Assault in Hockey game, reprecussons for paintball?

[Tyger]

Work with me here a moment.

If you haven't seen it, take a look at this CTV footage(click on the TOP video link on the right there, labeled "Todd Battis on the punch that's giving the NHL a black eye 2:24")

It's from a hockey game played in Vancouver. Col. Avs Vs. Vancouver Canucks, Todd Bertuzzi takes Steve Moore down HARD. The general feel is that this was a "payback" hit for a previous incident in Feb. The end result is that Moore has fractured vertebrea (broken neck), a concussion, as well as deep lacerations on Moore's face, and he will be out for the remainder of the season. As of right now, Bertuzzi is suspended, and the NHL will be measuring his fate later today (Thursday).

So how this is important to paintball? This is the second time that Vancouver police has investigated an assault on the hockey ice. Marty McSorley was charged with assault after taking down Donald Brashear who was playing for Vancouver at the time. He was given 18 month "conditional discharge" and hasn't played for the NHL since.

It just makes me wonder. If a paintball player viciously overshoots another player, could it be possible to charge them wiht assault? Don't roll your eyes and say "Those things happen in paintball." Fights and punches "happen" in hockey, and this is the second time in four years the authorities have stepped in. It's no longer "boys will be boys". The field of sports is now accountable for things like assaults between players. So it's something that needs to be addressed.

Related to that, if a kid gets torched up, is that child abuse? This is a serious question. Where does a player's accountability begin? And most importantly, where does a sport / game like paintball draw the line?

We all accept a limited ammount of accountability, and we accept that we will take a little pain when we play. How much accountability does the opponent have upon inflicting pain upon you? How much accountability do you have when you light someone up as "payback" for last game? Or when you overshoot someone becasue you swear he's wiping? Or even physical assaults with fists or paintguns in sime instances?

Just watching sportscenter, thinking about that.

-Tyger

(Sorry about the bad linking there, I've been outsmarted by the Canadian Broadcasting... I can't figure out how to just link to the video...)

[rkjunior303]

I think this boils down to if this was a case where it was a premeditated attack... While this was a retaliation for a hit that took place a -few- games ago (keep in mind, this is the 2nd time the Avs/Van have played eachother since the 'incident'), Moore dropped his gloves earlier in the game and took part in a fight that was probably due in part of that hit...

As for Bertuzzi -- He knew what he was doing. It was a complete attempt to injure the player. A sucker punch to the back of the head then riding him to the ice isn't an 'accident' no matter what happens.. No matter how much emotion or adrenaline was pumping, he had to plan it out.... I am an avid hockey fan and I do not oppose fighting in hockey. I think it serves a place to get a team pumped up or to police a situation. With the Instigator penalty, I think it made the situation a little worse by not allowing players to police incidents such as the hit Moore. If there was no instigator penalty, it would have allowed a player to confront Moore DURING the game where the original incident happened and 'fix' the situation right there.

Bertuzzi should be suspended for this year AND probably a good portion of -next- if not all of it... As for if there is any reprocussions in paintball, if you look at the high rates of fire these markers are pumping out these days -- no. I don't think they can make a valid case of it unless someone literally stood over someone and rifled them in the back with 20 rounds point blank.


Just my 2 cents.

[Tyger]

But my question is what does this mean to paintball?

If someone comes over the top of a bunker, shoots an opponent 30+ times in the head / neck, is this assault? If a team is trying to intimidate opponents in an X-Ball match by blasting them 15-20 times point blank in sensitive areas, can the cops be called?

And on the rec front, if a kid get shot by an adult, and even worse by their PARENT, and it raises welts, can it be considered child abuse? A lot of people will roll thier eyes when they read that, but this incident, and the legal fallout from it, REALLY makes me think.

If it was just an internal suspension, that's one thing. When the police step in and "Investigte an assault" in a sports arena, it becomes another. This has paintball relavance, considering that a part of the game involves shooting another person with a pellet, which causes a small injury. (a welt is an injury, a SMALL one, but it's still there)

-Tyger

[rkjunior303]

I think you have to look at the nature of the injury.

In paintball -- getting shot is the nature of the game. It is required to complete a certain task within that game, regardless if they get hit with 1 shot or 15 in my opinion. I think, by stepping on the field, the players assume the risk that they are going to get shot -- regardless of the number of rounds.

In hockey -- the object of the game isn't to skate around and punch people in the head. It's to score more goals than your opponent utilizing a mix of offensive and defensive tactics. A punch in general isn't part of the basic premise of the game -- while it is greatly accepted that a fight in hockey does happen.

It is defintely a catch-22 because you defintely can make a case either way. There is defintely a can of worms to be opened if this goes to a trial.... While I think this case is due to the severity of the injury what's to stop a local rec league player to not sue/press charges while playing in a league game where he gets cross-checked standing in front of the net and has an arm broken, or something to that effect.. Ya know?

[Tyger]

That's not nessarily true, as most rules state that you eliminate an opponent when they are shot with "a paintball". Singular. We tolerate leeway in that because we "generally" accept that in the time one ball hits you, there's some in the air.

Paintball players assume some risk, true. But I know for a fact that I do not assume the risk of having some yabo shoot me 50 times in a deadbox because he can. I'm also looking at this from the perspective of an "outsider" looking in. If they see a kid take a paintball and begin to cry (which I've seen!) they will make assumptions. They will also make assumptions about seeing someone get shot 10+ times point blank.

Getting hit in hockey is part of the nature of the game too. It's why hockey players get all annoyed when the police step into thier game, they see it as a "part of the game". Paintball players see it that way too. But if the NHL isn't immune to legal inquiry from police, what about paintball?

-Tyger

[rkjunior303]

True I see your point there.. It defintely is one giant mess I'm pretty much rambling anyways -- I'm sitting at my desk and I haven't had my morning coffee yet! It will be interesting to see how this affects any other sports (including paintball) that involves contact of some sort -- wether it be a hit, getting struck by a paintball, etc.

[Jazzman]

Just saw the verdict on Bertuzzi... he's suspended for the rest of the season, including the playoffs.

With paintball, I know that when I step out onto the field, chances are I'm going to get shot (especially if I'm playing poorly). I'll even accept a fair share of extra hits, as Tyger says, because there's a few in the air. There is a difference, however, in what I'll deem acceptable in a rec game and in a tournament. Getting shot 10-15 times in a walk on game is simply not acceptable. I've seen it happen before, and the refs handled the situation by booting the player who overshot. I imagine that someday, some parent will file charges against another kid's family for similar reasons. Here's a question to the more hard core tourney players out there.... what is acceptable as far as bonus balls go? How many times are you willing to get hit before you get mad?

[RusskiX]

The penalty and future regulation of hockey as a result of this incident is purely a factor of the severity of injury. If Moore had gotten right back up with a cut lip and skated off, Bertuzzi would hav gotten a 5 minute major or a one game suspension at most.

All fighting in hockey is premeditated, this incident is no different. The "unintended" level of injury is the difference.

Same goes for paintball. Light some one up and you may face a sanction for the individual tourney in question, no more. The problem will arise when someone loses an eye or suffers a permanently debilitating injury and the outside world learns of it. And the majority of the population will not learn about it, unless it gets caught on some sensational tape aired by mainstream media.

I'm sure hockey will endure some soul searching and enforcers will be on their best behavior for a while. But this kind of incident will probably occur again despite the amount of regulation, due to adrenaline and tradition.

[mrhooie]

They had a lawyer from Vancouver on CTV's Sportsnet this AM

He came up with something that bears repeating.

If this happened to someone at a night club - it's assault

But when you enter a hockey rink as a player, you are ginving a level of consent. It's physical play and you consent to that physical play.

Now - what Todd did was wrong, he's distraught over it, he's being punished by the league.

The punishment definatly fits the crime - let the league deal with it, the police need not be involved.

So as far as paintball goes - the punishment must fit the crime.

[D-CeLL]

"But when you enter a hockey rink as a player, you are ginving a level of consent. It's physical play and you consent to that physical play."

Physical play yes, what Bertuzzi did NO.

Bertuzzi, I hope he gets charged with assault, and if I had my way he would be kicked out of the NHL. There is no reason for that kind of crap. Turn the guy around so he can be in a position to defend himself better. Don't blast him in the back of the head and drive his face into the ice. GG smash his face and breaking his neck.

[ShooterJM]

Originally posted by RusskiX
If Moore had gotten right back up with a cut lip and skated off, Bertuzzi would hav gotten a 5 minute major or a one game suspension at most.

All fighting in hockey is premeditated, this incident is no different. The "unintended" level of injury is the difference.

Actually this isn't the same. Witness the "bounty" placed on moore by vancouver. Also note that it was a clean hit that moore gave to naslund. The Cancuks even said in their statement that "There needs to be retribution wether it was clean hit or not". Hockey fights are traditional and have a very strict code of conduct. This incident is VERY different.

This is akin to a paintball player clocking another player in the head by swinging his gun and tank at him. Yeah it happened during the sporting event, but it's no more an accepted part of the game as monica seles gettings stabbed by a crazed fan, or tonya harding's whack a knee program.

[SlartyBartFast]

Originally posted by mrhooie
But when you enter a hockey rink as a player, you are ginving a level of consent. It's physical play and you consent to that physical play.

Not quite entirely true.

It's in the same league as the consent forms you sign before an activity absolving the organiser of responsibility.

You are giving consent to an UNDERSTOOD level of risk for the NORMAL/ACCEPTABLE consequences of NORMAL/ACCEPTABLE play/participation.

If can be proven that the act was outside the boundary of the consent (whether implied or stated on a release form) the player or the organiser can be held responsible (say if injured/killed due to an organisers neglect).

Impact on paintball? Well, it only highlights what is already part of the legal system in north-america. If you are injured due to another player acting contrary to the accepted practices of the game, while contravening the rules, or ignoring the instructions of recognised officials, you the victim or any spectators could lodge a complaint with the police.

An example on AO right know would be Butterfingers admission to bonus-balling.

http://www.automags.org/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=128895

No matter how low the actions of the cheater, the player that had a hopper of paint emptied onto him while in a fetal position could register a complaint with the police.

It would be up to a judge to determine if Butter's actions were consistent with the implied consent to risk of paintball or not.

Butters has admitted that the emptying of the hopper load was premeditated, against the rules, punishable by game officials, and recognises that he inflicted pain on the victim.

If I was him, I'd delete that thread PRONTO as the victim could quote it in their case against him.

[RusskiX]

Originally posted by ShooterJM


Actually this isn't the same. Witness the "bounty" placed on moore by vancouver. Also note that it was a clean hit that moore gave to naslund. The Cancuks even said in their statement that "There needs to be retribution wether it was clean hit or not". Hockey fights are traditional and have a very strict code of conduct. This incident is VERY different.

This is akin to a paintball player clocking another player in the head by swinging his gun and tank at him. Yeah it happened during the sporting event, but it's no more an accepted part of the game as monica seles gettings stabbed by a crazed fan, or tonya harding's whack a knee program.

Meh, I personally don't think it was Bertuzzi's intention to end Moore's career or break his spine. You make it sound like Vancouver as a team wanted Moore dead.

Was it a dirty hit? YES! Did vancouver premeditate the actual result? Probably not. They wanted to send a message, fair or unfair. But the scope of the injuries is what sets this apart and warranted the intervention of authorities. Will this action be prosecuted outside of hockey? Probably due to the nature and extent of the injuries.

[funkykarl]

I think that what Bertuzzi did was completely uncalled for. I've been playing hockey almost all of my life, and understand the implied consent involved in lacing up the skates and stepping on the ice. If you give somebody a cheap shot, you can pretty much expect some sort of a retaliation; whether it be somebody picking a fight to your face or something else, you do not expect to get your face mangled and your neck broken without a chane to defend yourself. Should the cops be brought in? I think that should be up to Moore. Either way, I think the league should have dealt with Bertuzzi a bit more harshly.
When playing paintball, tourney or rec, I accept the fact that when I get hit I'll probably take the first plus the balls that were already flying through the air, plus maybe a few more due to the excitement of the game and the adrenaline pumping. I shouldn't be expected to tolerate, however, people shooting 20 bonus balls into my side after I've clearly been hit and/or have my hand in the air because I bunkered somebody last round or because somebody suspects me of wiping. If you have a problem like that, take it to the refs before you take it into your own hands.
(sorry if this just sounds like a summary of previous posts, it's just what came to mind after reading the thread).

[ShooterJM]

Originally posted by RusskiX
Meh, I personally don't think it was Bertuzzi's intention to end Moore's career or break his spine. You make it sound like Vancouver as a team wanted Moore dead.

Was it a dirty hit? YES! Did vancouver premeditate the actual result? Probably not. They wanted to send a message, fair or unfair. But the scope of the injuries is what sets this apart and warranted the intervention of authorities. Will this action be prosecuted outside of hockey? Probably due to the nature and extent of the injuries.

Agreed, I don't think Bertuzzi intended to cause such a severe injury, but I think it's clear that the hit itself was premeditated. Did he decide beforehand to drive moore's face into the ice? Probably not. Did the Canucks organization foster the idea of the bounty and retaliation, of course. I've been searching for any response other then crawford's by any Vancouver team member and haven't found any.