Can NFL Players/Teams be sued for dirty hits???

[RP]

https://www.aol.com/article/news/202...-hit/24633068/

I'm not much of a sports fan but was wondering if NFL players and/or their teams can or should be financially liable for blatantly dirty hits that seem intended to cause pain and/or injury???

[blue]

Originally Posted by RP

https://www.aol.com/article/news/202...-hit/24633068/

I'm not much of a sports fan but was wondering if NFL players and/or their teams can or should be financially liable for blatantly dirty hits that seem intended to cause pain and/or injury???

There is a very real possibility if the behavior o the field was considered criminal activity. Like the swinging of the helmet last season. For a minute it was being investigated as criminal assault.

[marty bradbury]

Personally I think they should. They are not above the law. IMO

[buddyhu]

I think they should be. But dirty hits and career-ending injuries that they sometimes produce have been part of the game for decades, and he league seems to tolerate it (and lots of other unsportsmanlike misbehavior). Coincidence? Probably not. The pro football culture has been, in some respects, as much about persevering in the face of awesome violence as it is about teamwork and competition.

[raysachs]

Originally Posted by marty bradbury

Personally I think they should. They are not above the law. IMO

Well, what they do is essentially sanctioned violence, most of which would be against the law outside of the confines of a football game. I mean, if someone just put a solid NFL hit on someone out on the street, they'd be up on assault charges real fast. So, in a sense, are they NOT above the law? Or simply outside it.

I mean, if someone pulled out a gun or knife in the middle of an NFL game and went after someone, that would clearly be prosecutable. But a Football hit that could be described as dirty, but for which the line between clean and dirty is often an extremely fine one, seems to me to make any sort of prosecution highly unlikely. I mean, the hit Jack Tatum put on Darryl Stingley that caused Stingley's paralysis back in the '70s, would pretty clearly be outside the rules in today's game, but it would result in an in-game penalty and maybe being kicked out of the game. At the time it was considered within the rules but vicious - I don't recall Tatum having a penalty called against him. Today he'd be flagged for a hit on a defenseless receiver and a hit to the receiver's head. But I don't know how you'd prosecute someone for a hit that was deemed "dirty" that happened at the speed or an NFL game.

I guess someone taking off someone's helmet and swinging it at the guy's head is in a grey area and could be considered criminal assault because it's outside of the game itself. But a vicious hit that badly injures or even kills someone? I don't see how you could prosecute it. You'd have to prove intent - I don't think you could.

-Ray

[Tahitijack]

Dirty hits can easily be eliminated by a simple penalty removal of the attacker from the sport until the injured player can return to the game.

Too bad members of the Saints aren't on this forum...lol

[robj144]

They're have been a few in hockey:

https://toronto.citynews.ca/2016/02/...minal-charges/

And, I'd imagine one could extend that to football.

[jklotz]

I dunno. I might be the odd man out, but it seems to me that these guys are doing this by choice. Nobody forced them to go out and play, and each one of them are well aware of the risks. They know folks are going to get hurt and they signed on the dotted line anyway.

[Inyo]

Originally Posted by blue

There is a very real possibility if the behavior o the field was considered criminal activity.

Like the swinging of the helmet last season. For a minute it was being investigated as criminal assault.

No.

The precedent has already been set, many years ago. In 1977, Lynn Swann filed suit against Oakland Raiders defensive back George Atkinson for a malicious forearm hit to Swann's head in the first game of season 1976, knocking Swann out. The blow was clearly a criminal assault, and it could have easily killed Swann (in the 1975 Oakland-Pittsburgh playoff game, Atkinson knocked Swann out during a tackle with a similar vicious swat to the head).

And that 1976 Atkinson attack took place removed from the actual action, where Atkinson came up behind Swann and delivered an obviously premeditated and deliberate forearm to the back of Swann's head, knocking the future NFL Hall of Fame inductee out. Once again, that blow could have easily killed Swann.

If that on-field football incident failed to qualify as a criminal act in the eyes of the law, then nothing ever will.

One must note, though, that at least three hockey incidents have led to criminal charges--two for swinging a stick, and the other for a sucker punch that ultimately left the victim with a broken neck (in the fisticuffs example, the perpetrator eventually received 80 hours of community service and a year of probation).

[12barBill]

Basically this is controlled by the NFL and the NFL Players Union. Union employment, Union working conditions, collective bargaining, etc.

Info:

https://operations.nfl.com/football-...fines-appeals/

[blue]

Originally Posted by Inyo

No.

The precedent has already been set, many years ago. In 1977, Lynn Swann filed suit against Oakland Raiders defensive back George Atkinson for a malicious forearm hit to Swann's head in the first game of season 1976, knocking Swann out. The blow was clearly a criminal assault, and it could have easily killed Swann (in the 1975 Oakland-Pittsburgh playoff game, Atkinson knocked Swann out during a tackle with a similar vicious swat to the head).

"snip"

If that on-field football incident failed to qualify as a criminal act in the eyes of the law, then nothing ever will.

No relation to the case I cited. A brutal hit away from the play, but on the clock, is not the same as as swinging a helmet and smashing into the helmet-less head of somebody after the whistle.

In the 70's that was part of the game. Was it in the top .5 percent of egregious acts in football? Yes.

If the local municipality had charged, and convicted (or if Garrett had plead out) for assault with a deadly weapon, a civil suit would most certainly have been a possibility. Would Rudolph have been able to sue without having the players turn on him for being a snitch? Another question entirely.