Skip
repetitive navigational links
L-Soft  -  Home of  the  LISTSERV  mailing list  manager LISTSERV(R) 14.3
Skip repetitive navigational links
Previous messageNext messagePrevious in topicNext in topicPrevious by same authorNext by same authorPrevious page (October 2000, week 2)Back to main SOCREF-L pageJoin or leave SOCREF-LReplyPost a new messageSearchProportional fontNon-proportional fontLog in
Date:         Fri, 13 Oct 2000 13:12:37 -0400
Reply-To:     Discussion of Topics for Soccer Referees <[log in to unmask]>
Sender:       Discussion of Topics for Soccer Referees <[log in to unmask]>
From:         Jim Mantle <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:      Re: Police - higher authority than the CR?
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"

I think the decisions of the courts is pretty similar in both Canada and the USA. Basically, they've said that administration of a particular sport, including penalties for activity which is an ongoing component of a sport, but beyond normal bounds, should be administered by the appropriate sporting body. So, if Johnny is called out on strike three which rolled to the plate, and mommy (or the losing team) sues, the court will decline to rule on the case. If a hockey player bodychecks another into the boards illegally, or slashes another player, the referee will call a penalty and the league may issue a suspension. If a soccer ball goes over the goal line and neither the AR or CR see it, but mom captured it on a video camera and can prove it went over, a court will still (hopefully) decline to rule on the case. Generally speaking, when you agree to participate in a sport then you agree to *all* of that sport - and that includes the fact that there is (may be) physical contact, or that officials sometimes make mistakes. However, if a black player is refused into a all-white league, or a hockey player doesn't slash another but instead clubs him over the head, or if the league does something against the League Constitution, or if a volleyball player crosses to other side of the net and whups the living tar out of another, then perhaps this "overflows" the sport and has moved well into the arena of common (in Quebec: civil) law. In McSorley, the defence tried to show that stick work, and inciting to fight, is part of hockey at that level. The prosecution showed that whacking another on the head, or doing something (attempting to whack someone on the shoulder) which could be mis-directed into a whack on the head, is not part of that sport. And McSorley was convicted (and given a discharge), and Hockey got the clear message that they are still part of society, and they don't run their own little regulatory world, to the exclusion of all other laws, within the boards. Works for me! Jim ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jonny Joseph" <[log in to unmask]> To: <[log in to unmask]> Sent: Friday, October 13, 2000 12:12 PM Subject: Re: Police - higher authority than the CR? > In a message dated 10/13/2000 5:03:04 AM Pacific Daylight Time, > [log in to unmask] writes: > > << The courts have also ruled that the judgement of sports > officials and referees is not to be challenged. >> > > I know it was in Canada, but is this true of the recent McSorley case too? >


Back to: Top of message | Previous page | Main SOCREF-L page

LISTSERV.URI.EDU CataList email list search Powered by LISTSERV email list manager