Halton Hills Six Nations altercation

Halton Hills Six Nations altercation

Joined: Sat Sep 10, 2011 4:06 am

Sat Sep 10, 2011 4:09 am #1

just wondring after a brawl like that if there were any fines, or suspensions for either teams? both teams have players with a lot of talent and it would be ashame if some get hefty suspensions which unable them to participate in the league next year
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: Mon Aug 16, 2004 3:05 am

Sat Sep 10, 2011 4:19 am #2

these probably won't be announced until early spring, if not prior to the rebels pre season "tournament" . however i think the whole thing will be brushed under the table. if the league wanted to suspend anyone, they would have done it before the Rebels went out west.
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: Wed Apr 04, 2007 2:19 am

Sat Sep 10, 2011 10:41 pm #3

or should i say would of carried over... seems pretty sneeaky.
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2003 2:06 am

Sat Sep 10, 2011 11:15 pm #4

these probably won't be announced until early spring, if not prior to the rebels pre season "tournament" . however i think the whole thing will be brushed under the table. if the league wanted to suspend anyone, they would have done it before the Rebels went out west.
As I understand it... since the Founders is a CLA tournament any suspensions handed out by the OLA would not be applicable.
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: Mon Jun 23, 2003 1:21 am

Sun Sep 11, 2011 3:36 am #5

these probably won't be announced until early spring, if not prior to the rebels pre season "tournament" . however i think the whole thing will be brushed under the table. if the league wanted to suspend anyone, they would have done it before the Rebels went out west.
You are probably absolutely correct. Noone got their face caved in by a water bottle flying in either direction. No body stupid enough to take their child to a game between these two teams had their kid seriously injured or permanently disabled by any of the meatheads involved on either side of the glass,so you are so right.Why would the OLA want to take a stand against this kind of crap? Lets continue to live by the old adage,"If it doesn't require an autopsy,there shouldn't be any penalty." Lets wait until a player or fan looses an eye,or their teeth or has their cheek bone driven into their sinus cavity. Better yet.Lets wait until some one or two year old takes a thrown object in the temple and has a piece of skull bone driven in to his brain,then after the court hears the prognosis that at the age of 60 this person will still have the mental capacity of a 2 or 3 year old and hands down a multi million dollar settlement,maybe then some one will decide it's time to take a stand.
Now.People can come on this forum and say I am exagerating and blowing things out of proportion if they want,but believe me, if it keeps up,there is going to be a catastrophic injury and the size of law suit and settlement is going to make your head spin. When some mother is sitting in court with a child in her arms whos mental capacity will not grow past a 2 year old,you better have a better defense than,"Boys will be boys and these two teams really don't like each other."
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: Wed Apr 04, 2007 2:19 am

Sun Sep 11, 2011 3:46 am #6

"he faked an injury this year in Huntsville and sat in the stands for three weeks"

if you cared about people getting hurt, why would you say that


sell your chevy, you don't deserve it.
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2009 9:12 pm

Sun Sep 11, 2011 2:47 pm #7

You are probably absolutely correct. Noone got their face caved in by a water bottle flying in either direction. No body stupid enough to take their child to a game between these two teams had their kid seriously injured or permanently disabled by any of the meatheads involved on either side of the glass,so you are so right.Why would the OLA want to take a stand against this kind of crap? Lets continue to live by the old adage,"If it doesn't require an autopsy,there shouldn't be any penalty." Lets wait until a player or fan looses an eye,or their teeth or has their cheek bone driven into their sinus cavity. Better yet.Lets wait until some one or two year old takes a thrown object in the temple and has a piece of skull bone driven in to his brain,then after the court hears the prognosis that at the age of 60 this person will still have the mental capacity of a 2 or 3 year old and hands down a multi million dollar settlement,maybe then some one will decide it's time to take a stand.
Now.People can come on this forum and say I am exagerating and blowing things out of proportion if they want,but believe me, if it keeps up,there is going to be a catastrophic injury and the size of law suit and settlement is going to make your head spin. When some mother is sitting in court with a child in her arms whos mental capacity will not grow past a 2 year old,you better have a better defense than,"Boys will be boys and these two teams really don't like each other."
Some will say that you are exagerating how ever , if anyone of you out there that is familiar with the Green OSHA Handbook ( the industry standard for safety policies) it exists because of unforseen accidents and situations that have happened in the workplace. When I first started working 40 years ago that book was about 1/4 in thick it is now 3 times that size why? because people get hurt in some very imaginative and weird ways . What Chevy guy is trying to say is that the governing body needs to be more proactive when it comes to the ever increasing number of Fan/Player incidents that are seemingly ignored by the officials, it seems to me that the operators of lacrosse dont want this to get any better and are happy with the status quo. Good luck guys I hope the insurance policies on your liability for being official members are paid in full.I for one have been known to leave an arena when this crap begins I cannot stomach it anymore .
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: Tue Oct 29, 2002 11:53 pm

Sun Sep 11, 2011 7:20 pm #8

You are probably absolutely correct. Noone got their face caved in by a water bottle flying in either direction. No body stupid enough to take their child to a game between these two teams had their kid seriously injured or permanently disabled by any of the meatheads involved on either side of the glass,so you are so right.Why would the OLA want to take a stand against this kind of crap? Lets continue to live by the old adage,"If it doesn't require an autopsy,there shouldn't be any penalty." Lets wait until a player or fan looses an eye,or their teeth or has their cheek bone driven into their sinus cavity. Better yet.Lets wait until some one or two year old takes a thrown object in the temple and has a piece of skull bone driven in to his brain,then after the court hears the prognosis that at the age of 60 this person will still have the mental capacity of a 2 or 3 year old and hands down a multi million dollar settlement,maybe then some one will decide it's time to take a stand.
Now.People can come on this forum and say I am exagerating and blowing things out of proportion if they want,but believe me, if it keeps up,there is going to be a catastrophic injury and the size of law suit and settlement is going to make your head spin. When some mother is sitting in court with a child in her arms whos mental capacity will not grow past a 2 year old,you better have a better defense than,"Boys will be boys and these two teams really don't like each other."
She:kon!

I believe most rinks provide warnings to spectators essentially telling them that by attending the event they are accepting the risks associated with that event such as errant hockey pucks and lacrosse balls, sometimes equipment, other times broken plexi-glass.  This does no relieve the league of any culpability for any injuries that happen as a result of on-the-floor incidents, but I believe it mitigates any serious damages being awarded to any spectator as a result of a lawsuit.  Most damages are covered by insurance.

Here is an interesting paper on the legalities of spectator injuries at sporting events.  It is from the Sturm College of Law at the University of Denver, thus the focus is more on American law, but the idea is basically the same in Canada.  There are exceptions to the rule, and this case from Nova Scotia was settled last year.  This was in the days prior to the netting.

The problem is that anyone can create a nightmare scenario about what <em>could</em> happen, but such scenarios never pan out as realistic and appear to be more unfounded hysteria than anything else.  Saying:"...some one or two year old takes a thrown object in the temple and has a piece of skull bone driven in to his brain..." is the exact kind of absurd comment that is difficult to take serious to those with the responsibility of making changes.  Change isn't made on the basis of someone else's ability to be over-the-top melodramatic.

If it were, we'd all be forced to wear teflon bubble wrap suits and motorcycle helments when attending lacrosse games.

Skennen

...Tsitshoh...

 

 
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: Mon Jun 23, 2003 1:21 am

Mon Sep 12, 2011 12:21 am #9

You might be right. However,the courts might make a distinction between an errant pass and objects deliberately thrown into the stands during stoppages in play.
As to your comment Ron. It sounds as though we shouldn't hold our breath waiting to see any improvement. If the adults in charge don't see anything wrong with this conduct there isn't much chance they are going to teach the players left in their charge anything different.
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: Tue Dec 17, 2002 4:31 am

Mon Sep 12, 2011 1:16 am #10

She:kon!

I believe most rinks provide warnings to spectators essentially telling them that by attending the event they are accepting the risks associated with that event such as errant hockey pucks and lacrosse balls, sometimes equipment, other times broken plexi-glass.  This does no relieve the league of any culpability for any injuries that happen as a result of on-the-floor incidents, but I believe it mitigates any serious damages being awarded to any spectator as a result of a lawsuit.  Most damages are covered by insurance.

Here is an interesting paper on the legalities of spectator injuries at sporting events.  It is from the Sturm College of Law at the University of Denver, thus the focus is more on American law, but the idea is basically the same in Canada.  There are exceptions to the rule, and this case from Nova Scotia was settled last year.  This was in the days prior to the netting.

The problem is that anyone can create a nightmare scenario about what <em>could</em> happen, but such scenarios never pan out as realistic and appear to be more unfounded hysteria than anything else.  Saying:"...some one or two year old takes a thrown object in the temple and has a piece of skull bone driven in to his brain..." is the exact kind of absurd comment that is difficult to take serious to those with the responsibility of making changes.  Change isn't made on the basis of someone else's ability to be over-the-top melodramatic.

If it were, we'd all be forced to wear teflon bubble wrap suits and motorcycle helments when attending lacrosse games.

Skennen

...Tsitshoh...

 

 
In hindsight, I bet the Olinskis wish they wore teflon suits and helmets when they were reffed the junior lacrosse game at Nations that saw them get seriously injured. That incident cost the OLA and others serious coin, but was anything learned from it. Methinks not, it was swept under the rug and when the incident is brought up, there is a distinct "shhh" sound in response. It is a far more litigious society now than even when they were mugged, and whether one likes it or not, most actions and activities now HAVE to be viewed in context of liability. Being a director or official of an association, be it the OLA or local association, does not completely absolve one of personal liability, hence many organizations in varied sports are seeking directors liability insurance to protect the volunteers. However, such insurance will not help if one is a dinosoar and refuses to be proactive and deal with potential risks. At the risk of being dumped on, or having one's post deleted, one can only repeatedly suggest that status quo is not sufficient, that the varied risks to fans, players, officials stemming from conduct, location, etc be carefully reviewed and the apprpriate measures taken.
Quote
Like
Share