No, Mark, my opinion is well-supported by what you have written in this thread and by the very fact that you created such a thread in the first place.
Here are your quotes:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.
I do not officiate H.S. soccer anymore, but I saw this on CNN.com. I am sure the lawyers will make lots of money in this case.
MTD, Sr.
|
In the very first thing that you write you imply that there will be a successful lawsuit over the child's death and by mentioning HS soccer officiating in the sentence immediately prior, you convey the message that the officials, if there even were any, are going to be part of that lawsuit and
must somehow be at fault. How else are the lawyers going to "make lots of money?"
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.
It is a reminder that no matter what the age group involved, officials have to do their pregame due diligence.
MTD, Sr.
|
In this second one, you directly attribute a specific duty to the officials by using the term "due diligence" (definition from the dictionary
: the care that a reasonable person exercises under the circumstances to avoid harm to other persons or their property) with the clear implication that if this was not done that they did failed to use reasonable care to avoid this and can now be held accountable for what happened. Of course, you fail to note that per NFHS rule 1-7 "Up until the moment the game begins, it is the
responsibility ofthe host institution or game management to judge whether or not the condition of the field, the elements and other
conditions affecting the safety of the field of play allow for a safe game to begin," nor do you state that the goals actually don't have to be anchored at all. In fact, per NFHS 1-4-1, they can merely be counterweighted and do not have to be attached to the ground by anything. The goals are not required to be immobile and sturdy enough to do gymnastics upon. They are just supposed to be safe enough to fulfill their role in playing the game of soccer. Furthermore, many sites went away from the permanent goals of which the posts were embedded a couple of feet into the ground because people decried them for posing a safety hazard as they were so unforgiving when a kid crashed into them. This and the proliferation of artificial turf led to the widespread use of portable goals in the past ten to fifteen years.
Lastly, by posting the story on a website about officiating and another one specifically dedicated to HS officiating, your action amounts to nothing more than a sensationalistic attempt to scare HS officials into getting into every little detail because they are worried about getting sued. Your "warning" about the "hazardous conditions" of the field is blown WAY out of proportion. The very article that you posted says "...goals tipping over have killed more than two-dozen people in the last 30 years."
That's UNDER ONE death per year over the last THIRTY years!
By comparison how many players have been killed in car or bus wrecks while travelling to or from a game? How many died from a heart condition while on the field? How many suffered a fatal head injury from a collision with an opponent?
The experts on this matter cited in the article, the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, state that these deaths aren't occurring while people are just playing the game of soccer and the goals are being used for their proper purpose, but rather "
people are killed when they climbed on the soccer goal or while attempting to do chin-ups, pulling the goal down."
That's going to be the case with any piece of playground equipment that is misused or treated in a manner for which it was not designed. I'd bet that after the incident in your cited story is fully investigated that that will be found to be the case here as well.
So let's keep this in perspective and quit trying to scare referees with such stories from the media. You are far too experienced an official and of such an age that you should know better than that.