see anything the coach did that warranted getting a face full of metal.
The coach was physical with the intent of getting the umpire's attention - not with doing the umpire any physical harm. Nor could the action taken by the coach be construed as having the reasonable potential to cause bodily harm.
This does not justify the coach's actions, however.
On the other hand, it appears the umpire's only intent was to cause physical harm. And his action could certainly be construed as having the potential to cause great bodily harm.
I would say the latter trumps the former as for as egregiousness.
There should be sanctions for both - in my opinion.
David Emerling
Memphis, TN
|
The coach grabs the umpire, the coach walks toward and initiates contact with the umpire, the coach brings his hands up...do these actions AND the perceived threat they create, make it reasonable for the umpire to head-butt the coach?
I say "yes"...I believe you would say "no". And that is why (1) many law professors often say (as they are handing out their final exam) that there is no right or wrong answer to the question asked in the exam AND (2) we have juries for "real life" situations.
