By Prof. Gil Fried, University of West Florida
The small number of fans at a University of Massachusetts Women’s Basketball game went crazy when Noah Lee made a lay-up, free throw, three-point shot, and then a half-court shot all in 25 seconds. The celebration was short lived as then the negative feedback ensued. Who know whether it was the school or the promotional insurance company, but Mr. Lee was told that he would not receive the promised $10,000. The claim was that he had stepped over the half-court line. Video of the incident was available on YouTube and shows the minor infraction. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kp3ujFu4VFY
Instead of being offered the $10,000 he was offered some perc such as using a suite, courtside tickets, gift cards and UMass swag. When news broke that he would not get the $10,000 the university stepped in to say one way or another he would get the $10,000. This reminds me of an incident where a fan made a ¾ court shot years ago to win a large sum ($1,000,000) and the insurance company and the NBA team were balking at paying him because the content was only open to those who had not played college or professional basketball, and he had played one semester of junior college basketball.
I am a firm believer of hosting such contests, similar to hole-in-one golf contests. They add excitement and fun to many events. The fine print is the key. The devil is always in the details. There should always be a process if there is a dispute as to coverage and what if there are minor technical issues and concerns. The contestant is a third-party beneficiary of the insurance contract, but they are the public face of these disputes and until the issue is resolved, the negative publicity could harm both the event organizer and the insurer. An average fan would see this as nitpicking and that the corporate elite are trying to stick it to the little guys. That is never a good place to be in. That is why the rules need to be pre-approved by all parties and clearly communicated to the contestant and reiterated before the activity. That is where a neutral third party can serve as an enforcer of the rule and serve like a referee to adjudicate any issues right there to avoid any possible public black-eyes.
