Coach slaps Player...

[GarthB]

Originally Posted by CoachJM

I am a firm believer in the premise that my players learn much more from what I do than from what I say. What this coach taught his players was that it's OK to "lose it" in a stressful situation.

Exactly, and he taught them an acceptable manner in which to "lose it".

So, I'd take the kid, lose the coach, & be impressed with the umpires for not getting involved where they weren't really needed.


JM

In your opinion, coach, were they not needed because they didn't see it? Were they not needed because this event wasn't visible to the public?

What if this happened on a field without a dugout...standing at the bench near the parents and other fans. Do you thinkthe umpires should ignore incidents like this, at this age level, in full view of the public?

[UmpJM]

Garth,

What I intended to suggest was that what the coach did was "unacceptable" and taught his players the wrong thing.

As I said, I did not see the actual incident. From the descriptions I have read, it did not strike me as severe enough, public enough, or prolonged enough to warrant the umpires' intervention.

JM

[GarthB]

Originally Posted by CoachJM

Garth,

What I intended to suggest was that what the coach did was "unacceptable" and taught his players the wrong thing.

As I said, I did not see the actual incident. From the descriptions I have read, it did not strike me as severe enough, public enough, or prolonged enough to warrant the umpires' intervention.

JM

Could you stop wiggling and answer the question I posed?

What if this happened on a field without a dugout...standing at the bench near the parents and other fans. Do you thinkthe umpires should ignore incidents like this, at this age level, in full view of the public?

[UmpJM]

Originally Posted by GarthB

Could you stop wiggling and answer the question I posed?

What if this happened on a field without a dugout...standing at the bench near the parents and other fans. Do you thinkthe umpires should ignore incidents like this, at this age level, in full view of the public?

Garth,

Well, I didn't mean to "wiggle". And, from a master of the "one hand clapping" post, no less. I don't know whether to be flattered or insulted.

Nonetheless.

If the situation I read about had happened in full view of God & everybody, without cover of a dugout, I STILL don't think it would have been appropriate for the umpires to intervene. For the reasons I stated previously.

If a similar situation were to occur that was more severe, more prolonged, and/or more public I could see the umpires putting a stop to it, ejecting certain parties (like the "slapping coach", for example), etc.

My point is that if it does not affect the conduct of the game, it is not the umpires' responsibility to address. It is the league's. Of course, at a certain point, it is ANY responsible person's responsibility to address. (See Neville Chamberlain, e.g..)

Ultimately, this is a decision each person must make for himself.

In this particular case, if it were up to me, the Coach would no longer be coaching the team. Nor would he be put in jail. The player would still be playing. He might sit all or part of a game. That's how I see it.

JM

[GarthB]

Originally Posted by CoachJM

Garth,

Well, I didn't mean to "wiggle". And, from a master of the "one hand clapping" post, no less. I don't know whether to be flattered or insulted.

Nonetheless.

If the situation I read about had happened in full view of God & everybody, without cover of a dugout, I STILL don't think it would have been appropriate for the umpires to intervene. For the reasons I stated previously.

If a similar situation were to occur that was more severe, more prolonged, and/or more public I could see the umpires putting a stop to it, ejecting certain parties (like the "slapping coach", for example), etc.

My point is that if it does not affect the conduct of the game, it is not the umpires' responsibility to address. It is the league's. Of course, at a certain point, it is ANY responsible person's responsibility to address. (See Neville Chamberlain, e.g..)

Ultimately, this is a decision each person must make for himself.

In this particular case, if it were up to me, the Coach would no longer be coaching the team. Nor would he be put in jail. The player would still be playing. He might sit all or part of a game. That's how I see it.

JM

So I guess this means you can't answer the question.

[SanDiegoSteve]

I answered the question. No. It was not appropriate.

Is it as big a deal as you make it out to be? Also, no.

Was it an act of violence? No, ociffer Garth.

Was it done out of anger? Don't think so.

Was it done out of shock at what the kid said? Probably.

Was it right? Well of course not.

Did things like this happen regularly to kids who grew up pre 1970's? Absolutely.

Did anyone make a big deal over it back then? Hardly.

Do you think that the coach would like to take it back? I would bet he does.

Do you think that he is sorry he reacted like he did? I'm pretty sure he is.

Is this really important, when we have American troops getting killed every day in Iraq? NOT EVEN CLOSE TO BEING THE LEAST BIT WORTH DISCUSSING.

In fact, it is so not worth discussing, that I am not going to discuss it further.

You may safely continue ignoring my idiotic posts now.

[Dave Hensley]

Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve

I answered the question. No. It was not appropriate.

Is it as big a deal as you make it out to be? Also, no.

Was it an act of violence? No, ociffer Garth.

Was it done out of anger? Don't think so.

Was it done out of shock at what the kid said? Probably.

Was it right? Well of course not.

Did things like this happen regularly to kids who grew up pre 1970's? Absolutely.

Did anyone make a big deal over it back then? Hardly.

Do you think that the coach would like to take it back? I would bet he does.

Do you think that he is sorry he reacted like he did? I'm pretty sure he is.

Is this really important, when we have American troops getting killed every day in Iraq? NOT EVEN CLOSE TO BEING THE LEAST BIT WORTH DISCUSSING.

In fact, it is so not worth discussing, that I am not going to discuss it further.

You may safely continue ignoring my idiotic posts now.

Good Rumsfeld impersonation.

[Dan_ref]

Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve

Is this really important, when we have American troops getting killed every day in Iraq? NOT EVEN CLOSE TO BEING THE LEAST BIT WORTH DISCUSSING.

My vote for the most ignorant, self-serving, intellectually dishonest and childishly immature string of words ever to be seen on the internet.

"But officer, how can you give me this speeding ticket when there are troops dying in Iraq?"

"Gee honey, I know you have a headeache but there are troops dying in Iraq..."

"Sorry boss, can't work overtime time tonight. Don't you realize there are troops dying in Iraq?"



Un. F'ing. Believable.