Example Essays Home
FAQ
Acceptable Use Policy
Tech Support
LOG IN!
Click HERE for Instant Access
 
This is a free preview of the paper.
Join Now
Log In
  

Sports And Drugs

Until the late 1970’s it was unheard of to hold a coach or owner liable for the actions of a player. Players were seen as grown adults with an intricate skill and knowledge of their sports. They know fully well what actions can and cannot be committed and act on their own accord when they act outside these boundaries. It seemed unfair to hold their coach or the team’s owner accountable when they had nothing to do with the player’s actions at all.

However, this viewpoint towards employer liability changed dramatically with two landmark court cases in the 1970’s; Tamjanovich v. CA Sports Inc—the company that owns the NBA’s Los Angeles Lakers—and Hackbart v. Cincinnati Bengals. Each case involved a professional athlete seeking damages against another for actions committed away from the field of play, causing significant physical harm. While in court, both plaintiffs relied upon the principle of “respondeat superior” to hold the owners of the franchises partly responsible for the tort actions of their players.

Respondeat Superior is an Anglo-American common law doctrine. It states that an employer can be held vicariously liable for a tort committed by one of their employees. In a professional sport this relationsh


Another issue to consider is the ability of a professional athletic league to promote and advertise their sport. Generally, most people watch high intensity contact sports such as football and hockey because they are fast paced with lots of action. If player could be held liable for injuries committed during a game, they would be less likely to be aggressive during a game. This decline in the level of physical play could lower interest in a sport. In turn, this would make it harder for leagues to market their sports to the general public.

Sport organizations play an integral role in controlling the game through their own policies and rules and those of their governing bodies. A professional league in fact has significant, if not ultimate control over the level of violent conduct tolerated on the field. It exercises this control through its own rules, regulations and policies. Clearly, where a sport organization fails to enforce these rules, only then can a court of law be reasonably justified in becoming involved with an on the field altercation.

Respondeat Superior was used very uniquely in the two cases to make the employment sport companies responsible for the actions of their employee players. First in the Hackbart case, Hackbart stated that Bengals head coach Paul Brown and his coaching staff did not properly train and instruct their rookie players on how to conduct themselves when away from the field of play.

On February 21, 2000, the National Hockey Leagues’ Vancouver Canucks held a 5-2 lead over the Boston Bruins with only 2.7 seconds left in the game. Then suddenly and without warning, Boston defenseman Marty McSorley struck Vancouver forward Donald Brashear across his temple with the blade of his stick. Upon reviewing the incident on video, it was clear that McSorley intended to commit his actions, as Brashear was isolated in the corner of the rink and was not directly involved in the play on the ice. Brashear was left unconscious, convulsing and bleeding from the nose. He was carried off the ice on a stretcher and was diagnosed with a Grade 3 concussion, the most severe. Because of the injury Brashear missed the remainder of the season and spent the next four months rehabbing from the injury.

However some people viewed the punishment as being too lenient, especially the British Columbia court system. Three weeks following the incident the crown attorney—Canada’s version of a head prosecutor—in Vancouver decided to charge McSorley with assault with a weapon.

A new test was developed in modern times that is broader and contains many factors than the old “implied commands” test. Labeled the “scope of employment” test, it states that an employer can be held vicariously responsible for all employee acts—whether they are negligent or intentional—that arise in the scope of employment. This was the standard of review which arouse out of “respondeat

Some topics in this essay:
Superior Anglo-American, Brashear NHL, Bill Daley, Paul Brown, Sports Council, Donald Brashear, , Cincinnati Bengals, British Columbia, Gary Betman, “respondeat superior”, employer held vicariously, field play, vicariously liable, “scope employment”, governing bodies, held liable, held vicariously, actions committed, acts committed, courts involved, held liable torts, mcsorley’s hit brashear, court field ice, tamjanovich ca sports,

Join now to see the rest of the essay!
Approximate Word count = 1958
Approximate Pages = 8 (250 words per page double spaced)


  

More Essays on Sports And Drugs


Professional Papers:
Drugs in Sports1210 words
Drugs in Sports1187 words
Performance Enhancing Drugs in Sports717 words
Mandatory Drug Testing in Professional Sports1554 words
Drug Use in Professional Sports1212 words
Drug abuse in professional sports2017 words



Student Written Papers:
Sports And Drugs1724 words
sports and drugs1809 words
Sports and Drugs1548 words
Drugs in Sports711 words
Drugs In Sports1321 words

Look at even more essays on Sports And Drugs
More Sports Essays

Join Now
(Credit Card)
Join Now
(Online Check)
Join Now
(Phone 1-900)



CUSTOMER SERVICES




Acceptance Essays
Arts
Custom Essays
English
Foreign
History
Miscellaneous
Movies
Music
Novels
People
Politics
Religion
Science
Sports
Technology
Book Notes

 

 


All papers are for research and references purposes only!
Copyright © 2002-2009 ExampleEssays.com DMCA
Saved Papers