The Law relating to “off the Ball" contact/ Sport

19th July 2017
The Law relating to “off the Ball

“It’s Only a Game”

Sport brings together people of different backgrounds and cultures from all over the world and puts them on a level playing field where anything can happen, within the rules of the game. When emotions are running high, and tackles are being made any slight misjudgement can cause serious injury.

During the match the referee is in control of the players and if a bad challenge is made, on or off the ball, then it is up to him whether or not to punish the culprit. On 25th June 2014, during the biggest sporting competition in the world, the FIFA World Cup, Luis Suarez appeared to bite one of his opposition, in an off the ball incident, which was seen but not punished by the referee.

If you play in a contact sport then you acknowledge that by playing you are giving your consent to any injury that may occur. The fact that most sports have their own disciplinary panels means that in the majority of cases there is not only no need for criminal proceedings, but it is undesirable that there should be any. Conduct outside the rules of the game is always expected to occur in the heat of the moment, and even if a warning or sending off is given, it may not reach the required threshold for it to be a criminal assault. To be considered as criminal the conduct must be sufficiently grave enough to be categorised.

The case of Rv Barnes (2004) concerned an amateur football match the defendant tackled another player who as a result sustained a serious leg injury. At the defendants trial for the offence of unlawfully and maliciously inflicting grievous bodily, the Crown contended that the injury had been caused by his recklessness. The defendant argued that his tackle had been a fair challenge during play, and the injury was an accident. In his summary the judge made it clear that for the defendant to be found guilty, the prosecution would have to prove that what had happened was not done by way of ‘legitimate sport’. The prosecutions case was that the defendant’s action was so reckless that it could not have been in legitimate sport and so was an assault. After a four day trial he was convicted by a majority verdict of unlawfully and maliciously inflicting grievous bodily harm. He was then sentenced to 240 hours of community service and ordered to pay the compensation of £2,609 to the victim. Following this an appeal from the defence was granted successful on the grounds that the judge failed to explain to the jury what was meant by the term ‘legitimate sport’ and therefore meant that the judge’s summing-up was inadequate.

If the Uruguay international, Suarez, had bitten Georgio Chiellini in the street then it would have been seen as assault, and if he had been prosecuted and sentenced in England, then he would probably have to take part in between 180 and 240 hours of community service.

He does have form for this, and has bitten two people before. As he clearly hasn’t learnt from the previous incidents he would probably be facing an imprisonment of a couple of weeks. But as he was playing a game of football at the time of all three incidents, he was banned from all football related things for four months along with the next 9 Uruguay matches, in the most recent case.

Both Suarez and the defendant in the other case have been accused of violent and unnecessary play, but a few things make the conduct completely different in their own ways. Luis Suarez may have made a move to bite another player, off the ball, and didn’t receive the correct punishment from the referee but he was punished greatly after the match by the worldwide football governing body FIFA. However, the defendant made a sliding challenge to win the ball. The laws state that challenges outside the laws of the game may occur, which is why he was given a red card and told to leave the field of play. He didn’t try to injure the player unlike Suarez and was therefore not punished anywhere near severely.


How Banks are Cashing in on Wills image

How Banks are Cashing in on Wills

Recent headlines have reported how banks are now cashing in on Wills.

During the 1990s and early 2000s, banks offered customers low cost Wills (or sometimes even free Wills) but the small print allowed the bank to charge extortionate rates to act as Executors. It is reported that banks are expecting billions of pounds of revenue from their Will writing services and administering estates and in some cases their fees have been over £12,000 to administer an estate as they look to charge a fixed fee PLUS a percentage of the deceased’s wealth.

If you or a loved one has made a Will through a bank we would urge you to check who you have appointed as Executors and check any small print which you may have signed. If you are unsure then please speak with one of our lawyers in the Wills and Probate team who can look at your existing Will with you. It may be appropriate to make a new Will which revokes any previous Will you have made which could save your family thousands of pounds when your estate needs to be administered.

In the majority of cases, when someone has passed away we can provide the family with a quote of how much the legal fees will be so that there are no nasty surprises once the administration is complete.

Read More

Testimonials

Gemma Mayer LLB

"I would highly recommend Maples Solicitors, especially Gemma Mayer, for any conveyancing work. The level of support and professionalism was excellent at all times. I also felt if I needed to ask or clarify anything that it was not an issue. Buying and selling a house is stressful enough, but Gemma helped me through it step by step."

Anita Toal LLB BA

"I think you are brilliant. You can use my comments above. You are efficient, friendly and quite clearly very good at what you do. Mainly you don’t leave people hanging around too long for." "So easy to talk to her and she understood what I wanted. She put me at ease and I cant thank her enough"

Daven Naghen LLB

"Daven provided an excellent service, from attending the first interview with me to the final court appearance. He filled me full of confidence that he would defend me to which he did and come out with an excellent outcome in view of my position that I had put myself in."

Faye Blair LLB

Faye was excellent, sensitive and acted very well to the time constraints we faced. Great service and dealt with compassion at such sad times made the process less painful very professional.

Jamie Dobbs ACILEx

Over the last forty years I have cause to deal with many law firms both in a personal and professional capacity, including some ‘top’ London Companies. In all of those dealings I have never found anyone as proactive and so willing to offer help and advice as Jamie Dobbs. During the last two years Jamie guided my parents through the completion of Lasting Powers of Attorney. Helped myself with the use of the LPA and recently dealing with Probate and Estate Administration following their death.

Mike Pepper MA

Mike Pepper gave us excellent advice. He was always most helpful and accommodating giving lucid explanations every step of the way. Thank you Mike.

Claire Smith FCILEx

Claire Smith has been amazing in every way. I highly recommend her and I am so grateful for all her help. She’s professional on all levels, reliable, extremely organised and I will be recommending her to everyone. I’m very lucky to have had her representing me and I can’t thank her enough. She is an asset to Maples. Thanks so much Claire!