I believe that in general the danger of attending a sporting event or playing a sport means that the person assumes the reasonable risks associated with it. You never know what happens when it gets taken to court but most of the time when someone is injured they aren't going to get reimbursed.

I believe that the child who died at a hockey game got money because they didn't adequately provide safety features and the NHL adjusted afterwards because of it.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!

Do I assume all risks by driving my car?

_________________

Yes. Now, if someone else is negligent including your car company or mechanic that's different.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!

Does you car have a disclaimer on it? Is it owned by Jerry Reinsdorf and/or the State of IL?

_________________

So, are baseball teams negligent for only putting up protective screens around 5% of the playng field even though common practice shows that dangerous projectiles eneter from all angles during every game?

_________________

They obviously don't believe so. If this family does then they should file a lawsuit and find out if a court does.

My guess is that after the person died in that NHL game that MLB figured out the answer and we didn't see a change to the netting.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!

I'm just saying that to me it would be a good reason for the Sox to just offer the $2K. Like you've pointed out, that's a paltry sum for this organization - it's not like the family is asking for some huge $$$ damages. Sounds like they are legitimately just asking for help with their share of the bills.

Additionally, this is now bad press for them. You can't spend $2K on marketing and recover from that.

_________________

MLB (at least the Sox) have taken away netting in recent years. The net behind the plate used to strech all the way back to the concourse. Now, those popups that are fouled straight back land in the crowd since that portion of the net as been removed.

_________________

The problem is when this happens again when Adam Dunn hits his 55th home run of the season next year off a toddler and the family sues the White Sox and the state for $10 million this could be used to say "See, they paid his medical bills!".

I really don't think it makes sense that a team making millions of dollars is being cheap here.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!

And I DIDNT win straw that stirs the drink?


This thread was DEAD

I ressurected that shit

Happy Friday

I agree.

What they should do is shower the family with so many freebies that they dont complain.

If he gave them season tickets for next year or an Ozzie plan or something.


What did he give him? A ticket to ONE sox game?

Whats that worth? Do they even charge for tickets?

_________________

I agree, it would be different if a family was suing for huge $$$ damages in addition to just medical costs. That's why I said in my previous post.


Aaaaaaaaaaaaand - 55th HR!!!??! I smell an over/under bet coming.....

_________________

I don't think you got my point. If they pay them $2,000, which is nothing to them, they make it more likely they will lose $10,000,000 in a lawsuit later on if it happens again. They need to be consistent with the "Sit there at your own risk" policy.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!

Should the Sox have followed up with the family? Probably. Should they have paid his bills? While it would be nice, it isn't a good idea.

Someone started to touch upon this earlier: it is likely a request from MLB. If the Sox pay, then where is the line drawn? Someone who had to pay out of pocket in the past will be upset that the Sox didn't pay theirs, and try to sue. Or any future incidents would have medical bills sent to teams throughout the league. It's unfortunate, but, that is why the assumed risk is printed on the ticket.

Oops, I was a little slow in typing my post, but, yes that is exactly it.

Disclaimers are simply to get rid
of the large percentage of people
that actually believe they mean anything
at all.

If I wear a t-shirt that says,
"Talk to this guy at your own
risk" and I punch the next guy
who addresses me in the mouth
does the fact that I wore the
shirt eliminate my liability?

_________________
Anybody here seen my old friend Bobby?
Can you tell me where he's gone?
I thought I saw him walkin' up to The Hill
With Elon, Tulsi, and Don

Of course you all realize that this thread will now prevent Lil Danny from ever allowing his son to attend a baseball game.

_________________
Proud member of the white guy grievance committee

It aint the six minutes. Its what happens in those six minutes.

Funny, but, not the same thing

You should put that on all of your posts too just to be safe

_________________

No, what you did was illegal. If the White Sox replaced the baseball with a timed explosive they would have been liable for the explosive.

The White Sox are doing nothing wrong by letting a baseball game be played at a baseball stadium. You have an assumed risk for attending. There is no assumed risk that you are going to be assaulted by you.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!

Rick, you are much more wrong that right on this one.

_________________
"That's what the internet is for. Slandering others anonymously." Banky
“Been that way since one monkey looked at the sun and told the other monkey ‘He said for you to give me your fuckin’ share.’”

Good counterargument.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!

Your analysis makes me smile....in a very condescending manner.

_________________
O judgment! Thou art fled to brutish beasts,
And men have lost their reason.

everyone uses that line until they get injured and seek out a PI lawyer

_________________
O judgment! Thou art fled to brutish beasts,
And men have lost their reason.

Fair enough, Rick. Let me give you a real world
example. You can't string wire at the level of
a snowmobiler's neck even on your own property
and absolve yourself of the responsibility for
stringing it with a sign.

You can look up the Illinois Appellate decision.
I'm almost certain it didn't go the Sox' way.

_________________
Anybody here seen my old friend Bobby?
Can you tell me where he's gone?
I thought I saw him walkin' up to The Hill
With Elon, Tulsi, and Don

why are you typing like T-Bone all of a sudden?

It must be my phone.

_________________
Anybody here seen my old friend Bobby?
Can you tell me where he's gone?
I thought I saw him walkin' up to The Hill
With Elon, Tulsi, and Don

That's true because you are intentionally doing something. If Jerry Reinsdorf had strung wire in the hallways he'd be liable too.

However, normal baseball activity was taking place. The only intent was to play a game, which is what the person was there for. If the person who put up the wire instead put up a clearly visible fence he would be fine. The intent of a fence is to keep people out. The wire is an attempt to injure someone who comes on your property. It's just like me electrifying my front door handle to keep out burglars. You can't do something with intent to injure. However, if someone gets injured on something you would expect to normally be there or an action to be taken place it's different.

Now, if Jerry Reinsdorf was there with a pitching machine shooting balls at the fans it would be different. Foul balls from the games are expected though.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!

Rick, you are wrong, Just admit it.

I mentioned this to 4 different attorneys today and emailed one. The one I emailed, here is his response and he is a huge Sox fan, 4 season tickets and hates the Cubs.

No liability in "this situation" unless the netting does not go far enough down line or something. I could make great arguement for the family in this case, but not going to here. Well known risk of having kid sit there and arguments like area should be restricted to minors by club go nowhere. However, no bad precedent set by covering $2000 as well. Seems like a nice thing at holiday season to do and a few tickets an the signed AJ Pics are a bit light in my opinion. Also, why no premises-no fault coverage to pay med bills of like 1OK, 25K or 5OK similar to no fault- med pay on an auto policy. Not a "slippery slope" issue at all. Could even have it cover only after health insurance probably and make it secondary coverage to the injured parties health insurance. Answer maybe- cheaper and cleaner to just take position of assumption of risk and be done with it. I would guess it will be taken care of in someway at this point

_________________
"That's what the internet is for. Slandering others anonymously." Banky
“Been that way since one monkey looked at the sun and told the other monkey ‘He said for you to give me your fuckin’ share.’”