Uncalled Cheap Shots

[rockyroad]

Originally Posted by fiasco

Now you're just changing your argument to fit the facts you've found. Your debating skills need some work.

Your argument was not that you could find yourself in a potential lawsuit. Of course a parent can sue if they really want to. That's beside the point. Your argument was that you would not be able to successfully defend yourself in the situation brought about by the video in question.

Comparing a case where a wrestling official has the power to step in and prevent a wrestling move from taking place while its taking place is wholly different from a basketball official who stands on the sidelines and watches play unfold from 5 to sometimes up to 20 feet away. I have no control over the players' movements from that far away. I'm sorry, but I'm not fast enough (or prescient enough, even) to know when that type of "hard foul" is going to occur, meaning I can't step in and prevent it from happening, as the wrestling official could have done in the case you cited.

Back to the drawing board. Try again.

Nope...the case revolved around the fact that the official did not properly apply the rules. It isn't a different scenario - it's the same. It's all based on the negligence of the officials because they did not properly apply the rules of the contest.

Nice try on your part, but not good enough.

You keep right on trying to make this about my debate skills. I will simply say that if you honestly believe that there is no lawyer out there who could make a case for an injured player and his family based on this video evidence, then you are sadly mistaken.

[fiasco]

Originally Posted by rockyroad

I will simply say that if you honestly believe that there is no lawyer out there who could make a case for an injured player and his family based on this video evidence, then you are sadly mistaken.

You can say I'm mistaken all you want, but you've still yet to prove how I'm mistaken. You've produced some article that is tangentially related, but not really. You're taking a case that is about a wrestling referee watching a player put an illegal hold on a player and recklessly allowing that particular hold to continue and trying to apply it to a situation that isn't even remotely related.

If you want to make an apples to apples comparison, you would have to compare that wrestling case to a basketball official who sees a player applying an illegal hold to a players arm, calls nothing, and then that player breaks his arm, all the while the official never blows the whistle.

Remember that an official's action has to be proven in court to be reckless or intentional to be actionable. Show me that same video where you have officials swallowing their whistles on every play and I'll agree with you.