The scenario of an injured athlete being pressured by a coach to return to play is a dramatic staple, but it also raises significant questions regarding legal liability in sports.
In the realm of amateur and school athletics, the legal duty of care is clearer. As noted by Professor Timothy Davis of Wake Forest Law, coaches owe a duty of care to their student-athletes not to increase the inherent risks of a sport. Consequently, coaches have, at times, been held liable for player injuries when they breach this duty.
However, the legal landscape shifts when considering professional sports. Precedent in this area is less established, yet the potential for liability remains a relevant consideration.
Legal scholars suggest that liability based on recklessness might arise where an athlete sustains an injury as a consequence of a coach acting outside the scope of their expertise. This is particularly salient when coaches have an actual or constructive appreciation of the potential risks stemming from their conduct. A key example is when a coach’s decision directly contradicts medical advice. Similarly, a coach’s demand that an athlete return to play, especially given the coach’s lack of medical training, arguably provides evidence of recklessness. Such a demand disregards an immediate and readily ascertainable risk, moving beyond a mere abstract possibility of risk.
Despite the theoretical basis for liability, Professor Davis identifies several significant barriers to successfully holding professional coaches accountable. These include, but are not limited to, the existence of workers’ compensation schemes, the strong athletic “culture” often prioritizing playing through injury, potential federal preemption issues, and mandatory arbitration clauses. Professor Davis ultimately concludes that professional coaches currently face limited incentives to prioritize player health from a purely liability standpoint—at least in the current legal environment.
While some media outlets, such as the New York Times, have recently focused heavily on issues like concussions in professional football, Professor Davis points to the league’s response to these health crises as a model for achieving progress and systemic change outside of the judicial system.
