Fan Hit by Koepka's Drive - **MERGED TOPICS**

[gatorpedsMD]

This is a joke...Nobody forced her to attend the event. Nobody forced her to stand in a landing zone.

(1) What could the event organizers done? Maybe they should just remove all fans. Keeps fans safe. Keeps players from getting breaks on errant shots.

(2) What did she do to prevent getting hit? I have been to both the memorial and bridgestone invitational twice. I never once stood 20 yards in front of the tee box. Never stood in the landing area for drives. My eye-sight is corrected to 20/20 but I usually can track a shot even if I am few hundred yards away. Maybe she was not paying attention?

 

Either way, spectators should take some personal responsibility.

 

Your question #1 is really what the lawsuit would deal with I suppose. I am guessing the argument would be that if the situation was knowingly dangerous, the tournament should not have allowed people to stand there.

 

Much as we would sometimes like, stupidity isn't always accountability. If you host something, the law seems to think in some cases that you have a responsibility to protect people from their stupidity

 

Remember the most notorious case ever.... someone getting awarded 1M for spilling coffee on themselves

 

Read that coffee case again. It wasnt that simple. Its was due to neglegance on mcdonalds part.

 

 

u could argue negligence here if: the player did not yell 4 and point in direction of the ball, the ball spotter on the tee did not wave the sign towards that side of the gallery, and finally the local marshal did not tell the people to take cover.

 

at the players a ball came within 5 feet of me and all these things happened which assisted in me/others not getting hit. I could see an argument if this proper procedure was not followed that she could have a case.

[MtlJeff]

This is a joke...Nobody forced her to attend the event. Nobody forced her to stand in a landing zone.

(1) What could the event organizers done? Maybe they should just remove all fans. Keeps fans safe. Keeps players from getting breaks on errant shots.

(2) What did she do to prevent getting hit? I have been to both the memorial and bridgestone invitational twice. I never once stood 20 yards in front of the tee box. Never stood in the landing area for drives. My eye-sight is corrected to 20/20 but I usually can track a shot even if I am few hundred yards away. Maybe she was not paying attention?

 

Either way, spectators should take some personal responsibility.

 

Your question #1 is really what the lawsuit would deal with I suppose. I am guessing the argument would be that if the situation was knowingly dangerous, the tournament should not have allowed people to stand there.

 

Much as we would sometimes like, stupidity isn't always accountability. If you host something, the law seems to think in some cases that you have a responsibility to protect people from their stupidity

 

Remember the most notorious case ever.... someone getting awarded 1M for spilling coffee on themselves

 

Read that coffee case again. It wasnt that simple. Its was due to neglegance on mcdonalds part.

 

Negligence is not a static thing that's easily defined. I'm sure they would argue there was negligence here

 

Wasn't McDonald's negligence simply not writing on the cup that the coffee was hot, or properly securing a lid? Many would argue those things are pretty basic things for a consumer to know

[playa]

the easy answer here is the ryder cup makes money hand over fist. they should pay for reasonable medical care here on such a serious injury, regardless of liability, just in the spirit of fan experience. pga doesnt wanna give up $ to players other than some charity money, at least do this.

I agree completely but think she is entitled to more than just reasonable medical care. If she has lost sight in that eye she should receive a hefty damages payout too. I hope I'm never in that position, but the psychological damage of having only one functioning eye would be immense. This is a lifelong injury that will affect her in all kinds of ways. There areany posters quick to take the side of organizers and shift responsibility to the spectator, but trying walking in her shoes before getting on your high horse and writing this off as an unfortunate accident.

If it were your wife, daughter, sister, friend would you be so quick to say it was her fault? Or worry about precedents thatay hurt the organizers? That's what insurance is for.

 

Who pays for the damages payout?

 

The one that pays should be the one at FAULT.

 

So whos at fault here. And what neglegence was present from the faulted party?

 

You dont deserve a huge chunk of money just because something happened.

 

Someone should pay you because they were neglegent.

The organizers charged good money for tickets to the event,therfore they are charged with a duty of care to all paying attendees. It would be reasonable to expect that part of that duty of care would involve minimizing the risk of serious injury such as a golf ball blowing out an eye and leaving you permanently blind in that eye, and being responsible for compensation. I don't believe negligence is needed, but even without knowing all the facts I would expect it wouldn't be difficult to show negligence on some part by organizers or staff.

There are many here who seem to think it's the fans responsibility to know where to stand and how to react etc, but shouldn't the organizers be aware of the risks and take responsibility for the consequences?

It's easy for keyboard warriors to take the intellectual high ground and remove emotions from the argument, but there is a person who paid to see an event and who is now facing the prospect of life with one eye.

It's like saying a police officer who is shot and seriously injured by a perp doesn't deserve compensation cause he knew the risks when he signed up.

And so called disclaimers aren't worth the paper they're written on without signatures of the so called agreeing parties.

 

[bodhi555]

Must admit I love all the people saying that in an idea world this wouldn't have gone to court. Sadly it didn't happen in an ideal world, it happened in France, so even though it wasn't really anyone's fault (there were plenty of shouts) someone has to be held responsible.

 

To me it was just one of those things - if you go to see a pro sports event where people are hitting 1.5 inch wide projectiles at 180 mph + then occasionally one will end up hitting a fan. Brooks didn't aim at her, she didn't get in the way of the ball - but at the end of the day these things will happen. She's been well looked after, Brooks has no blame in his direction, so what's the issue?

[playa]

Must admit I love all the people saying that in an idea world this wouldn't have gone to court. Sadly it didn't happen in an ideal world, it happened in France, so even though it wasn't really anyone's fault (there were plenty of shouts) someone has to be held responsible.

 

To me it was just one of those things - if you go to see a pro sports event where people are hitting 1.5 inch wide projectiles at 180 mph + then occasionally one will end up hitting a fan. Brooks didn't aim at her, she didn't get in the way of the ball - but at the end of the day these things will happen. She's been well looked after, Brooks has no blame in his direction, so what's the issue?

No issue the way you describe it, but some here think she owes Koepka an apology for costing him a few yards of roll. I also disagree about responsibility. Someone does have to be held accountable, even if it's nobody's fault. If it all came down to who was at fault or who was negligent the one with the deepest pockets and best Lawyers would always Win.

[bodhi555]

Must admit I love all the people saying that in an idea world this wouldn't have gone to court. Sadly it didn't happen in an ideal world, it happened in France, so even though it wasn't really anyone's fault (there were plenty of shouts) someone has to be held responsible.

 

To me it was just one of those things - if you go to see a pro sports event where people are hitting 1.5 inch wide projectiles at 180 mph + then occasionally one will end up hitting a fan. Brooks didn't aim at her, she didn't get in the way of the ball - but at the end of the day these things will happen. She's been well looked after, Brooks has no blame in his direction, so what's the issue?

No issue the way you describe it, but some here think she owes Koepka an apology for costing him a few yards of roll. I also disagree about responsibility. Someone does have to be held accountable, even if it's nobody's fault. If it all came down to who was at fault or who was negligent the one with the deepest pockets and best Lawyers would always Win.

 

Nope, I would say it's what we call over here an accident. If between the PGA of America, the European Tour and The Ryder Cup someone picks up the tab and looks after her after the accident, I'd call that a win tbh.

[doublehans]

This is a joke...Nobody forced her to attend the event. Nobody forced her to stand in a landing zone.

(1) What could the event organizers done? Maybe they should just remove all fans. Keeps fans safe. Keeps players from getting breaks on errant shots.

(2) What did she do to prevent getting hit? I have been to both the memorial and bridgestone invitational twice. I never once stood 20 yards in front of the tee box. Never stood in the landing area for drives. My eye-sight is corrected to 20/20 but I usually can track a shot even if I am few hundred yards away. Maybe she was not paying attention?

 

Either way, spectators should take some personal responsibility.

 

Your question #1 is really what the lawsuit would deal with I suppose. I am guessing the argument would be that if the situation was knowingly dangerous, the tournament should not have allowed people to stand there.

 

Much as we would sometimes like, stupidity isn't always accountability. If you host something, the law seems to think in some cases that you have a responsibility to protect people from their stupidity

 

Remember the most notorious case ever.... someone getting awarded 1M for spilling coffee on themselves

 

Read that coffee case again. It wasnt that simple. Its was due to neglegance on mcdonalds part.

 

Yep, its funny people use that as the height of ridiculousness. The media made it seem that way because it sold papers, but it really wasnt so simple as the headlines screamed it was.

[doublehans]

Must admit I love all the people saying that in an idea world this wouldn't have gone to court. Sadly it didn't happen in an ideal world, it happened in France, so even though it wasn't really anyone's fault (there were plenty of shouts) someone has to be held responsible.

 

To me it was just one of those things - if you go to see a pro sports event where people are hitting 1.5 inch wide projectiles at 180 mph + then occasionally one will end up hitting a fan. Brooks didn't aim at her, she didn't get in the way of the ball - but at the end of the day these things will happen. She's been well looked after, Brooks has no blame in his direction, so what's the issue?

No issue the way you describe it, but some here think she owes Koepka an apology for costing him a few yards of roll. I also disagree about responsibility. Someone does have to be held accountable, even if it's nobody's fault. If it all came down to who was at fault or who was negligent the one with the deepest pockets and best Lawyers would always Win.

 

Nope, I would say it's what we call over here an accident. If between the PGA of America, the European Tour and The Ryder Cup someone picks up the tab and looks after her after the accident, I'd call that a win tbh.

 

Thats the thing. This doesnt really have to be about being forced to pay. Its just sthg with all the money involved here those entities should step up and take care of it. If she wants some large damages payout, I get having lawyers involved, but taking care of the medical bills etc is just doing the right thing as a host to such a huge event.

[MtlJeff]

This is a joke...Nobody forced her to attend the event. Nobody forced her to stand in a landing zone.

(1) What could the event organizers done? Maybe they should just remove all fans. Keeps fans safe. Keeps players from getting breaks on errant shots.

(2) What did she do to prevent getting hit? I have been to both the memorial and bridgestone invitational twice. I never once stood 20 yards in front of the tee box. Never stood in the landing area for drives. My eye-sight is corrected to 20/20 but I usually can track a shot even if I am few hundred yards away. Maybe she was not paying attention?

 

Either way, spectators should take some personal responsibility.

 

Your question #1 is really what the lawsuit would deal with I suppose. I am guessing the argument would be that if the situation was knowingly dangerous, the tournament should not have allowed people to stand there.

 

Much as we would sometimes like, stupidity isn't always accountability. If you host something, the law seems to think in some cases that you have a responsibility to protect people from their stupidity

 

Remember the most notorious case ever.... someone getting awarded 1M for spilling coffee on themselves

 

Read that coffee case again. It wasnt that simple. Its was due to neglegance on mcdonalds part.

 

Yep, its funny people use that as the height of ridiculousness. The media made it seem that way because it sold papers, but it really wasnt so simple as the headlines screamed it was.

 

I read the case again...it was because the coffee was served "too" hot as to constitute a burn hazard. But again, you could just as easily argue that it's the consumers responsibility not to pour it on themselves.

 

Re-reading the case actually was fun because I had forgotten the legal arguments I suppose. But if anything, it doesn't change my thoughts here. The case probably had merit even though many would still argue its ridiculous and on the consumer

[Medic]

Read an updated report today and she lost the globe - no chance of getting sight back from what the article said.

 

Sad. Very.

 

It could have been much worse - a strike in the head could easily kill.

 

This really does need to be a lesson for those who don't think twice about hitting into others or not shouting a warning if a shot goes astray. I cannot imagine how Brooks feels about the situation now that the true severity has come out.

[Event^Horizon]

This is a joke...Nobody forced her to attend the event. Nobody forced her to stand in a landing zone.

(1) What could the event organizers done? Maybe they should just remove all fans. Keeps fans safe. Keeps players from getting breaks on errant shots.

(2) What did she do to prevent getting hit? I have been to both the memorial and bridgestone invitational twice. I never once stood 20 yards in front of the tee box. Never stood in the landing area for drives. My eye-sight is corrected to 20/20 but I usually can track a shot even if I am few hundred yards away. Maybe she was not paying attention?

 

Either way, spectators should take some personal responsibility.

 

Your question #1 is really what the lawsuit would deal with I suppose. I am guessing the argument would be that if the situation was knowingly dangerous, the tournament should not have allowed people to stand there.

 

Much as we would sometimes like, stupidity isn't always accountability. If you host something, the law seems to think in some cases that you have a responsibility to protect people from their stupidity

 

Remember the most notorious case ever.... someone getting awarded 1M for spilling coffee on themselves

 

Read that coffee case again. It wasnt that simple. Its was due to neglegance on mcdonalds part.

 

Yep, its funny people use that as the height of ridiculousness. The media made it seem that way because it sold papers, but it really wasnt so simple as the headlines screamed it was.

 

I read the case again...it was because the coffee was served "too" hot as to constitute a burn hazard. But again, you could just as easily argue that it's the consumers responsibility not to pour it on themselves.

 

Re-reading the case actually was fun because I had forgotten the legal arguments I suppose. But if anything, it doesn't change my thoughts here. The case probably had merit even though many would still argue its ridiculous and on the consumer

 

I concur. Yes, there are instances of negligence and they should be adjudicated as such, but by the same token in some of these suits individual responsibility should bear some weight.

[Golfer4Life]

Koepkaaaaaaaaa!

[Titleist 670]

Read an updated report today and she lost the globe - no chance of getting sight back from what the article said.

 

Sad. Very.

 

It could have been much worse - a strike in the head could easily kill.

 

This really does need to be a lesson for those who don't think twice about hitting into others or not shouting a warning if a shot goes astray. I cannot imagine how Brooks feels about the situation now that the true severity has come out.

 

I always yell "fore", but it's hard for people to hear when they're 415 yards away and I missed the fairway by 2 yards.

[cgbm]

Its funny to me that something terrible happens and people automatically say “someone owes me money”

 

Who would pay if a meteorite dropped from the sky on your foot and broke it?

 

Somebody owes me!

[Titleist 670]

Its funny to me that something terrible happens and people automatically say “someone owes me money”

 

Who would pay if a meteorite dropped from the sky on your foot and broke it?

 

Somebody owes me!

 

Depends on the circumstance. I don't know about this tournament, but if there are marshals or volunteers there who are going to help the gallery be safe in some manner (either by indicating a tee shot is about to be hit, or is wayward) and they don't do it, perhaps there is some liability there, especially since this woman lost her eyesight in one eye.

 

I don't have that big of an issue where there appears to be some negligence, of people wanting their medical bills covered, but anything frivolous is a different story.

[cgbm]

Its funny to me that something terrible happens and people automatically say “someone owes me money”

 

Who would pay if a meteorite dropped from the sky on your foot and broke it?

 

Somebody owes me!

 

Depends on the circumstance. I don't know about this tournament, but if there are marshals or volunteers there who are going to help the gallery be safe in some manner (either by indicating a tee shot is about to be hit, or is wayward) and they don't do it, perhaps there is some liability there, especially since this woman lost her eyesight in one eye.

 

I don't have that big of an issue where there appears to be some negligence, of people wanting their medical bills covered, but anything frivolous is a different story.

 

The severity of the injury should not dictate liability.

[Golfer4Life]

I guess to some the Marshal should have put his or her own eye on the line. Give me a break!

[Golfjack]

Terrible situation, but I do think obviously she wasn't paying attention, and probably didn't think the drive would go that far. To me the tournament should not allow spectators to stand in the driving landing areas off the tee. It's hard to spot off the tee due to distance, and some people just don't pay attention all the time (it's a really long day out on the course, and for non golf nerds it's hard to be 100 pct committed). I would think though that on the back of the ticket the terms probably specify and absolve them of any physical injury. Nobody reads that stuff obviously. It's kind of like if you are out playing 18 holes, you don't hit until the prior group is out of range. Thus spectators should not be allowed to be in the 280-380 area for pro tournaments maybe.

[toddnt]

Terrible situation, but I do think obviously she wasn't paying attention, and probably didn't think the drive would go that far. To me the tournament should not allow spectators to stand in the driving landing areas off the tee. It's hard to spot off the tee due to distance, and some people just don't pay attention all the time (it's a really long day out on the course, and for non golf nerds it's hard to be 100 pct committed). I would think though that on the back of the ticket the terms probably specify and absolve them of any physical injury. Nobody reads that stuff obviously. It's kind of like if you are out playing 18 holes, you don't hit until the prior group is out of range. Thus spectators should not be allowed to be in the 280-380 area for pro tournaments maybe.

Wouldn't fly, Ive seen pros shank it before in events. So, you wouldn't have fans off the tee area?

[Golfjack]

Terrible situation, but I do think obviously she wasn't paying attention, and probably didn't think the drive would go that far. To me the tournament should not allow spectators to stand in the driving landing areas off the tee. It's hard to spot off the tee due to distance, and some people just don't pay attention all the time (it's a really long day out on the course, and for non golf nerds it's hard to be 100 pct committed). I would think though that on the back of the ticket the terms probably specify and absolve them of any physical injury. Nobody reads that stuff obviously. It's kind of like if you are out playing 18 holes, you don't hit until the prior group is out of range. Thus spectators should not be allowed to be in the 280-380 area for pro tournaments maybe.

Wouldn't fly, Ive seen pros shank it before in events. So, you wouldn't have fans off the tee area?

Risk management buddy. You can't rule out all spots. Shanks are I'm guessing very infrequent for pros.

[lopey986]

I can see from the way this topic has continued on that a lot of people have stayed at the Holiday Inn Express recently.

[Hankshank]

A lady got hit by a ball at the RC and seems unfortunate enough to have lost her sight on one eye.

It was all over CNN and a lot of newspapers.

It's not exactly the first time someone has been hit hard, I can think of a dozen times when I have seen it on TV the last years.

The pro's seem to have gotten better the last year or so, shouting "fore". But I suppose it's true, like Koepka says, that its kind of impossible to hear a call from 270+ yards out. Could there be anything done to increase spectator safety?

 

When I watch European Tour events here in Scandinavia I try to avoid places where stray balls from the current pairings might end up, and I have not even been close to have been hit by a ball.

 

Sometimes, like at the 17 at Wentworth this years European tour PGA Championship the spectators are standing on places where the players don't even see where the balls end up. It was like a hailstorm of balls raining over people. And at Riviera there was a crazy dogleg with people behind it being hit several times.

 

I dont mean that people should go to golf tournaments in knights armours. But maybe something could be done to decrease the hit rate somewhat?

[Always_rough]

First, I don't think it's a problem. But for those who do, I think the problem is actually pretty easy to fix.

 

First, start with something in the ticket stating how standing at certain parts of the golf courses are more dangerous than others, for example next to fairways instead of the tee box and a safe way off of the greens (Unless Tom Kite's teeing off).

 

Second, place signs along the fairway in areas where the balls are likely to land/go of course, so around 230-330 yards off the tee boxes. Signs should read about what to do if fore is yelled, for example turn away, cover head with hands. Should also read to not LOOK for the ball.

 

Third, and kinda extra, you could have certain areas cordoned off to refuse to allow patrons to stand, but I think this is a little extreme.

[nyrican52884]

It's the same with baseball. Fans want to be as close as possible to get the ultimate experience. Fans want to feel like they're on the field.

 

We all understand the risks at sporting events. The challenge with golf is that the ball is still in play when it goes stray, unlike baseball, so you can't put covers or glass enclosures around the fans. People placement will always be second guessed when these things happen.

 

It's unfortunate and a challenging situation. There's not much time for a warning, and hearing the warning is difficult from far away as mentioned.

[Hankshank]

 

Third, and kinda extra, you could have certain areas cordoned off to refuse to allow patrons to stand, but I think this is a little extreme.

It's extreme, granted, but left green on Wentworth 17 is such an area.

[gatorpedsMD]

Its funny to me that something terrible happens and people automatically say “someone owes me money”

 

Who would pay if a meteorite dropped from the sky on your foot and broke it?

 

Somebody owes me!

 

NASA

[wcbjr]

First, I don't think it's a problem. But for those who do, I think the problem is actually pretty easy to fix.

 

First, start with something in the ticket stating how standing at certain parts of the golf courses are more dangerous than others, for example next to fairways instead of the tee box and a safe way off of the greens (Unless Tom Kite's teeing off).

 

Second, place signs along the fairway in areas where the balls are likely to land/go of course, so around 230-330 yards off the tee boxes. Signs should read about what to do if fore is yelled, for example turn away, cover head with hands. Should also read to not LOOK for the ball.

 

Third, and kinda extra, you could have certain areas cordoned off to refuse to allow patrons to stand, but I think this is a little extreme.

 

Or, ya know, don't go to an event with flying golf balls if you don't want the risk of being hit. But yeah, the passive signage wouldn't hurt. That wouldn't alter the patron experience much.

[lumberman2462]

I’m surprised it doesn’t happen more often.

 

The nightmare scenario is that a small child gets seriously injured or killed.

 

I’ve been to tournaments where I’ve seen newborns being carried in those belly backpacks....or whatever they’re called.

[dcmidnight]

I’m surprised it doesn’t happen more often.

 

I'm stunned it doesn't. There are hundreds of thousands of tee balls hit on tour(s) every year. To say nothing of the approach shots where guys will basically admit, oh we were hitting it into the grandstand to take advantage of the free drop.

 

It doesn't make this any better though.

[Hawkeye77]

It's really not a problem. People need to pay attention.

 

A bunch of signs? Ugh.

 

Cue the Five Man Electrical Band.