Fight during game

[gsf23]

That's not a fight, that is a cheap-a$$ attack by a kid that doesn't have the sac to come at someone head on.

The precedent was set in South Dakota, I wouldn't be surprised to see charges filed.

[ChuckElias]

Originally Posted by gsf23

That's not a fight, that is a cheap-a$$ attack by a kid that doesn't have the sac to come at someone head on.

The other kid shoved him first. It wasn't a sneak attack, it was a retaliation. If the first kid didn't expect to be hit back, then he's stupid, too. That doesn't make either kid right; I just don't think it was "cheap".

[Back In The Saddle]

Got a link?

[BayStateRef]

http://www.cnn.com/video/player/play...sault.intv.cnn

[BloggingRefGuy]

Originally Posted by ChuckElias

The other kid shoved him first. It wasn't a sneak attack, it was a retaliation. If the first kid didn't expect to be hit back, then he's stupid, too. That doesn't make either kid right; I just don't think it was "cheap".

Chuck--Does this include the four full-throttle punches to the head of an unconcsious person lying on the floor? Is that "retaliation" too?

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by ChuckElias

The other kid shoved him first. It wasn't a sneak attack, it was a retaliation. If the first kid didn't expect to be hit back, then he's stupid, too. That doesn't make either kid right; I just don't think it was "cheap".

After finally seeing it, thanks to BayStateRef, I gotta agree with you. That certainly wasn't what could be called an "unprovoked attack" imo either. That doesn't justify the beatdown, but you also don't know if there was a history there or if something happened between those two previously in that game either. You can't go by the story from one side only.

Both refs did the right thing too imo. Someone got there off the bench real quick and both refs stood back and watched.

[Jurassic Referee]

Now.....what's your call as an official?

Personally, I think I'd call that a "fight" and give both players flagrant personal fouls for fighting.

NFHS rule 4-18-2 - "Fighting includes....an attempt to instigate a fight by committing an unsporting act towards an opponent that causes an opponent to retaliate". NCAA rule 4-23-3(b) basically uses the same language.

Write 'er up real good, and let whoever game management was on that game deal with the fall-out.

Jmo....

[Dan_ref]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Now.....what's your call as an official?

Personally, I think I'd call that a "fight" and give both players flagrant personal fouls for fighting.

NFHS rule 4-18-2 - "Fighting includes....an attempt to instigate a fight by committing an unsporting act towards an opponent that causes an opponent to retaliate". NCAA rule 4-23-3(b) basically uses the same language.

Write 'er up real good, and let whoever game management was on that game deal with the fall-out.

Jmo....

What I saw was an unprovoked shove in the back during a drive to the basket. This kid who got pummelled is nothing but a cheap shot artist. He just happened to cheap shot the wrong guy. I like to think he's learned a lesson, but now his daddy is dragging him around crying to the press that he's an innocent victim.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Dan_ref

What I saw was an unprovoked shove in the back during a drive to the basket. This kid who got pummelled is nothing but a cheap shot artist. He just happened to cheap shot the wrong guy. I like to think he's learned a lesson, but now his daddy is dragging him around crying to the press that he's an innocent victim.

Daddy might be taking a chance with what he's doing now though. I ain't a prosecutor (even though I watched the OJ trial.... man, that Greta van Sustern broad is ogggglly) but I think that, with the provocation, you either gotta charge both of 'em or fuggedaboutit completely. Kinda looks like they're trying to forget about it.

Rec league basketball......

- Time for the Yankees......my tv is coal-fired. Takes a while to warm up.

[grizwald]

I'd find it hard to believe that the kid in the dark jersey attacked the kid in the white jersey like that over just that one shove. Perhaps he did, but since the entire game is on tape, you'd have to prove it for me to believe it.

And since that is what a jury (or judge in the case of a juvenile charge in most states) would be asked to do. And since it doesn't appear the prosecutor wants to move forward. I'd guess the rest of the tape either conveniently doesn't exist, or doesn't paint the same picture as this dad would like you to believe.

There is one universal truth, prosecutors like to win cases especially easy ones that are (or could be) high profile. Wins, especially ones that everyone knows about, are good for career advancement in the criminal law profession.

If this case is as open and shut as that footage and that dad would have you believe, I'd guess that charges would be brought. The fact that they haven't been, would make me think otherwise. But like I said perhaps I'm wrong. Let’s see the parts of the tape that the other side would like us to see as well.

It's making no excuses for the kid beating the living crap out of the other kid. It clearly is not the right thing to do, however it may not be a criminal act either.

[IUgrad92]

That's just great. Any kid, with your philosophy, is going to feel retaliating in this fashion is justified...........if he feels he took a "cheap shot", that is.

What the Lawrence kid was wrong, what the Wichita kid did was worse. And who typically gets caught in retaliation scenarios??? There better be charges filed.

If the Wichita kid was getting elbowed through the coarse of the game, then he should have been asking the officials to watch for it, or at least tell his coach and let the coach talk to the officials about it.

This happened on a basketball court Dan, not some back alley.

[grizwald]

Originally Posted by IUgrad92

This happened on a basketball court Dan, not some back alley.

Does the law care where it happened when it comes to the question of guilt in a court room?

[ChuckElias]

Originally Posted by IUgrad92

That's just great. Any kid, with your philosophy, is going to feel retaliating in this fashion is justified...........if he feels he took a "cheap shot", that is.

I don't think anybody has said that the retaliation was justified. I don't think Dan implied that when he said that the Lawrence hopefully learned a lesson. I hope the kid learned a lesson, too. The Wichita kid will hopefully learn a different lesson. That doesn't "justify" either kid's actions.

What the Lawrence kid was wrong, what the Wichita kid did was worse.

I'm not sure anybody would disagree with you, or has disagreed with you on that point.

If the Wichita kid was getting elbowed through the coarse of the game,

If the game was coarse, the officials probably should've given T's for profanity. If the court was coarse, maybe it needs to be sanded. If he was getting elbowed through the course of the game, however, I agree that he should've let the refs handle it. Just a thought from your annoying Mr. Spelling Guy.

[Dan_ref]

Originally Posted by IUgrad92

That's just great. Any kid, with your philosophy, is going to feel retaliating in this fashion is justified...........if he feels he took a "cheap shot", that is.

I gotta say, in terms of critical thinking skills I'm doubting you got your money's worth in that IU degree. Hopefully it's not too late to get a refund.

Or maybe whatever you learned there has been forgotten.

[BayStateRef]

From the other coach:

Kris Maples coaches the Wichita Youth Basketball league team that squared off against a team of 14-year-olds from Lawrence March 26th.

After being shoved, one of Maples' players clotheslined and then pummeled a player from the Lawrence team. Home video caught it all on tape.

Maples says his player was only responding to several elbows the Lawrence player had thrown during the course of the game.

http://209.248.155.133/fox/fullstory.asp?id=14210