Recalling the fight situation that took place in PA during the state championship game last year, I heard about this and thought I should share it with everyone.

Following a regional quarter-final in Las Vegas, Cheyenne HS and Bishop Gorman had a bench clearing brawl. Here is the newspaper article, but as we know it will be typical of all press stories:

State KOs Cheyenne

Brawls leads to suspension; petition seeks judge's relief
By Adam Candee
<[email protected]>
LAS VEGAS SUN

David Peeples could not comprehend why his season had ended.

His mother would not accept that it had.

Deborah Johnson filed a request for an injunction this morning against the Nevada Interscholastic Activities Association's decision to remove Cheyenne's football team from the playoffs.

The suit alleges that the NIAA's decision goes against the organization's own guidelines for due process rights to a hearing in the case. The suit also requests more than $40,000 in damages, because the suspension during a playoffs stopped college scouts from evaluating Peeples for potential recruitment and scholarships.

The injunction request also names Jerry Hughes, executive director of the NIAA, the Clark County School District and William Garis, the school district's director of student athletics and activities.

District Judge Jennifer Togliatti was to handle the case and was expected to look over the injunction during her lunch break today. A hearing had not been scheduled.

Peeples, Cheyenne's star senior tailback, said he meant to give a hug to a friend on the Gorman team last week after the Desert Shields upset the Gaels, 32-27, in a Sunset Region quarterfinal. Somehow, both Peeples and Cheyenne principal Dr. Ronan Matthew said, the move was misinterpreted, sparking a minute-long brawl between the teams during the postgame handshakes.

Those within the Cheyenne program expected some suspensions as a result, but on Thursday they received a much worse penalty. The Nevada Interscholastic Activities Association issued a one-game suspension to the entire Cheyenne team, ending the Shields' season with a forfeit of their Sunset Region semifinal against Centennial. The Bulldogs automatically advanced to the Sunset title game.

"I didn't even believe it," Peeples said, speaking in barely more than a whisper Thursday night from his home.

Gorman also received a one-game team suspension, effective for its first Southwest Division game of 2004. That is little consolation to Cheyenne coach Dave Snyder, whose Shields, the fourth seed from the Northwest Division, finish with a 6-4 record and plenty of what-ifs.

"It's been a baffling experience," Snyder said. "I haven't seen anything so bizarre in my life."

Centennial coach Joel Bertsch, whose team will now have its second open date in the past three weekends, would have preferred his Bulldogs earn their way into the next round.

"It's unbelievable," Centennial coach Joel Bertsch said. "We were in disbelief."

Hughes spent the past two days reviewing TV news films of the fight and meeting with school district administrators in Las Vegas to determine what penalties would be issued. Hughes decided that the brawl warranted the harshest of responses.

"This is a very unfortunate situation," Hughes said. "A precedent has been set in the past that this type of behavior will not be tolerated in Nevada high school sports. While these decisions are very difficult, it must be emphasized that we expect our athletes to be good citizens who respect each other both on and off the field."

Both Matthew and Snyder distanced the school itself from any possible legal action.

"The school will not take it to court," Matthew said. "We have accepted the ruling of the NIAA. (But) as you know, the kids have parents."

Matthew met with Hughes on Thursday morning before the decision was made. They reviewed the tapes and Hughes outlined the NIAA's options for punishing the teams. Those included suspensions at the beginning of next season, as well as suspending athletes who play other sports during the winter or spring seasons.

Hughes' ultimate decision left Matthew and Snyder with the unenviable task of breaking the news to the team at the end of the school day.

"A lot of them wanted to know why -- why do you blame all of us?" Snyder said.

Snyder contends that just a handful of players from both sides were actually involved in the fight, while most were attempting to separate the teams. Foremost among the peacemakers, Hughes said, was Peeples.

"They started it," said Peeples, who ran for nearly 300 yards in the victory.

The NIAA decision also stated that individual suspensions will be handed down, but the names of the players will not be released. The ruling does not appear to distinguish which team instigated the fight and the NIAA is leaving the investigation into the brawl open, with the threat of further disciplinary action looming.

The threat meant little to the Shields.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Anyway the big news is that the judge overturned the NIAA's decision to suspend the team and the game will be played on Monday. I think this is a terrible decision. The league office finally took a stand on the side of sportsmanship only to be thwarted by some whiny parents and a judge. What is HS sports coming to?

Ya gotta grease the squeaky wheel. Or at least the loudest squeaky wheel.

Careful with generalizations like that. I have a friend who works in the press, and he is an honest man, as are many who work in that profession.

Your statement is shallow and ignorant.

All stories have more than one side. Often all sides are honest but just from a different perspective. Journalists can be entirely honest and potray an event in their choice of ways.

I can live with that.

But there's too big a tendency, especially these days, to blame newspapers and TV for everything we don't agree with, and that's something that bothers me.

I'll stand by my statement.
 

This newsreporter clearly wrote with a sympathy for the players on team. Nowhere in the article does he mention sportsmanship or praise the league officials for attempting to put a stop to these type of fights at the HS events.
The most important quote in the whole article is passed over without so much as a word from the writer:
"This is a very unfortunate situation," Hughes said. "A precedent has been set in the past that this type of behavior will not be tolerated in Nevada high school sports. While these decisions are very difficult, it must be emphasized that we expect our athletes to be good citizens who respect each other both on and off the field."

As evidence of his siding with the HS team, despite admitting that "Hughes spent the past two days reviewing TV news films of the fight and meeting with school district administrators in Las Vegas to determine what penalties would be issued," look at the words chosen to describe the decision to declare a forfeit:
1. they received a much worse penalty.
2. Hughes decided that the brawl warranted the harshest of responses.
3. the threat of further disciplinary action looming

This author clearly wanted to convey the decision as something dark and terrible. Rather than simply reporting the event, his personal opinion of the NIAA's decision comes out in the article, and it is obviously a negative one.

Then there is the inclusion of obligatory sensational comments:

1. The suit also requests more than $40,000 in damages, because the suspension during a playoffs stopped college scouts from evaluating Peeples for potential recruitment and scholarships. (Oh, please!)

2. "It's been a baffling experience," Snyder said. "I haven't seen anything so bizarre in my life."

3. "It's unbelievable,"

4. why do you blame all of us?

5. "They started it," said Peeples, who ran for nearly 300 yards in the victory.
I particulary love this one. It's so childish that any decent reporter wouldn't have even bothered to include it. Notice how all of the blame is shifted to the NIAA officials and deflected from the student athletes. Does the writer criticize the behavior of the players anywhere in the story? Nope.

Finally, the article ends with the tear-jerking closing line:

"The threat meant little to the Shields."


Canuckrefguy,
I think that "shallow and ignorant" applies far more to this piece of work than my generalization, which probably contains more truth than most would want to admit.

As for your friend, I believe that he is honest and a good person because you say so, but if he were to write something like this and pass it off as reporting, I would criticize him as well.

thumbs up
 

Nevedaref,

We agree on this one. I agree with your assessment of the article and I support the decisions of the NIAA on this matter. I wish the PIAA had the same perspective.

My comment was directed at the notion that the article you dislike so much is "typical" of all press reports.

I suppose if fans see an official kick a call, and then believe it's "typical", then that's okay too, then.

We, as officials, are very quick to denounce the ignorance of coaches and fans for not respecting us, and the tendency to generalize one incident to all of us.

Hypocritical doesn't even begin to describe it.

Re: I'll stand by my statement.
 

Great response-analysis. Can you teach the section on propaganda to my history class or critical thinking and watching for bias in my Psychology class?

Hey I just noticed I made senior member-woo hoo!

Changes need to be made
 

One thing that might have helped all this is something that needs to be seriously looked at.

What is the one thing that most officials do as soon as a game is over? Hall a$$ to the locker room. If the officials had stayed on the field after the game to observe the handshake, they could have been independent observers of what happened and maybe a "fair" judgement made.

By that I mean, if the losing team did start the fight then they became the winners as they got the other forfeitted for playing the next game that they deserve to. Who's to say it was not intentional? Or couldn't be intentionally done in the future.

While I agree if players fight, they should be suspended. The game officials could have possibly seen who started it and who should be the one(s) to sit on suspension. As a result a large number of kids will not get that chance due to the actions of a few.

It is customary for baseball officials to watch the handshake at the end of a game. One would think that a physical contact sport like football should have it done as well.

Y'are one naieef
 

canuck . . .

final bit of fallout from fight
 

So rather than dole out appropriate punishments to the teams for their state final brawl, here is the result for all of us:

This season, anytime there is to be a throw-in in front of either team's bench area, the official will, using his or her judgement, move the throw-in spot beyond the bench area, either nearer the endline or midcourt.

Seriously.

This got only slightly less uproar from the coaches at the interpretation meeting than the "defender with foot on sideline is blocking" rule.

To me, it's a parenting issue. The mother is so worried about her little boopsie getting his college scholarship that she doesn't see the person he's becoming. If this had been my brother, my dad would have said, "Son, to avoid suspicion, don't tie your shoes in the watermelon patch." David Peebles should not have tried to give the opponent a hug. He could have said a nice word quietly, and slapped hands or something less open to mis-interpretation. The mother needs to say, "Son, if you get a scholarship, I'll be very proud, but lots of good players don't get scholarships, and you'll just have to live with it." That's life.

I don't have any sympathy for this parent or her kid...now if the legal action was taken by a player and parents who were not involved in the fight, that would be different...why punish the entire team/program for something that some of (but not all) the players did? Seems like a pretty harsh penalty to me...suspend or kick off the kids who were involved in the fight, but not the entire team...same thing as if there is a fight in the lunchroom at school, and the principal suspends/expells everyone who was in there whether they were in the fight or not...doesn't seem right to me...

The problem is that, for example in basketball, all players who engage are penalized, whether they are fighting or "peacemaking." Leaving the bench is in itself reason for ejection and punishment. This strikes me as similar reasoning.

That would be true if it happened during the game...this didn't happen during the game...and according to the account, only a handful of players actually fought...so you punish the entire team for the actions of a handful of jackasses?? I really disagree with that...

The question is how conclusive was the video tape regarding who was fighting and who was peacemaking? If it's difficult to tell, then you must either make arbitrary decisions on shaky evidence or punish everyone.

Just to update the situation, Cheyenne won the game last night (Cheyenne def. Centennial, 28-6) that the TRO allowed them to play. They now advance to the regional final.
The NIAA has appealed the TRO and if they eventually win, all wins, titles, etc. will be stripped from this team.
Of course, I wonder what compensation would be owed to the teams they defeat, such as Centennial, before this legal issue is finally decided. Can they sue for damages because they didn't make the regional final and their players were not seen by the college scouts attending that game?
It is a mess.

PS The AP wrote a very matter of fact article that was printed in the Reno paper regarding the TRO being granted. This article was quite objective and was nothing like the one in the Vegas paper. If I can find an on-line copy, I'll post it. I'm just not going to type it all in.

Or punish the ones that you KNOW were fighting, and not punish everyone arbitrarily at all...if you miss some of the fighters then you miss some, but you don't punish kids who weren't part of it...

For those who thought the reporter in Las Vegas was too one-sided in favor of the fighting football team, the same paper's columnist was just as strident in supporting the Nevada high school sports association. Excerpts follow, with llinks to the full story.:

Columnist Ron Kantowski: Hughes, NIAA make the right call -- again
November 14, 2003
http://www.lasvegassun.com/sunbin/st...515860110.html

"Anytime you take a kid out of a playoff situation, it's very difficult," Hughes said Thursday after announcing the sanctions. "It's one of those unfortunate things, but you can't turn your head. Quite frankly, it puts a little pit in your stomach. It's not a fun thing and I empathize with the (innocent) kids."
At least he got it right. No further review is necessary, as far as I'm concerned.
Are innocent kids suffering because a handful (or two) of their peers couldn't control their emotions? No question. But coaches harp about football being a team game. You win as a team, you lose as a team.
Why should being penalized be any different?

Columnist Ron Kantowski: Adults become focus of a kids' game
November 18, 2003
http://www.lasvegassun.com/sunbin/st...515879344.html
Owing to two football teams who decided to shake hands with left hooks, coaches and administrators who failed to control and/or discipline the wanna-be pugilists, a sanctioning body that has been put in the position of ruling with a heavier right hand than George Foreman, parents who can't leave bad enough alone, a judge who wants to be a sports commissioner, an attorney who fancies reading his name in the newspaper and a local media that has turned this story into front page news, the Southern Nevada high school football playoffs have been transformed into a circus.
This just in: Barnum & Bailey 7, Human Drama of Athletic Competition 0.
I also wonder what's going to happen the next time it is learned after that fact that a school had used an ineligible player and Hughes rules a forfeit, a fairly common penalty for such a transgression.
When that occurs, the whole team suffers because of one individual. Sound familiar?
But just when you think you've had enough, something happens to restore your faith in the thrill of victory, the agony of defeat and yes, the human drama of athletic competition. For me, that was Monday's game.
Under difficult circumstances, both teams played hard and by the rules. Cheyenne, the better team, won. Nobody from Centennial tried to start a fight afterward.
And when the referees whistled No. 64 for encroachment, his teammates accepted the 5-yard penalty, even though it wasn't their fault.

I dunno....if it's a 4 year free ride then we are talking about some serious money here, and could possibly be a deal breaker for this kid's ability to get into college. And at that age he already is the kid he's becoming if you ask me. On the other hand, if the kid was really counting on the performance of his final game to get an offer then I suspect he hasn't turned many heads anyway...or maybe it's the mom's lawyer who's building this up. But it doesn't make sense to me for the kid's mom to take this all with just a shrug - in other words I think she did the right thing by her kid.

Having said that, I believe the judge was completely wrong issuing the restrainng order and letting the team play without penalty. Life is what happens when you are busy making other plans. And this *team* - not just the one kid who happened to be the star - was about to get dealt a healthy dose of life that would have served as a deterrent to others for years to come. And that is what is wrong with this picture IMO.

Thanks for the link! Also notice that it was a different reporter! It is too bad that Hughes was overruled and the team was allowed to play and win.

I'm just catching up, but I can't believe nobody has jumped on the notion of officials supervising the handshakes.

Never, never, never. I joke with my partner in basketball that I'll be in the lockerroom before the final horn is done sounding. Of course I'm exaggerating. Slightly.

That said, there ARE baseball umpires who will watch the handshake, but I am certainly not one of them. Most top umpires are not either. Me? I toss the balls to one of the kids as I'm walking off the field. In football, we trot to the lockerroom after the final play.

For God's sake, there are ADULTS there. If they can't control themselves and their teams AFTER THE GAME ENDS, it certainly isn't my problem. And frankly, I don't care what happens after the game and my jurisdiction ends. At that point, they can call the cops.

I don't do football but I do know the Las Vegas high school sports landscape firsthand. I know the athletic directors for both schools and I know some of the players on both teams.
I think that if the team had accepted the suspension and the mother didn't do anything it could have left a bad taste in the recruiter's mouth and she couldn't have that. Would you want to recruit the next problem child into your program? I don't think so. He could be the next "Keyshawn Dillon" with guns and bombs in his dorm room with a porno buisiness on the side. I just threw that in for humor but we cannot assume these kids will follow the straight and narrow anymore. She threatened he played and now it could "appear" that he wasn't wrong afterall. See how that could be a difference?
I lived there and I'm familiar with both schools so as far as the "Hug" I say Bull&*(*! I have done many games in Vegas and something is said or done between players that I have to nip in the bud. They always say "but that's my boy", "we know each other" or "he's my cousin." Without taking care of this then things can get out of hand. When I first read the post I wasn't surprised by the fight. I thought I had missed something from the preseason because I know this didn't happen last year.
I have much more I could say but I will stop here. Don't be surprised about what happens in Las Vegas.

I suppose I might agree with you, depending on how she's been handling other situations which we haven't heard about. If he's been a basically good kid, and the mom knows that the opponent that Peeples hugged was an old friend... yea, I could see the mom's response being reasonable. I was reading into the situation a history of "lil boopsie" screwing up, and mom coming to his rescue again and again. The sentences just sound like those types of sentences. And I think Peeples should learn some humility -- it's understandable how the opponent might feel a little taunted. Would Peeples have been as quick to hug his friend if Peeples had just lost by 5 instead of winning?

It does involve big money, you're right, but that shouldn't make or break the deal. If the kids on the team were fighting, they were fighting.

And you are definitely right about his college chances, if he hasn't been spotted by now...