[Dan_ref]

Originally posted by JRutledge

I disagree. If you are condescending in your opinion of someone of a person that does hold your heritage or race when they hold an opinion, that kind of comment is totally acceptable. It is clear he wanted to get a rise out of you and others and that is exactly what was accomplished. Any person has a right to show their distain for a word, opinion or attitude regardless of what any feels about it. It is no different if you call someone a name and they turn around and punch you in the mouth. Not everyone is going to react the same way to words, nor should they. I might personally not know everything that offends someone, but I sure am not going to tell them they are wrong for being offended if I was not personally aware of the overall connotation of my actions or words. What I find very interesting when it comes to many issues of race and even gender on this board is that the white males want to tell everyone how they should think when it does not go along with their point of view. I was the person that took exception to the original comments and I had that right. I did not expect then folks would agree and definitely do not take that attitude now. But I do feel that anyone has the right to voice their opinions here regardless of what side of the fence you are on. I can assume that Ps2man used the term in order to make a point. Too many people of that background say that when there are folks being condescending and tell them how they should feel. This is not the 1950s anymore. We are in 2005 now. People have the right to say what they feel and you do not have to like it. I realize that alone makes many uncomfortable, but that is the world we live in. If you are offended by the word "massa" then we have the right to be offended by the word "thug" when that word is used out of the context that it has meaning. You cannot have it both ways.

Back to the original topic.

I could give a damn what race Coach Chaney is. None of the parties involved were even white (except for the officials). The Temple player was Black. The St. Joseph player was Black. The only people involved that were white were the officials that called nothing but a common foul on the play in question. I think what Chaney did could get him fired and just might get him fired. I do not care that the man was in the Hall of Fame, he used very bad judgment. I think he also should not have admitted or talked openly about the situation either. Because I know this kind of thing happens all the time, it just is not talked about. If the kid did not get hurt, this probably would not have been as much of a story either. In other words there would be no suspensions or massive media coverage over the event. He has even opened himself up to a lawsuit which could easily be won in the favor of the hurt kid. So for those that want to make my opinion on the incident as a race issue, that is just plain say. I only took issue with a use of words that continues a stereotype when this is not a legal issue. It is a civil issue, but not a legal one. I also think the player could have used better judgment as well and not fouled the kid very hard on the shot. I also think he is not totally at fault because he was following instructions. The entire situation is complicated and there is a lot of blame to go around. The Temple administration when the original comments were made could have done something. The officials could have called this flagrant. But I do understand why they did not call it flagrant. You do not see many flagrant fouls so it could have been a complete surprise to the calling officials and he did not do anything as a result. It is easy to second guess while watching the video tape. The conference could have done something and still could do something. I guess we will see what is going to happen in the coming days and weeks.


Peace

Might I suggest...