What kind of jackass lays on a freaking rubber exercise ball WITH WEIGHTS and doesn’t think it might burst? I’m certain the warranty was “burst proof” for “normal” use vis-a-vis normal body weight. People need to use common sense and good judgement before doing something that was obviously stupid.
Obviously you have never stepped into a gym as this is a widely adopted method to lift weights to work core muscles, balance, etc. This is one of the ways these balls are marketed as being effective, so they should be liable for a ball bursting.
Using an exercise ball for alternate arm dumbell presses is a common regimen combining chest and arm work with core strength exercises. You simply like your upper back/neck on the ball and use your core muscles to make your back straight as if on a bench. Alternating arms forces you to use your core to keep your body centered on the ball.
What the article fails to say is how much weight this _sshole was using. There isn’t an un-limited amount of weight a piece of rubber 1/8th inch thick can support. Maybe it was over-inflated. Why couldn’t this macho mans use a freakin’ bench? Why do people always make excuses for poor judgment and stupidity?
Alot of what you say will come out in discovery, including how heavy the player is. I am suprised you didn’t mention that. The injured player is not automatically an ahole because the training device he was using broke. Also, his team is suing, not the player. This type of occurance is why we have a tort system, CGL cover, insurance agents etc. You need to lighten up. Take a long weekend or something.
The tort system has become bastardized by the plaintiff bar and become a forum for attempting to shift the failure of someone to exercise personal responsibility and blame someone else for fun and profit. It something is your fault there is no profit to be made. Enter the galant personal injury attorney with his/her creative theory of liability. Oh, the ball was “burst resistant” (not burst proof) ergo some idiot weighing in at 180 pound and carrying another 50-60 pounds of dumbells should be guaranteed putting 240 pound on an inflated rubber ball is safe. As someone else pointed out, why wasn’t he using a bench? Because the colored bouncy ball was softer on his manly tush? Those balls are fine for crunches but introducing weights is another matter.
This is a well accepted type weight work that is part of many peoples resistance training routine – idiots and non-idiots alike. Only flabbie girliemen aren’t familiar with this type of excercise.
I had the same thing happen at my gym and the GM for the club said he contacted the mfg and said they do not burst (but it did). Probably the same freaking company!
We have updated our privacy policy to be more clear and meet the new requirements of the GDPR. By continuing to use our site, you accept our revised Privacy Policy.
What kind of jackass lays on a freaking rubber exercise ball WITH WEIGHTS and doesn’t think it might burst? I’m certain the warranty was “burst proof” for “normal” use vis-a-vis normal body weight. People need to use common sense and good judgement before doing something that was obviously stupid.
Obviously you have never stepped into a gym as this is a widely adopted method to lift weights to work core muscles, balance, etc. This is one of the ways these balls are marketed as being effective, so they should be liable for a ball bursting.
Using an exercise ball for alternate arm dumbell presses is a common regimen combining chest and arm work with core strength exercises. You simply like your upper back/neck on the ball and use your core muscles to make your back straight as if on a bench. Alternating arms forces you to use your core to keep your body centered on the ball.
What the article fails to say is how much weight this _sshole was using. There isn’t an un-limited amount of weight a piece of rubber 1/8th inch thick can support. Maybe it was over-inflated. Why couldn’t this macho mans use a freakin’ bench? Why do people always make excuses for poor judgment and stupidity?
They DID market it as “Burst-Resistant” not “Burst-Proof”.
While it may not save them any BI type claims, it does protect them from false advertisement type claims.
Alot of what you say will come out in discovery, including how heavy the player is. I am suprised you didn’t mention that. The injured player is not automatically an ahole because the training device he was using broke. Also, his team is suing, not the player. This type of occurance is why we have a tort system, CGL cover, insurance agents etc. You need to lighten up. Take a long weekend or something.
The tort system has become bastardized by the plaintiff bar and become a forum for attempting to shift the failure of someone to exercise personal responsibility and blame someone else for fun and profit. It something is your fault there is no profit to be made. Enter the galant personal injury attorney with his/her creative theory of liability. Oh, the ball was “burst resistant” (not burst proof) ergo some idiot weighing in at 180 pound and carrying another 50-60 pounds of dumbells should be guaranteed putting 240 pound on an inflated rubber ball is safe. As someone else pointed out, why wasn’t he using a bench? Because the colored bouncy ball was softer on his manly tush? Those balls are fine for crunches but introducing weights is another matter.
…that’s what you get when you do any type of physical activity–HURT. Where’s my beer?
This is a well accepted type weight work that is part of many peoples resistance training routine – idiots and non-idiots alike. Only flabbie girliemen aren’t familiar with this type of excercise.
I had the same thing happen at my gym and the GM for the club said he contacted the mfg and said they do not burst (but it did). Probably the same freaking company!