Dave O’Brien, Editor of College Sports Business News recently published an article entitled “Heat Related Football Deaths Lead to Lawsuits”, and provided some excellent suggestions for coaches and administrators to follow with regard to summer practices.
The article reminded me of a number of Connecticut Sports Law posts covering heat related issues in high school athletics including the tragic case of Commonwealth of Kentucky v. Jason David Stinson, the first reported criminal case brought against a coach in connection with a player’s on-field death. The coach was ultimately acquitted, however, the well-publicized case was bound to trigger changes in high school athletics.
Let’s revisit some of the changes that I discussed following the Stinson case:
1. Administrative Changes
The Stinson case gives cause for state legislatures, school boards and interest groups to examine their policies and procedures in an attempt to provide a safer environment for student-athletes. New laws and rules will surely result. In fact, the Commonwealth of Kentucky passed a law aimed at protecting players before the Stinson case was even tried. Coaches in the Commonwealth now must take a 4-hour online course that covers topics from temperature-related illnesses to head, neck and facial injuries.
The National Athletic Trainers’ Association recommended more stringent heat-related guidelines at the high school level. Among the recommendations were eliminating two-a-day practices during the first week of August drills and giving players more time to recuperate.
2. Contractual Changes
Although the Stinson case was prosecuted in criminal court (a civil claim has also been filed), civil claims are much more common at the high school level. Coaches, more cognizant of the liability they face, will want to ensure that their employers will provide indemnification in the event of a lawsuit. Of course, employers are highly unlikely to indemnify coaches for claims that allege beyond mere negligence and rise to the level of recklessness.
Schools, on the other hand, may require that coaches complete first-aid training as a prerequisite to employment. In addition, schools may require that a coach’s practice plans be approved by an athletic director or physician. Although such measures may appear to be over the top, schools and towns recognize that they are likely to be included in any lawsuit against a coach in the event of a player injury or death. Including such requirements into coaching contracts not only encourages compliance, but demonstrates that the school has made an attempt to protect its student-athletes by implementing a specific policy. The existence of such a policy may help protect a school if litigation arises.
3. Coaching Changes
The culture of coaching is bound to change. The tough, old-school methods of toughening a team up – especially in football – are likely to become relics of the past. Two-a-days, if they are even allowed to continue, will be carefully monitored. Coaches will have to consider the heat, whether players are properly hydrated, and whether any players have complained of not feeling well, before ordering wind sprints. Another issue, which was demonstrated by the New York Little League case discussed by Rick Reilly, concerns the teaching elements of coaching. Coaches will not only have to teach players how to tackle, but how to avoid dangerous supplements and recognize signs of heat-related problems in teammates and themselves. Documentation of the lessons taught may be equally important. Smart coaches will keep practice logs detailing the nature of drills, time of practice, performance of players and any complaints of student-athletes.
With two-a-days fast approaching, properly dealing with hydration and the heat is of the utmost importance. Coaches, Athletic Directors and School Districts should evaluate their programs to ensure that the lessons from the Stinson case have been heeded.