[APG]

Originally Posted by Dealone

This story is not about some misconduct penalty; it is about a player suffering a serious medical sports injury. The author of the story assumed editorial opinion but associating the foul to the medical consequences with the phrase 'cheap shot' in the lead. Was it a cheap shot? Was it a hot dog dunk by Etherington? Would Etherington have lost his balance without being pushed from behind? Regarding the foul, how flagrant was it? The foul was committed before the dunk but yet it didn't interfere with Etherington enough to prevent the dunk. Etherington lost his balance after the dunk. Emotions run high with serious medical injuries especially when mixed with phrases like 'Cheap Shot'. #40 is a juvenile under the supervision of his family and his school. Do I associate his and his families name with this emotional story which associates (in my opinion unfairly) his foul with the medical injuries? These are the factors I consider as editor and as editor I make the correct call and omit the kid's name.

An absolute cheap shot. It was not a hot dog dunk...not even close. I doubt the player would have lost his balance but that doesn't matter...the fact is he did due to an unnecessary push. That play was an easy flagrant foul...no doubt about it...I think it was a bush league play.