The Funding Procedure for the Facility
The Great American Ball Park is one of the most expensive stadiums build in Ohio in recent times. The stadium is home to the Cincinnati Reds, which is a professional baseball team in Ohio. The stadium is estimated to have cost over $290 million construct (Altman, 2013). The funding procedure for the stadium encompassed planning to raise money from taxpayers in Ohio to fund the building of the facility (Altman, 2013). The funding procedure was as follows. There were government bonds that were approved by taxpayers to raise finances for building the facility (Groupe , 2019).The residents of Hamilton County initially voted to raise sales taxes in the county as a way of making the county to raise the funds required for the construction of the Great American Ball Park (Groupe , 2019). After the vote, the county issued bonds to raise the finances to build the stadium. The bonds were sold to investors to raise the money needed to finance the Great American Ball Park. The bonds were then issued tax free to investors (Goldberger, 2019). What this implied is that the bonds did not require the investors to pay taxes to the federal government for the interest they collected from the bonds (Goldberger, 2019). The stadium was therefore funded tax payers money through the issuance of bonds that paid lower interest rates to investors since the bonds were tax free to the investors.
How the Facility Was Approved
There was controversy about the facility which made its approval to be delayed. Negotiations between the city of Cincinnati and the Reds dragged on for years before the approval to construct the stadium was made (Goldberger, 2019). One of the reasons why the construction was delayed for approval was that the Reds were accused of not having the commitment to spend both their cash and tax payer’s money towards the construction of the stadium (Stupp, 2003). Several proposals were put forward for the constructions of the stadium but the Cincinnati Reds could not come to an agreement on how funding will be implemented to make the construction of the stadium commence (Greg, 2005). Eventually, the proposal by the Broadway Commons was the one that led voters to approve the construction of the stadium which was funded by tax payer’s money through government bonds that were issued to investors by the county of Hamilton (Stupp, 2003). The facility was approved through a vote in 1998 by the Cincinnati voters, to use tax payers money to build the stadium on the waterfront through the ballpark proposal Stupp, D. (2003). The proposal is the one also known as the Broadway Commons proposal. Even though the proposal was approved in 1998, the actual proposal for the construction was endorsed in 2000, which paved way for the construction of the stadium at the waterfront (Leventhal, 2006). It should be noted that in 1999, the Hamilton country commission made the proposal that the stadium was not to be built on new land but ensured that the ballpark that had an opening to the Ohio river was the ideal location for the stadium (Leventhal, 2006). This was the final stage in the approval of building the stadium since the building commenced in 2000 as the Reds were playing in the old stadium.
The Types of Amenities Provided At Great American Ball Park in Cincinnati Ohio
The stadium boasts of world class amenities which are associated with its heritage but some of the amenities are for fans (Leventhal, 2006). One of the notable facilities in the stadium is the gap (Pahigian, & O'Connell, 2012). It is made up of a 10.5 meters or 35 foot wide break that was constructed at the stands (Altman, 2013).The gap exists between the 3rd base and the home plate and its is bridged by every level of its concourse (Altman, 2013). The gap offers a clear view into the Great American Ball Park from the skyline within the park and downtown in the surrounding areas in to the stadium.
At the right center field of the Great American Ball Park, there is an amenity referred to at the power stacks (Altman, 2013). The power stacks have two smokestacks that are akin to the common steamboats that were typical at the Ohio River in the 19th and 20th century (Altman, 2013). The power stacks emit flames; they have flash lights, and have the ability of launching fireworks that play the main function of responding to the efforts by the home team (Groupe , 2019). The smokestacks are aimed at making sure that when the reds strike a batter, there will be a flow of fire from the stacks. More specifically, the amenity is aligned with the efforts of the team since there is a launch of fireworks whenever there is a run or a win for the Reds (Greg, 2005). The smokestacks have a unique feature as they symbolize the #14 of Pete Rose (Groupe , 2019). The other amenity is the Great American Ball Park, is the River Boat Deck that is a private area party located at the batters eye (Groupe , 2019). It is meant for private parties by the fans or any person that can pay for it. The stadium also has a nursing suite for mothers, who need to breast feed or feed their babies. The nursing suit offers mothers a chance to nurse their children at the facility while they are attending events (Murray, 2015). The nursing suite was mainly built as an amenity to attend to women’s needs as it has a diaper changing areas, a kitchenette, a restroom, lockers, a refrigerator, TVs that show the game, and lockers (Murray, 2015). The amenity is located close to the champion’s club elevators (Murray, 2015).
The other amenities at the facility are first aid rooms that are located at one zero nine, one twenty six and rooms four hundred and eleven. The other amenities are the FOX Sports Club, the press Dining Room, Lexus Diamond Club, and Public Safety & Security Command Center, the hall of fame and the Kroger fan zone.
Comparison of the Stadium with Other Stadiums
Most baseball stadium are compared in terms of the size since the size determines the capacity and amenities that are present in the stadium (Groupe , 2019). Compared to the Great American Ball Park, there are larger baseball stadiums in terms of capacity and amenities. For instance, the Yankee stadiumhas a large capacity of 52,325compared to the Great American Ball Park capacity of 42,319 (Groupe , 2019). Other stadium that have a large capacity compared to the Great American Ball Park are the Dodger Stadium located in California, the Coors field, Chase field, in Arizona, Globe Life Park in Arlington, T-Moblie Park in Washington, Oakland-Alameda County Coliseum, Busch Stadium in Missouri, Oriole Park at Camden Yards, Angel Stadium of Anaheim and Citizens Bank Park located in Philadelphia (Groupe , 2019). Other facilities that have a lower capacity compared to the American Ball Park are Citi Field located in New York, Oracle Park, Miller park, Comerica Park, Nationals Park, SunTrust Park, Minute Maid Park that all have a capacity of less than 42,139 fans (Groupe , 2019).
It should be noted that the Great American Ball Park has an average capacity compared to over 201 stadiums for base ball in the US (Stupp, 2003). Most of the larger facilities in terms of capacity have more amenities compared to Great American Ball Park. As it relates to smaller facilities, they have a lower capacity and fewer amenities compared to Great American Ball Park. The capacity of the Great American Ball Park indicates that the maximum number of spectators that the capacity can accommodate is average and hence the amenities that come with hosting the over 43,000 fans is also average for any big baseball stadium (Stupp, 2003).
The Uniqueness of the Great American Ball Park
One of the unique facilities at the Great American Ball Park is the food served to the facility. The eat stands located at stands 144 and 128 offer a unique eating place where there are unlimited access to soda, popcorns, chips, peanuts and hot dogs for merge 20 dollars (Stupp, 2003). The other unique features at the facility are the hall of fame and a museum, a private events location for non comedy events, and the Fioptics District that has luxury furniture, and games for people wishing to visit the facility. The facility also has a team shop where fans can get branded T-shirts, caps and Jerseys and the facility is open every day. Another unique facility at the stadium is the Red Stockings Pavilion which is located next to the hall of fame and museum. The Red Stockings Pavilion highlights the major players and principals that have contributed to the success of the team (Stupp, 2003). The facility also has an accessible parking space for fans which makes it easy for them to come in and go out anytime during a game. The facility also has a captioning board that aim at serving the deaf and late deafened people who may want to watch baseball games at the facility. The facility has captioning boards that are 3.1 feet x 22 feet and have a font size that is adequate for deaf pole to read from a distance about hats taking place during a baseball match (Pahigian, & O'Connell, 2012).The facility also has Automated External Defibrillators that are located at numerous locations in the stadium. The other unique feature at the facility is assisted listening devices for people that are near deaf (Pahigian, & O'Connell, 2012). The listening devices are located at the TriHealth Fan Accommodation Station, located behind section 420 and 119 (Pahigian, & O'Connell, 2012). For spectators to access finances for anything they need to buy, the facility has ATM machines, at the suite level, viewing level, field level, administration building and the terrace level (Pahigian, & O'Connell, 2012). The facility also has a central parking system that assists patrons that have minor issues with their cars. The central parking system assists patrons with jump starting their cars, and fixing of mechanical errors that their vehicles have such as a flat tire. The other unique features in the facility are the first aid stations; staffed with trained personnel, fan clubs, fan accommodation stations, elevators and escalators for visitors that require special assistance to go certain locations in the facility, and party decks.
The Hurdles Did the City Had To Overcome To Build the Facility
One of the hurdles the city faced had too with convincing voters to pass the vote that will allow the taxpayers to approve paying for the construction of the stadium (Pahigian, & O'Connell, 2012). There were issues on whether the stadium should have an open roof or not, something that could have inflated the budget set forth for the construction of the stadium (Pahigian, & O'Connell, 2012). The controversy on whether the stadium should have a retractable roof dealayed the commencement of the project until the management and the contractors agreed that a retractable roof could make the construction to be delayed and squeeze the budget of the project (Goldberger, 2019). Additionally, there were hurdles on whether the bonds issued should be tax free or taxable. The hurdle delayed the issuance of bonds since some of the people involved in the pre-funding phase had suggested that tax free bonds could cost the tax payers a lot of money (Goldberger, 2019). However, in the end it was decided that the bonds to be issued should be tax free and that paved way for the construction of the stadium. Issues of the design of the stadium were also a hurdle since there were numerous designs that had been suggested for the stadium (Shannon, 2008). It took a lot of time and negotiations for the contractors to come to the conclusion of the type of design the building will have.
The Cost of the Facility
The major of the cost for the stadium was incurred by the city of Cincinnati and Hamilton County. The stadium cost the city and the county $325 million (Goldberger, 2019). From the cost $280 million of the cost which is about 86% of the total cost was public financing for the stadium (Goldberger, 2019). The cost was incurred as a result of the voters increasing the sales tax by a half-center for every dollar that was approved by the voters on 1996 (Goldberger, 2019). The other cost was a result of private financing which was 14% of the total cost of building the stadium (Groupe , 2019). The exact cost of private financing was $45 million (Groupe, 2019). The cost was a result of the naming deal which the city entered into with the Great American Insurance Company. The total cost for the construction of the stadium from private and public financing was $325 million (Groupe , 2019).. At Present, the value of the stadium stands at $280M, even though the value is less than the cost that was incurred to construct the stadium.
The Major Sponsorship Agreements They Have In Place
The company has sponsorship from major companies in the US. Some of the companies that have sponsorship agreements with the stadium are Coca-Col, PNC, Kroger, P &G, Cincinnati Bell, Great American Insurance Group, and First Star Logistics, Humana, Lexus, Grippo’s potato chips, Budweiser, Delta Air Lines and TriHealth (Pahigian, & O'Connell, 2012). From this sponsorship agreement the major ones are with Lexus which has it logos displayed at the stadium’s Diamond seats. As it relates to the sponsorship deal with Grippo’s potato chips it has agreed to produce customized barbecue potato chips that feature the 150th anniversary logo for the stadium (Pahigian, & O'Connell, 2012). The sponsorship deal with Coca-Cola funds the digital exposure of the stadium and its facilities online. The LaRosa’s promotion offers free pizza to spectators every time he team strikes 11 batters (Pahigian, & O'Connell, 2012. PNC announced that it will remain as a major sponsor for the stadium throughout to 2022, as the financial adviser for the stadium (Pahigian, & O'Connell, 2012). PNC continues to sponsor the community fund by the stadium and the company also has 6 ATMs in the stadium. The sponsorship deals by the companies have made the stadium to bring in new business worth $3.2 million (Pahigian, & O'Connell, 2012). The company has used the sponsorship deals to make money that runs most of its affairs and attracting spectators to the stadium.
The Major Events Take Place in The Facility
The major event that takes place at the facility is baseball games. The stadium host major league baseball games but it also hosts other non-game day events to supplement its revenue streams (Shannon, 2008). Examples of the non-game day events are corporate meetings and seminars by companies (Pahigian, & O'Connell, 2012). The other events are wedding ceremonies by private individuals who rent space in the stadium, fundraising events and galas, holiday parties by corporate, employee appreciation events by companies, award banquets, and high school proms (Pahigian, & O'Connell, 2012). The events add to revenue streams for the stadium during days when there are no baseball games or during a break in the major baseball league. The stadium has perfect event spaces for the above events and has a website where corporates and individuals can book for event spaces. The stadium also offers people that want to have concerts spaces where music concerts can take place in Ohio (Shannon, 2008). Examples of the major concerts at the stadium are the On the Run Tour that generated over 4 million dollars for the stadium in Augusts 4 2011 (Altman, 2013). The other major concerts at the facility were the Burn It down Tour that took place in 2014, the What Makes You Country Tour in June 16 2018 and the down the rabbit hole live in august 2018 (Groupe , 2019). The stadium also host political events during campaign years. In 2004, president Bush held a campaign rally at the stadium Groupe , L. (2019).
Facility Issues That Occurred Recently
One of the issues the facility faced in 2014 had to do with seats falling apart (Groupe , 2019) This was a product of improper management of the facility. The problem took place a decade after the stadium opened doors to spectators and other events. About 39,000 seats started falling part due to poor maintenance by the stadium management something that affected its ability to host events for some time (Groupe , 2019). The impact of the issue of seats falling apart was a huge cost to replace the seats by the stadium. The repairs cost the cost $1.3 million to do repairs and replace other seats that were found to be in bad condition (Groupe, 2019). The seats started forming cracks on the plastic backs and the bottom of the seats. Some of the seats split open to open gashes and this affected the ability of the facility to host events until the seats were replaced. The problem made the stadium to be closed for the repairs and replacement of the seats. More especially the impact on the stadiums finances was that it had to incur repairs worth 1.3 million and replacement of the seats cost the stadium $4.7 million (Groupe, 2019). Through the do it yourself project, the city was able to replace 39000 seats. Since the lease with county required it to maintain the seats it had to incur the cost of repairing and replacing the seats that were damaged.
Another major issue that faced the stadium was the swarm of bees that took place before the game between the Reds and the San Francisco Giants (Groupe, 2019). The bees swarmed to the stands where some fans were and it was a big scare for the fans and players. The issues made the game between the Reds and the San Francisco Giants to delay. The impact of the issue is that it made the game be delayed and some fans ended up cancelling their tickets. This made the stadium to lose money in terms of the canceled tickets. As the bees moved above the field to the stands where fans were, they led to a commotion and some fans ended up being injured as they looked for a place to hide from the bees (Groupe, 2019). Later it was discovered that there was a hive in the park, something that happened because the management were not keen on maintaining the facility well something that made the bees to make a hive in one of the hollow pipes. The 35 minute delay cost the stadium in terms of revenues from people who were turned away before the game started.
- Altman, J. (2013). Gapper's Grand Tour: A Voyage Through Great American Ball Park. Cincinnati: Mascot Books Incorporated
- Goldberger, P. (2019). Ballpark: Baseball in the American City. Boston: Knopf Doubleday Publishing Group.
- Greg, R. (2005). Cincinnati's Crosley Field: the illustrated history of a classic ballpark . Cincinnati, Ohio : Road West Pub. Co
- Groupe , L. (2019). Sport Cincinnati: Great American Ball Park, Paul Brown Stadium, Cinergy Field, Stingers de Cincinnati, NBA All-Star Game 1966. New York: General Books LLC.
- Leventhal, J. (2006). Take Me Out to the Ballpark: An Illustrated Tour of Baseball Parks Past and Present. Black Dog & Leventhal Publishers.
- Murray, S. (30 March 2015). Great American Ball Park opens nursing suite. Retrieved from Cincinnati.com.
- Pahigian, J., & O'Connell, K. (2012). The Ultimate Baseball Road Trip, 2nd: A Fan's Guide to Major League Stadiums. New York: Lyons Press, 2012.
- Stupp, D. (2003). Opening Day at Great American Ball Park. New York: Sports Publishing L.L.C.
- Shannon, M. (2008). Riverfront Stadium : home of the Big Red Machine. Charleston, SC : Arcadia Pub.
- Stupp, D. (2003). Opening Day at Great American Ball Park. Cincinnati: Sports Publishing LLC,.
Pictures of the stadium
Negligence in Sports Organization Facilities
Any business has some liabilities that are involved mainly in legal issues. The case is not any different for the sports industry and the related organizations. However, there have been heated debates on the extent of liability that should be laid on the sports organization. Among the significant issues of concern have been the injuries that occur within the premises of the organizations and whether they can be termed as negligence (Dickson & Gray, 2012). Negligence is the unintentional harm caused to others especially clients, when the unsatisfactory amount of care or precaution is rendered to the subject. Negligence occurs when someone, more so a business owner or manager does an action that a reasonably prudent person would not do it that way. In other times it also entails the failure to take the necessary steps hence endangering the safety or well being of others. In this paper, I argue that sports organizations should be found negligent if they do not upkeep their premises as expected hence endangering the safety of participants and patrons.
As much as physical exercise and sporting are essential activities and is required for healthy living, it has been faced with challenges primarily due to the high level of injuries incurred in these activities. Although there are many causes to the high level of injuries witnessed in the area of sporting, many can be attributed to poor maintenance of sporting facilities. Injuries can be incurred from the equipment or even the general state of the premises where the sports take place (Králík, 2013). Some of the organizations host their sporting activities in old abandoned warehouses which do not only increase the risk for injury from faulty equipment but also by the structures such as the floors or other materials that may have been left over by previous users of the room.
In many cases, there has been suspected high levels of negligence among the organizations that facilitate these sporting activities hence the high levels of injury incidences. With the rise in lifestyle disease, there has been a high demand for the use of sporting facilities in the quest to keep fit hence reducing the chance of certain conditions (Masteralexis, Barr, & Hums, 2005). Consequently, the pressure on the organization to keep up with the demand has led to the lowering of the expected standards of care that they ought to accord their clients. If clients are streaming into a facility, some of the organizations are unable to turn them down hence leading to overcrowding in the facilities. Congestion within a small sporting ground increases the chances of one getting hurt mainly if different sporting activities are being carried out at the same time.
One of the significant causes of negligence can be significantly linked to overcrowding in the facilities. Once the number of clients has exceeded those that it was designed for, chances are very high that the other conduct their activities beyond the areas designated specifically for those activities. For instance in the case that one is playing baseball beyond the area that it is designated for, there is a possibility of causing injury to other participants playing different games nearby (Masteralexis, Barr, & Hums, 2005). Likewise, if children are supposed to swim in a shallow swimming pool but end up being introduced to a deeper one before they are ready due to overcrowding, a child is likely to drown. It is expected that sports organizations maintain their facilities to keep up with the demand and hence reduce the risk involved in sporting. The study there is guided by the research question "Should a sports organization be found negligent if they do not upkeep their premises to ensure the safety of participants and patrons?"
Justification of the study
Studies have shown that sports hold a very significant risk of injury. It has been indicated that at least one in every five treatments in emergency departments across the United States is related to injuries gained in sporting. Although the stakeholders in the healthcare sector defend that the net gain from the sporting activities in terms of health is higher than the risk involved, the level of injury is significantly high and needs to be addressed. On the other hand, a considerable number of people fail to participate in sporting activities due to the high number of injuries recorded in the sporting facilities. In the European Union countries, at least 5 million injuries are treated annually due to accidents that occur at sports facilities. Team sports that happen in the facilities of most sports organizations account for about 40% of all the injury cases annually in the EU countries where sporting activities are higher than other nations (Maffulli & Buono, 2013). The sporting organizations must be brought to responsibility due to the incidences that occur due to negligence.
As earlier indicated, negligence has to do with the lack of a satisfactory degree of care to clients. It is expected that the management of an organization conducts due diligence within their firm to put in place measures that help to manage the risk of occurrence of any form of negligence. Negligence includes the presence of possible hazards within the premises of the sports organization (Dean, 2019). If a sports organization that owns a gym leaves its participants and their patrons to exercise on a rough floor that is likely to cause injury on the participants in the cases they fall, that may be categorized as negligence. The management of such organizations is obliged to making sure that all the facilities are maintained to the expected standard.
In the case that a patron had reported faulty equipment that is likely to cause injury to the participants, the management is expected to replace or repair that equipment as soon as possible. In the occurrence that the administration fails to act as expected, and the dreaded occurs, the management of the organization is and can be held accountable for the event. The victim can claim compensation or file a lawsuit against the organization in such a case. Several steps are followed in the process of proving negligence on an organization (Dean, 2019). First, the complainant ought to verify that the defendant owed a duty of care in the occurrence. In the cases of participants inside the premises of sports organizations, the owners or management have an obligation of care.
Secondly, one is required to demonstrate that the management breached some level of care that affected the events that occurred. In this case, if an injury occurred as the participants were doing their regular routines within the premises of the organization, the complainant is expected to demonstrate that the occurrences that endangered their safety were facilitated by the lack of adequate care (Dean, 2019). The management failed to take some precautions hence endangering the safety of the individuals who were on their normal activities. The extent to which proper care ought to do was not met either by omission or deliberately hence failing to ensure the safety of the clients of the sports facility.
Thirdly, a complainant must prove the occurrence of actual harm. Unfortunately, within the sporting sector, some of the forms of harms are brutal and devastating. In many cases, some of the participants and patrons have suffered gruesome injuries in the cause of the exercises within the facilities. Some of them include being injured by heavy equipment when they break down as well as being injured by rough floors in the case that one fall by accident (Dean, 2019). If one can place a direct link between the injury and the lack of care or taking the necessary precautions, the management of such sports organizations can be found liable and negligent.
Finally, it is crucial that one not just proves that there is an injury that was earned at the premises but also demonstrates without reasonable doubt that it was acquired as a result of the carelessness of the organization's management. It means that if it evident that the causative for the harm could have been avoided if a greater extent of care was engaged, the organization can be found negligent (Dean, 2019). For instance, if a coach had indicated that there is a need for the repair of a weight lifting equipment, and the organization failed to do so which led to the injury of one of the participants, the organization can be found liable for such an injury.
Duty and standard care
For negligence to have occurred, the care rendered to the participants in a sports organization must fall way below the expected standard of care (Nohr, 2009). Nevertheless, the planned standard care is not a predetermined and measurable level that can be determined on a scale. It is, however, explained by speculating what should be done by a reasonable person or even the boundaries that such a person would not cross. The law, therefore, imposes an expectation of care on any person who possesses common sense. It is expected that someone who has the common sense to perceive potential dangers and therefore take the necessary precautionary measures to ensure the safety of the participants.
So that the court can prove negligence on a defendant, they refer to the objective standard of conduct. The court must determine that the accused failed to apply deliberate measures to assure the safety of individuals participating in sporting activities within their facility. It is expected that the equipment being used in a facility be maintained regularly and checked before use to ensure the safety of the users (Spengler & Hronek, 2011). For instance, equipment used in scuba diving is critical, and in the cases that they are faulty, they would place the life of the users at risk. In the fact that the gasmasks or pipes are broken and they malfunction and the user is harmed, the organization facilitating that sport should be held accountable in the case of any eventualities.
At every sport, the standard of care expected is related to the degree of risk involved in that particular sport. For every game, there are various levels of risks based on its intensity and also the nature of the sport. For instance, sports such as hockey and scuba diving have a higher risk due to their nature. The premises under which some of the ports are done must be maintained particularly for the use in this sports hence ensuring safety (Nohr, 2009). For a sport such as hockey, the sticks and the pitch must be maintained appropriately to prevent the injury of the participants, the coaches, or even the spectators. If the pitch is bumpy or even rocky, the participants may incur injuries on their legs, which organization should be held liable.
It is therefore expected of the sporting organization to take into consideration various aspects that should guide them on the level of care that they should adopt at the places where multiple sports are handled. First, the management of a facility is expected to have considered the seriousness of the potential eventuality or any form of harm on the participants. Secondly, one ought to consider the likelihood of the occurrence. In other words, how often can the dreadful events occur. Finally, it is also vital that one finds the immediacy of the imminent danger (Spengler, Connaughton, & Pittman, 2006). The court of law expects that ant person with common sense would use such three steps to make the appropriate decisions towards reducing the risk on the safety of the users of sports organizations. Failure to have done so is considered negligence.
Besides, standard care is influenced by other factors apart from common sense. First, are the written standards in a given area. Such include the statutes of government and other regulations that are documented within a state. Basic requirements and code of standards exist for equipment and can be used to prove negligence by an organization if the users of their facilities incur any harm. The policies developed by various sport regulatory bodies are critical authorities while determining the standard of care that is expected for organizations operating in that field. Many sports such as golf and football have specific agencies that regulate and set the rules on the way the games are played and the basic requirements (Zwerver, 2015). The procedural manuals for a particular facility can as well be used against it in the case that those standards are not met during participatory programs.
Other factors that determine the standard of care that is expected from sports organizations include the unwritten standards; such refer to all the common practices and expectations in the industry of sports. For every sport, there is a basic expectation of some standards that are not written, but they must be facilitated for any sport. For instance, it is a general and common practice that all football pitches be coated with grass; no matter is it is real or artificial. In the case that an organization provides a pitch which is coated; otherwise, they should be held liable in the case of any injuries (Zwerver, 2015). The other factor is the past case laws. Sports organization should consider cases that have been handled in court to improve standards of care hence avoid possible litigation on similar matters.
The law of the liability of the occupiers is an essential consideration in the examination of negligence in the case of an injury within a sports premises. The application of any law regarding negligence is dependent on the ability of the prosecution to prove its occurrence as well as a liability on the accused (Spengler & Hronek, 2011). The facility liability places the duty to protect all those who enter a property on the owner or the occupant of the same. The legal responsibility is laid with those who control the premises, and the owner may be exempted from a possible litigation. Many states in the united states, as well as even other countries across the world, have a set statute or law that in general places the management of business premises with the responsibility of assuring security to the users. The same applies to sports organizations and their facilities.
It is, therefore, the responsibility of a sports organization to ensure that their facilities are free from hazards. In a sports facility, many items may seem okay, but they end up causing significant injuries to the users of these facilities. For instance, a significant failure has been the reckless placing of unused equipment that ends up causing injuries. Also, some of the facilities are not maintained as they are supposed hence causing harm on the individuals using the facilities (Spengler & Hronek, 2011). First, all the necessary structures within the facility must be maintained to the expected standards. Such includes walls and floors of the building. Rough walls and floors are among the leading causes of injuries in the sports facility.
Most often, injuries in sports facilities are related to faulty and dangerous equipment. In most of the cases, the blames have been on the manufacturer and sometimes on the maintenance. However, though there may be disagreement on the same, the bottom line is that somebody ought to take responsibility for the injuries caused by some of this equipment. There since the equipment is within the premises of the sports organization, they ought to take responsibility. The organizations must ensure that they choose the right quality equipment and also make sure that they are in order at all times (Spengler & Hronek, 2011). As much as there may be some equipment that is substandard being sold, any organization should ensure that they present the very best to their clients.
Also, the organizations can make arrangements to improve the equipment hence reducing the risk that they perceive. For instance, any sharp ends on equipment that are being used in a busy room can be cushioned to protect the users of the room from possible injuries. Secondly, the organizations can, at times, order for equipment that is custom made to fit the conditions of the rooms that they facilitate their events (Králík, 2013). Maintenance can as well be done more frequently on the equipment to ensure that the faulty ones are not used and hence cause injury on users. The above measures are assumed to be common strategies that a sober person should be able to implement efficiently.
There are specific approaches that sports facilities can implement to reduce the level of risk. Lack of such measures in a sports facility should be used as proof for negligence in a court of law in the case of injuries. First, every organization should pan for regular internal or external inspections to ensure that all the equipment and facilities are in order, and the chance for the occurrence injury or any other form of harm is rare. In the cases that there is an injury that occurs, the firm can defend itself by proving that there had been efforts to protect the users of the facility. Secondly, there ought to be a policy that stipulates specific requirements of operations for all the sports organizations and their facilities (Hronek & Spengler, 2002). The policy should define the basic premises that such sports can be hosted and penalties for failure to comply. In the case that injuries occur due to the presence of hazards in the facilities, the liability can then easily fall on the organization.
A policy can be developed demanding that the organizations acquire insurance that covers all the participants and their coaches. In the cases of any injuries, the victims can be compensated without long legal processes. Each organization should as well be required to develop a written document that explains the various steps they have put in place to ensure safety. Safety procedures should be displayed throughout the facility to ensure that all the users are aware of what to do in case of any accidents or even in the prevention of the same (Hronek & Spengler, 2002). Standard operating procedures regarding the use of every equipment should be displayed to prevent mishandling the equipment hence causing injuries.
Sports organizations should take responsibility for the safety of the individuals that use their facilities. The organizations should ensure that all the safety measures are considered to avoid any injury to their clients. Failure to comply with the general expectations of care standards can be termed as negligence that is punishable by the law. The occupiers' liability places the duty of protecting the safety of the entrants of property on the controllers of the same. Legally, sports organizations are obliged to ensure the safety of the participants, and their patrons, which failed to do so can lead to possible litigation.
- Dean, F. L. (2019). Negligence. Retrieved from https://old.fdean.com/negligence.aspx
- Dickson, T. J., & Gray, T. L. (2012). Risk Management in the Outdoors: A Whole-of-Organisation Approach for Education, Sport and Recreation. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
- Hronek, B. B., & Spengler, J. O. (2002). Legal Liability in Recreation and Sports. Sagamore Publishing.
- Králík, M. (2013). Civil liability of sports participants for sports-related injuries in the Czech Republic. The International Sports Law Journal, 13(1-2), 176-187. doi:10.1007/s40318-013-0016-2
- Maffulli, N., & Buono, A. D. (2013). Sports and exercise injuries. Oxford Medicine Online. doi:10.1093/med/9780199642489.003.0162
- Masteralexis, L. P., Barr, C. A., & Hums, M. A. (2005). Principles and Practice of Sport Management. Burlington, MA: Jones & Bartlett Learning.
- Nohr, K. M. (2009). Managing Risk in Sport and Recreation: The Essential Guide for Loss Prevention. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
- Spengler, J. O., Connaughton, D., & Pittman, A. T. (2006). Risk Management in Sport and Recreation. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
- Spengler, J. O., & Hronek, B. B. (2011). Legal Liability in Recreation, Sports, and Tourism. Sagamore Publishing.
- Zwerver, J. (2015). Sports Injuries. Nuclear Medicine and Radiologic Imaging in Sports Injuries, 49-67. doi:10.1007/978-3-662-46491-5_4
Cite This Work
To export a reference to this article please select a referencing stye below:
Related ServicesView all
DMCA / Removal Request
If you are the original writer of this assignment and no longer wish to have your work published on the UKDiss.com website then please: