By Eugene Egdorf, Esq.
It is a troubling, yet all-too-common, trend – an athlete that has filed a lawsuit alleging to have suffered from serious physical harm caused by the misconduct of a coaching staff.
In this instance, the victim is Zoe Wallis, a former basketball player for the College of Charleston (CC). The incident took place in August, 2014. That’s right – August. Basketball. Zoe was ordered to perform a timed, outdoor 5-mile run in the South Carolina summer heat. A 5 mile run – not wind sprints. Not a drill to improve lateral movement or quickness. Not even indoors, much less on an actual basketball court.
During the run Zoe complained to the coaching staff, in particular CC Head Coach Candice Jackson, that she was having trouble and needed to stop. She repeated this several times. Perhaps Zoe thought Jackson had a better understanding of athlete health and safety than actual basketball, as her 2-year record of 16-45 would surely call into question her coaching and training acumen.
Rather than do something reasonable, such as evaluating Zoe’s health condition, Jackson told her to “crawl to the finish line.” Zoe did finish, but immediately collapsed and was driven to the hospital – in a hot car and not an ambulance because Jackson opted not to call 911. As a result, Zoe suffered damage to her liver and kidneys and spent two days in ICU. Her basketball career is over.
Zoe is fortunate, however, as she survived. The same has not been true over the years for athletes at schools such as Central Florida, Ole Miss, Rice, Missouri, California, and others where athletes have died during “conditioning drills.” One may recall the situation at the University of Iowa where 13 football players were hospitalized after being forced to perform punishment drills after a disappointing performance in a bowl game.
One merely needs to look at the NCAA Medical Handbook to understand these “drills” are improper. Rather than taking action against these coaches and trainers who place the lives of athletes at risk, the NCAA – founded in 1906 for the purpose of protecting the health and safety of football players – continues to spend its time monitoring important matters such as how much spaghetti is eaten by University of Oklahoma football players, or how many text messages a coach sends to a recruit.
Over the years, litigation has been the only way to hold these wrongdoers responsible. Sometimes those cases are successful. In the settlement of Lloyd v. Rice, the NCAA agreed to conduct medical testing for sickle cell trait, which after going into effect has not caused another death. But more often legal defenses such as sovereign immunity, a topic on which of which previously written, provide a safe haven for even the most egregious wrongdoer. Zoe is fortunate that in South Carolina, unlike many states, she can bring a claim against Jackson. But the claim is capped at a mere $300,000.
Is it really too much to ask that coaches and trainers treat their players as they would treat their own children? To put their safety first? To not ask them to perform senseless drills that have absolutely nothing to do with on field performance? Or to have rules and laws with actual teeth to ensure their safety?
Eugene Egdorf is a seasoned plaintiff’s attorney, who has represented families and athletes in negligence lawsuits. He can be reached at geneegdorf@me.com
