Referees: Ref Slaps kid, Brawl Ensues

[Rebuilt]

I fear some on this thread do not understand the basic legal principal that adults hitting children is a completely different level of guilt than a child hitting an adult.

Its not the same thing . Nor did the child assault the ref to start it. Even so, the ref could have tried to restrain the child. Not slap him. That action should cost him his job and might even land him on charges but I doubt it considering the abuse he took afterwards from the players.

 

[DyerMaker66*]

I fear some on this thread do not understand the basic legal principal that adults hitting children is a completely different level of guilt than a child hitting an adult.

Its not the same thing . Nor did the child assault the ref to start it. Even so, the ref could have tried to restrain the child. Not slap him. That action should cost him his job and might even land him on charges but I doubt it considering the abuse he took afterwards from the players.

Apparently, you're just one of those "apologists".

 

[Goonzilla]

The trouble you have is that no one has condoned or celebrated the actions of the referee, which at the end of the day were trifling, even though they were way out of order. Certainly it didn't warrant a group lynching or unrestrained beat down from others not directly involved.

You seem obsessed with this position of power thing, like a complex. You hate your boss?

For people that want to raise legal complexities about adults v children, you'll more than likely find that any laws around the justification of using force against another person actually revolve around the defence and protection of people and property or keeping the peace; and not around exacting retribution or payback. The adult v child thing really wouldn't garner a lot of consideration in the context of what happened here, where age doesn't really appear to be a factor, other than as an excuse profered for behaving like an idiot. This isn't some deadbeat parent giving their kid a thrashing.

That referee could go to trial, pretty confident of exoneration in these circumstances, even though they may have absolutely screwed up badly as a referee. The kid who attacked the ref from behind would have no such luxury. His behaviour was indefensible.

 

[cowboy82nd]

He was protecting a teammate from abuse; that's a pretty valid reason to go ape **** on someone imo.

No, it's not!!!

 

[Goonzilla]

No, it's not!!!

It's quite irrational.

 

[cowboy82nd]

I'm the apologist? You're defending child abuse because the person who committed it was an official, and now you're using non sequiturs to try to rationalize it.

Just an honest question. If it's not assault when a player attacks another player with a stick, how is it child abuse when a ref slaps a child? Both are on the ice during a game. If it's child abuse for what the ref did (and I agree that he was wrong in his actions), then it should be child abuse ever time one of these kids get into a fight or technically when they get checked, or hit. At a minimum, it should be assault when these kids even touch each other going by this whole child abuse line.

 

[Goonzilla]

Just an honest question. If it's not assault when a player attacks another player with a stick, how is it child abuse when a ref slaps a child? Both are on the ice during a game. If it's child abuse for what the ref did (and I agree that he was wrong in his actions), then it should be child abuse ever time one of these kids get into a fight or technically when they get checked, or hit. At a minimum, it should be assault when these kids even touch each other going by this whole child abuse line.

That's actually a very interesting debate. There is definitely a line there between breaking the laws of the game and criminality. Everybody consents to or accepts some level of physical risk participating in most sports, be it hockey, being fouled in basketball or soccer or getting hit in the head by a pitch. Accidental injury through carelessness or recklessness is a real risk and so too is injury through a legitimate play, getting a puck in the face or a monster hit, but where an intentional act of foul play causes serious injury then I have no issue with action by law enforcement.

I think it has even happened in the majors. Didn't Marty McSorley get charged over that incident?

 

[Goonzilla]

If a guy deliberately cross checked someone in the face and knocked out all their teeth, is there really any argument that it's part and parcel of the game? There isn't.

 

[BrianE]

The camera just barely catches it but at the 10 second mark you can see the ref hit/slap the player on the side of his head, the kid then proceeds to kick the **** out of the ref, and I don't blame him. That guy should never referee again. Looks like one or two of the parents then grab the ref and have a few choice words for him.

Unreal, lol Ref starts some crap then 2 players start giving it back. I wish that Ref was.....well i can't say it because i will be kicked off of hf.

In my Wife's home country of Colombia and the rest of Latin America these altercations between players, Officials and fans are common place. Gosh there was an incident in Brazil 2 summers ago that made this look as if nothing ever happened.

The life of sports.

 

[DyerMaker66*]

Just an honest question. If it's not assault when a player attacks another player with a stick, how is it child abuse when a ref slaps a child? Both are on the ice during a game. If it's child abuse for what the ref did (and I agree that he was wrong in his actions), then it should be child abuse ever time one of these kids get into a fight or technically when they get checked, or hit. At a minimum, it should be assault when these kids even touch each other going by this whole child abuse line.

Not at all. You consent to being body checked when you go onto the ice, just like you consent to being tackled by a linebacker when you step on the football field. You don't consent to being struck by an official.

How does a child commit child abuse?

In the United States, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), and the Department for Children and Families (DCF), define child maltreatment as any act or series of acts of commission or omission by a parent or other caregiver that results in harm, potential for harm, or threat of harm to a child

Ergo, not another child who is playing against them in sports. It's a pretty simple, black and white issue that is being needlessly complicated by some people on this board.

 

[DyerMaker66*]

No, it's not!!!

Yes, it is! If you stand by and watch a crime happen are you really any better than the people committing the crime?

 

[cowboy82nd]

Not at all. You consent to being body checked when you go onto the ice, just like you consent to being tackled by a linebacker when you step on the football field. You don't consent to being struck by an official.

How does a child commit child abuse?



Ergo, not another child who is playing against them in sports. It's a pretty simple, black and white issue that is being needlessly complicated by some people on this board.

A child can commit child abuse. It's not about the age of the abuser but the age of the abused.

 

[DyerMaker66*]

The trouble you have is that no one has condoned or celebrated the actions of the referee,

Yes, you're condoning it by demonizing the people who stood up against it.

which at the end of the day were trifling, even though they were way out of order. Certainly it didn't warrant a group lynching or unrestrained beat down from others not directly involved.

Uh, pretty sure child abuse is a damn good reason to beat someone.

You seem obsessed with this position of power thing, like a complex. You hate your boss?

1) Debate the topic, not the poster
2) You seem obsessed with trying to analyze me and my relationships with my superiors, maybe you should worry about your own relationships with your own boss (I know, you probably think they're great, right?), or the child and the ref in this case?

For people that want to raise legal complexities about adults v children, you'll more than likely find that any laws around the justification of using force against another person actually revolve around the defence and protection of people and property or keeping the peace; and not around exacting retribution or payback. The adult v child thing really wouldn't garner a lot of consideration in the context of what happened here, where age doesn't really appear to be a factor, other than as an excuse profered for behaving like an idiot. This isn't some deadbeat parent giving their kid a thrashing.

Which is worse, at least the dead beat parent thinks they're parenting. What did this ref think he was doing? Asserting his dominance over a child?

The only person who is using excuses to exonerate someone for acting like an idiot is you.

That referee could go to trial, pretty confident of exoneration in these circumstances, even though they may have absolutely screwed up badly as a referee. The kid who attacked the ref from behind would have no such luxury. His behaviour was indefensible.

Sorry, but defending a friend from abuse is not indefensible. Abusing a child and abusing power are indefensible.

 

[ForeverJerseyGirl]

I don't agree with the kids who jumped the ref for hitting their teammate, because it's too much like vigilante justice for me to condone it, though I understand that they were in a very heated situation and may have felt that they were protecting their teammate. Given their developmental stage (human brains aren't actually done forming during the teenage years) and the competitive, emotionally charged environment I assign them less blame than the ref. Not of this justifies what they did, but it does mitigate it.

The ref should not have slapped the kid. As the adult and the official, he should have possessed the emotional control not to resort to violence (hitting instead of separating the player as is typically done by officials) and the foresight to see that his behavior was only going to make a bad situation worse. He should have known that slapping the kid was only going to escalate the situation and could easily be construed as child abuse. Although child abuse laws vary, I can tell you that it's probably not a good idea to slap a kid like that if you aren't the parent (and really even if you are the parent). It's pretty unfathomable that someone living in modern society with all the concern about child abuse wouldn't realize that the optics of a ref slapping a child aren't good.

The ref was very much in the wrong, and it actually is somewhat appalling to me that he is only being suspended two months. The ref had a responsibility to maintain order and he very much failed at it; his actions brought about more chaos because of his violence and rashness, and since he is the adult and the official, we would expect more from him than from teenagers and players.

 

[cowboy82nd]

Yes, it is! If you stand by and watch a crime happen are you really any better than the people committing the crime?

You mean the coward attacking the ref from behind? You mean that assault?

 

[DyerMaker66*]

A child can commit child abuse. It's not about the age of the abuser but the age of the abused.

What category would that fall under?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_abuse

Physical abuse
Physical abuse involves physical aggression directed at a child by an adult.

We are quite clearly talking about physical abuse, yes? Unless you are referring to sexual abuse (which has no place in this discussion) it's adult or older adolescent on child.

Also:

https://www.defencelaw.com/printversion-assault.html

Protection of others

A person may use force to defend himself or anyone under his protection from assault. Persons under another's protection likely include immediate family and those with whom one has a close relationship. The force used must be limited to that which is necessary.

Self-defence

You are justified in using force to defend yourself against an unlawful assault provided you did not provoke the assault and the force you use is not meant to cause death or grievous bodily harm.

It seems pretty clear-cut that what the kids did was justified and the only person here who broke the law is the ref.

 

[DyerMaker66*]

You mean the coward attacking the ref from behind? You mean that assault?

No, that was standing up for a victim who was being pummelled by an authority figure. As noted above, you're allowed to use force to defend people you have a close relationship with (I'd say a teammate would be one of those people).

Try to spin it all you want though, I love watching you spiders weave.

 

[cowboy82nd]

What category would that fall under?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_abuse



We are quite clearly talking about physical abuse, yes? Unless you are referring to sexual abuse (which has no place in this discussion) it's adult or older adolescent on child.

Also:

https://www.defencelaw.com/printversion-assault.html



It seems pretty clear-cut that what the kids did was justified and the only person here who broke the law is the ref.

I grew up in south Florida and there was a case where a 12 year old was convicted of child abuse for beating a 5 year old girl that lived next door to her. So, I don't know where you are getting your information from, but I know first hand that a child can commit child abuse. It's happened!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[BrianE]

A child can commit child abuse. It's not about the age of the abuser but the age of the abused.

In the Chicago area there were several incidents within last 5 to 10 years where children from 7 to 12 year old range were being tried for murder after being charged for killing others of similar age bracket and younger.

 

[DyerMaker66*]

In the Chicago area there were several incidents within last 5 to 10 years where children from 7 to 12 year old range were being tried for murder after being charged for killing others of similar age bracket and younger.

What does that have to do with abuse? Abuse /= murder

 

[cowboy82nd]

No, that was standing up for a victim who was being pummelled by an authority figure. As noted above, you're allowed to use force to defend people you have a close relationship with (I'd say a teammate would be one of those people).

Try to spin it all you want though, I love watching you spiders weave.

WOW, I'm a spider now. Wait till I tell my kids. And again, I don't agree with what the ref did, but he DIDN'T pummel the kid. You keep jumping from self defense to child abuse. So, if my kid gets thrown at at a baseball game, since he is my child, I can go after the pitcher? You can't go from it's a game to child abuse. Yes, the ref was wrong, and so were the players. Anything thing else, is just spinning webs (using your analogy).

 

[DyerMaker66*]

I grew up in south Florida and there was a case where a 12 year old was convicted of child abuse for beating a 5 year old girl that lived next door to her. So, I don't know where you are getting your information from, but I know first hand that a child can commit child abuse. It's happened!!!!!!!!!!!!

You don't know where I'm getting my information from when it's in the post you just quoted?

What case was this?

 

[DyerMaker66*]

WOW, I'm a spider now. Wait till I tell my kids. And again, I don't agree with what the ref did, but he DIDN'T pummel the kid. You keep jumping from self defense to child abuse. So, if my kid gets thrown at at a baseball game, since he is my child, I can go after the pitcher?

When did I say you (an adult) could pummel the pitcher (a child)? If anything, I'm saying the exact opposite and have been doing so for this entire discussion.

You can't go from it's a game to child abuse.

Uhh, what? The children were playing the game, it's the ref who went beyond that and made it child abuse.

Yes, the ref was wrong, and so were the players. Anything thing else, is just spinning webs (using your analogy).

No, assaulting children is quite clearly more wrong than fighting an opponent in a hockey game. Fighting is a part of the game, assaulting minors is not. That's not spin, it's a fact.

 

[cowboy82nd]

You don't know where I'm getting my information from when it's in the post you just quoted?

What case was this?

I can't quote you the case but it was about 1978 or 1979. The 12 year old was actually watching the 5 year old and she beat her and beat her bad. The 12 year old was charged and convicted of child abuse. Maybe it had something to do with the 5 year old being under her care at the time, but the point is, a child was convicted of child abuse.

 

[cowboy82nd]

When did I say you (an adult) could pummel the pitcher (a child)? If anything, I'm saying the exact opposite and have been doing so for this entire discussion.


Uhh, what? The children were playing the game, it's the ref who went beyond that and made it child abuse.



No, assaulting children is quite clearly more wrong than fighting an opponent in a hockey game. Fighting is a part of the game, assaulting minors is not. That's not spin, it's a fact.

So, minors can assault minors in a hockey game?