Quote:
|
Originally Posted by BadNewsRef
I have never voiced an opinion either way concerning Mr. Montgomery's removal from the game. My bone of contention in this thread has been that a lot of people question Mr. Montgomery's version of events without any basis to doubt his word. I have seen no newspaper articles, interviews, testimonials in support of Mr. Bailey, responses/statements from Mr. Bailey, nor press releases from the KHSAA, that would put into question Mr. Montgomery's accounting of the events surrounding his suspension.
|
My bone of contention in this thread is that people believe Mr. Montgomery's version of the events without having any real basis to do so. It's not a matter of doubting Mr. Montgomery's word; it's a matter of not having any solid information available to us that would prove that his version was correct. We have not heard his adversary's version, which no doubt will be completely different. We have not heard from any (supposedly)neutral observers such as Mr. Montgomery's partners who must have been in the dressing room, or the tournament director(s) who saw the altercation spill out into public view. We are not privy to the court rulings and the reasonings involved that denied Mr. Montgomery's appeal. Until we have heard
all of the details, I don't think that there is nearly enough information available to decide what version is correct. Iow, I think that
both parties should get the benefit of the doubt as to what happened in the dressing room. To do otherwise without definitive information as to what actually took place is just not fair to
either party imo.
I also think that
neither party should get the benefit of the doubt for then taking their dispute public. They were
both wrong to do so.