A Hypervigilant or Safety Conscious Ref?

[ODog]

Originally Posted by Kansas Ref

... the player was injured due to push in back that "everyone saw" and the official did not either consider it/call it a foul--[the parents] all saw game video and blamed the official for not "protecting/penalizing" player ...

Right, but we knew that part already. Change the scenario to "the official calls a foul." So what. Johnny gets hurt either way.

Did the parents in the Fla. scenario just blame the official (big deal ... happens, usually baselessly, dozens of times a game) or did they actually sue/win in the Fla. scenario?

Sorry, KansasRef, not trying to shoot the messenger. Just intrigued, that's all.

[jTheUmp]

Originally Posted by Kansas Ref

The main take home from this seminar was that it made me seriously consider taking out their 'liability insurance"- that Naso offers.

Which, of course, was probably at least partially the point of the presentation.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by ODog

Right, but we knew that part already. Change the scenario to "the official calls a foul." So what. Johnny gets hurt either way.

Did the parents in the Fla. scenario just blame the official (big deal ... happens, usually baselessly, dozens of times a game) or did they actually sue/win in the Fla. scenario?

Sorry, KansasRef, not trying to shoot the messenger. Just intrigued, that's all.

And, was there a pattern of similar plays being ignored prior to the play in question where the injury occurred? That is where the liability could come from.

[Adam]

If you absolutely must address it. Just stop the game and have a sub come in. You have more rule support for that than you do a technical foul.