Cheap shot foul on dunk temporarily paralyzes Indiana star

[RadioBlue]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

You're making an assumption: that the reporter had any valid reason to report the name of the fouling player. Or that he has a history of reporting the names of the players who commit fouls.

You need to back that assumption up before you start having a fit about the omission in this particular article.

Snaq's is correct. Don't call it shoddy journalism unless you have all the pertinent & relevant facts. You've stated an opinion based on your limited knowledge of the whole story. You're calling the integrity of a newspaper writer into question without knowing all the facts. Perhaps the writer had the kids name in his original story, but the editor yanked it. Do you know?

Would I have had a problem if the story included the fouler's name? Not at all. Just as I don't have a problem with the name being excluded. It really doesn't matter whether the kid's name is in the story, or not.

How often does a newspaper article name a kid who got called for defensive pass interference that led to the game-winning touchdown? How many times have you seen a rightfielder get named when he drops a can-of-corn flyball which led to the winning run in a high school regional?

It's in poor taste to name kids who make mistakes during a contest. While this situation is not your run-of-the-mill foul, nor were the results, I'm not sure it rises to the level where the offender should be named with no if's, and's or but's.

[Adam]

Yeah, the argument seems to be there are three types of fouls for purposes of naming the player:
1. typical foul, not worth mentioning.
2. Intentional/flagrant foul that causes injury but isn't a crime. Name the b@stard and embarrass him.
3. Criminal conduct. Leave it out if he's a juvenile.

I would change your football example to a personal foul (maybe roughing the kicker on a punt). Do they ever name these players in reports on high school games?

[26 Year Gap]

Originally Posted by RadioBlue

Snaq's is correct. Don't call it shoddy journalism unless you have all the pertinent & relevant facts. You've stated an opinion based on your limited knowledge of the whole story. You're calling the integrity of a newspaper writer into question without knowing all the facts. Perhaps the writer had the kids name in his original story, but the editor yanked it. Do you know?

Would I have had a problem if the story included the fouler's name? Not at all. Just as I don't have a problem with the name being excluded. It really doesn't matter whether the kid's name is in the story, or not.

How often does a newspaper article name a kid who got called for defensive pass interference that led to the game-winning touchdown? How many times have you seen a rightfielder get named when he drops a can-of-corn flyball which led to the winning run in a high school regional?

It's in poor taste to name kids who make mistakes during a contest. While this situation is not your run-of-the-mill foul, nor were the results, I'm not sure it rises to the level where the offender should be named with no if's, and's or but's.

Actually, this is a pretty pertinent factoid. Back when I was a junior in HS, we had to raise our hand if we committed the foul. When I was a senior, it became optional. Why? Because the Fed did not want to have the fouler "embarrassed because he did something wrong". I thought it was stupid then, and still do today. But, it leads to what I and others have pointed out multiple times in this thread. Editorial policy is up to the publishers and editors--not reporters or readers. And if they want to run their business that way, it is fine by me. I have a much greater problem with editorializing masquerading as reporting than I do because some kid's name was left out of a story and some guy on an internet forum is upset about it.

[APG]

Originally Posted by 26 Year Gap

Actually, this is a pretty pertinent factoid. Back when I was a junior in HS, we had to raise our hand if we committed the foul. When I was a senior, it became optional. Why? Because the Fed did not want to have the fouler "embarrassed because he did something wrong".

Which is all pointless when the announcer tells us, "Foul on number 22...*insert name*...his first. Team's 7th. Number 55...*insert name* at the line shooting two."

Then to add more to the "embarrassment" the scoreboard operator (I know this part is going to get CHS' ears up) puts that foul on the board and we a running count of all the "mistakes" every player as made in the game.

Those announcers and scoreboard operators sure are a "mean" bunch.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by AllPurposeGamer

Which is all pointless when the announcer tells us, "Foul on number 22...*insert name*...his first. Team's 7th. Number 55...*insert name* at the line shooting two."

Then to add more to the "embarrassment" the scoreboard operator (I know this part is going to get CHS' ears up) puts that foul on the board and we a running count of all the "mistakes" every player as made in the game.

Those announcers and scoreboard operators sure are a "mean" bunch.

When I was wearing a microphone for a HS football game a few years ago, one coach said, "I don't mind you wearing that, (as if I really cared to ask his permission) but please don't embarrass my players by announcing the number of the kids when they get penalties." Now, HS practice is to *still* not do so, but I found it funny in the same way. We tell the whole world who fouls in basketball, but we have to relay the numbers by carrier pigeon (or umpire to wing) in football. Just silly.

Full disclosure: I called my first flagrant foul ever (24 years) this season. The name of the player was not in the article in the paper. Nor were the names of the players who committed technical fouls in the same game.

Edited to add: The first and last name of the player in my game is in the box score just below the article. Matter of fact, now that I think about it, I used the boxscore to help with the report (saved me from digging out the game program).

[APG]

Originally Posted by RichMSN

When I was wearing a microphone for a HS football game a few years ago, one coach said, "I don't mind you wearing that, (as if I really cared to ask his permission) but please don't embarrass my players by announcing the number of the kids when they get penalties." Now, HS practice is to *still* not do so, but I found it funny in the same way. We tell the whole world who fouls in basketball, but we have to relay the numbers by carrier pigeon (or umpire to wing) in football. Just silly.

Full disclosure: I called my first flagrant foul ever (24 years) this season. The name of the player was not in the article in the paper. Nor were the names of the players who committed technical fouls in the same game.

Edited to add: The first and last name of the player in my game is in the box score just below the article. Matter of fact, now that I think about it, I used the boxscore to help with the report (saved me from digging out the game program).

Yeah I never really got that...especially at the high school level, I think just about every kid can handle an announcement stating he committed a foul. If he can't, then he's got a tough life ahead of him.

[26 Year Gap]

Originally Posted by AllPurposeGamer

Yeah I never really got that...especially at the high school level, I think just about every kid can handle an announcement stating he committed a foul. If he can't, then he's got a tough life ahead of him.

Or they learn to "play the victim".