OUR VIEW: Whose fault is it?

AT ISSUE: Student's lawsuit against goal-post manufacturer unwarranted

After Ball State University won the 2001 Homecoming football game against the University of Toledo, thousands of jubilant students ran onto the field, climbed both sets of goal posts and pulled and rocked them until they fell to the ground.

Unfortunately, one student was standing near one of the sets when it came down. It fractured his leg, dislocated his thoracic vertebrae and paralyzed him.

Now that student is seeking legal action against Marty Gilman Inc., the manufacturers of the goal posts. The suit claims the company was negligent in its equipment production.

According to a copy of the lawsuit, the student and his family claim the posts were prone to snapping and bending.

While the student's legal action is understandable, it's baseless. Manufacturers cannot be responsible for accidents that result from improper use of their equipment.

Neil Gilman, the president of Marty Gilman Inc., said the posts were built to "support themselves. ... We never made any claims it would support a student."

Gilman Inc. is a reputable company; it's the official equipment supplier of the National Football League. If the company makes shoddy products, why is its equipment trusted by the world's premier football league's owners, players and administrators?

In this case, the manufacturers aren't at fault. The goal posts snapped because deliriously excited throngs of Ball State students intended to snap them and bring them to the ground -- not because the posts were defective.

The goal posts were not constructed to withstand the weight, or the desire, of students who wanted to pull them down.

The student's accident, by all means, is tragic and unfortunate. But blame cannot be placed on Gilman Inc. or its products.


Comments

More from The Daily






This Week's Digital Issue


Loading Recent Classifieds...