Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Rich Fronheiser
How can you NOT "pull the race card" in this situation? Bailey, I assume, is white. Montgomery is an African-American. My first reaction upon reading this story was: Wonder if he would've gotten pulled from the game if he was white?
Furthermore, if I were an African-American and someone called me "boy," I wonder how I would react. I'd probably want to punch the guy in the mouth. I would assume that "boy" is only slightly less inflammatory than the N-word. I may be wrong.
|
Rich, the "race card" that I'm referring to is a poster inferring that someone is a racist because they don't agree with the other person's views. I've seen that one used here too many times, and now I'm seeing it from another source. That's the inference that BadNewsRef was trying to make of myself. That's just despicable imo.
From the story back on p1 of this thread,
both officials were pulled from games, apparently for letting the dispute spill out into public view. As for the "boy" part of it, I agree with you 100%
if the slur was made. All I have been saying is that until it is proven that Bailey actually did call Momtgomery "boy", then Bailey should be given the benefit of the doubt- as should anyone who is on the receiving end of any
unproven allegations, no matter what color they might be. Similary, Montgomery has to be given the benefit of the doubt as to whether he tried to get 2 other officials removed from a previus game, which apparently started this mess. If the allegations
are proven to be true, then Bailey should never be allowed to officate another game in Kentucky.
For the record, imo there were different phrases to this incident:
1) I've haven't commented yet on what started it off, I think. I will now. Bailey had no business entering that dressing room at half-time and starting the altercation. That's completely wrong. He deserves to be disciplined for that act alone by whoever is responsible for disciplining wrongful acts by officials in Ky. Hopefully, he will be. If so, I doubt that we will ever hear about the discipline though.
2) The argument
in the dressing room is a separate act. During that argument, it is
alleged that Bailey called Montgomery "boy". Until those allegations are proven or disproven, it is my opinion that Bailey should be given the benefit of the doubt, the same as any person who has been accused of anything without accompanying evidence to prove that accusation should be given the benefit of the doubt. That is all that I have been saying all along. Bailey is innocent until
proven guilty. If Bailey
is eventually proven guilty, then again- imo- his career as an official in Ky should be over. And...if the allegations are proven false, then Montgomery should have to answer for making those allegations also. Whichever way it turns out, there should be
no discipline involved either way until the allegations are proven or disproven. This one shouldn't be difficult to investigate either. Montgomery's partners shoulda been in the dressing room and shoulda witnessed what went down. Get their stories.
3) The argument then spilled out into public view. I've already commented on that. Imo, both officials were wrong to let that happen. We don't know all the facts here also, but whoever convened that regional seemed to agree that both officials were wrong. They removed
both officials from further games. The Appeals and Supreme court of the state of Ky apparently backed up the right of the convenor to make that judgement, even though we don't have the reasons as to
why the courts made that decision.
Hopefully, someone is investigating this mess. Also hopefully, a racial complaint has been put in to the state of Kentucky, and that complaint will be investigated properly. That's the
fair way to handle it.