Violence in the N F L

[Dis]

Originally posted by Mrs. Tuberski
How funny not one jail sentence from al that evil doing

actually, looking at a similar photo roundup (at SI - linked from CNN.com) the hocky incident was prosecuted. And the guy spent 18 months in jail for assault with a weapon.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/multimedia/photo_gallery/0610/gallery.badathletes/content.9.html

[Imran Siddiqui]

just what the sports contests need lawyers in suits saying u were hurt and we can get u some money!! Oh joy where do i sign up to watch the cheerleaders casue they are gonna be more active then the players if this goes on

'Cause obviously in the last 40 years (from the most famous case on this issue) that's what has happened. It's ok that you refuse the read what I've posted on the law and continue babbling your ridiculous nonsense. I'll just refuse to read your drivel from now on.

[Mrs. Tuberski]

Everytime when she did it when i came to teh front of the line yeah she did it on purpose!! u can belive what ya want but i know and our team knew it was on purpose.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Originally posted by Dis
actually, looking at a similar photo roundup (at SI - linked from CNN.com) the hocky incident was prosecuted. And the guy spent 18 months in jail for assault with a weapon.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/mul...content.9.html

Yep, Marty McSorely went away for a while, as well he should have. Which brings up another point, what happens if the guy gets 'in-house punishment' and decides to retire (or gets cut) the next day? So nothing really happens to him?

Also Jeff Gilloole and his accomplice did some time for the Tonya Harding hit. IIRC, the camera sued Rodman civilly and I believe it was settled.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Originally posted by Mrs. Tuberski
Everytime when she did it when i came to teh front of the line yeah she did it on purpose!! u can belive what ya want but i know and our team knew it was on purpose.

That's nice, but the law requires proof. You know... not just what you thought about it? I'm sure if it was blatant enough so everyone (not just your team) thought it was the case (like if she came over to your side of the net), you could sue and win over your medical bills. You'd probably, at the very least, need the ref to say it was a blatant intent to injure. But if he didn't throw her out, he probably didn't see it that way.

I know you are getting confused on the distinction, but an easy rule of thumb is that in order to even THINK about suing for a sports violence and injury case and getting somewhere other than having the cast thrown out, the opposing player must be tossed from the game, or in pro sports, the opposing player must be suspended and fined by the league. That's the bare minimum (note this: minimum!!)!! Then the questions of deliberate and willful intent to injure or reckless disregard may be persued (of course in some sports people are tossed easier than others, such as baseball, and that must be taken into account in asking the pertinent questions of intent or recklessness).

[Grandpa Troll]

Originally posted by SlowwHand
That's not the same.

Not the same as what..blowing in Gramps ear..

Thats almost an obscene gesture and from a much respected Texan..

/me remembers two things comes from Texas..Moo-Cows..and..

[SlowwHand]

[Mrs. Tuberski]

i think no one is understanding me here. Football hockey and even soccer are contact sports. Witht the tendeny to become violent, whether it be intentional or not. I still think the courts and stuff should not be involved. Evenif the incident is as flagrant as the stomping on his head and the biting off of holyfields ear. The said commisions should be able to handle the case against the person doing the act. Whether it be supend them for life from said sport and heavy fines or for a while and fines. The point is this is a matter that should be handled by the sports commision involved whwther it be the nfl, nhl or boxing. As tuber said earlier the assualts as they are considered should not be picked by the courts on which one merits legal action. Cause you and i both know that if i was playing for fun and was to start a fight and possibly punch a person in the face for a bad call, attitude whatever we both know id be arrested. How does a player start a fight and the same doesnt hold the same since it was as delebierate and the stomping of this guys head?

[Elok]

I didn't know sports fights typically involved attacking a man while he was lying helpless on the ground, deliberately removing his protective gear, and giving him an injury requiring a couple of dozen stitches.

[SlowwHand]

You can't tackle a QB below the knees. It's not allowed to tackle a player by grabbing their shoulder pads.
You can't crackback block below the waist, and you certainly can't kick and stomp on a player.

[Imran Siddiqui]

i think no one is understanding me here.

We understand you. We just think you are a loon.

What if the guy dies from a stomping? Should it be handled in-house? If not, then why pick and choose which are actionable (forgetting for a moment that that is what courts DO)?

[SlowwHand]

She's not a loon. She has a perception on rules that isn't agreed with.

Now you, you're a loon.

[Ben Kenobi]

What if the guy dies from a stomping? Should it be handled in-house? If not, then why pick and choose which are actionable (forgetting for a moment that that is what courts DO)?

For the same reason that the Mrs. said earlier. If we treat assault the same way outside the stadium as inside the stadium, then we might as well watch the cheerleaders.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
For the same reason that the Mrs. said earlier. If we treat assault the same way outside the stadium as inside the stadium, then we might as well watch the cheerleaders.

But we don't and no one is suggesting we do (*points to link to the actual law above*)

[Mrs. Tuberski]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

i think no one is understanding me here.

We understand you. We just think you are a loon.

What if the guy dies from a stomping? Should it be handled in-house? If not, then why pick and choose which are actionable (forgetting for a moment that that is what courts DO)?

While i might resemble that remark, i dont seemy opinion as lunacy. You can ask your self the same question if a guy goes to tackle another player dumps him on his head and dies or is paralyzed should the person doing the tackling be arrested for playing a game? We all know he was going after the guy to tackle and stop him with all his might. What im trying to say is that the incidents should be handled in the leagues commission. Not the courts