Contractual limits on dangerous activities

[Kreskin]

Should sports contracts include limits (or more limits) on what a player can do in his/her own time?

The Ben Roethlisberger motorcycle incident brought attention to the issue. The Steelers QB was recently involved in an accident that nearly cost him his life, let alone career. Riding a motorcycle without a helmut he slammed into the windsheild of another vehicle, fracturing his jaw and nose, and receiving various other injuries including a minor concussion.

Last year Roethlisburger was publicly supportive of the State of Pennsylvania repealing its motorcycle helmet law, saying he would never use a helmut anyway. Some say he should not have been on a motorbike, period, helmet or no helmet, while leading a professional football team, that his actions threatened the financial livelihoods of other players and team ownership (not just his own). Others say he is a free man to live his own life, like it or lump it.

What do you think?

http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/5696896?GT1=8211

 

[thecdn]

With the amount of money invested by teams in some of these atheletes, yes I can see contracts that bar or restrict certain types of activity.

An injury to someone like him could affect the performance of the entire team thus affecting the players economically as well as the owner, other employees and even the city.

I ride a motorcycle to work daily and I can understand a restriction in cases like these. Or at least a stipulation that a helmet must be worn. Riding is dangerous enough but doing so without a helmet is moronic.