I swear I read this as “obnoxiousness into buggery” and had a moment of 
:eek: :eek: .
Am I the only one who giggled just a little bit at the video? I apologized immediately afterward to the great god karma, but still…
That was precisely what I envisioned the moron thinking. “I’ll show him someone he can’t make a ‘late hit’ on!”
I think ND’s (nimrod dad) actions were great, that CSA (cheapshot artist)
totally had it coming, and that the initial hit on IV (innocent victim) was blatantly
and intentionally cheap. ND does not deserve jailtime, especially not a felony
child abuse conviction. The only reason thats even being thrown out there is
the media attention. ND deserves at worst, a small fine and being ousted as
an assistant coach. To all the people crying out that the moral of this story
should be that parents shouldnt get so wrapped up in their kids sporting events,
I would like to propose a different moral: Parents should teach their kids a little
sportsmanship and common decency and perhaps they wont have to worry about
people retaliating against them.
Some points to consider:
-
CSA was wearing full pads and really, considering the realitive sizes of
all three parties, CSA doesnt appear to be hit much harder than IV. -
The play in question was a kickoff. This means that even if CSA’s hit wasnt
3-4 seconds late, it still would have been blatantly illegal as it was in the back. -
It should be noted that CSA is significantly bigger that IV, CSA isnt
cheapshotting somebody with a legitimate chance to retaliate. -
CSA is a bully plain and simple, and as often happens, got what was coming
to him.
That’s ridiculous. “He was wearing pads, so he couldn’t have gotten that badly hurt!”
Did you ever play football, IIceman? Pads or not, that shit can hurt, especially when you’re not expecting contact. Kids don’t wear pads to make the invulnerable; they wear pads to reduce the risk of severe injury. If a guy who outweighs you by 100 pounds gets a running start and hits you square in the back when you’re not expecting it, you’re going to be hurt, regardless of whether you’re in pads or not.
Cheap Shot Artist definitely did not “get what was coming to him.” What was coming to him was a 15 yard penalty, maybe an ejection or even a suspension from the next game or two. A couple of extra hard or questionable hits from his opponents on the field would have gotten the message across too. But what the coach did was so far out of the range of acceptable reactions that I’d have no problem charging him with felony assault. Do you really think a set of pads levels the playing field in a fight between a 36 year old adult and a 13 year old boy?
I didnt base my assessment of how bad the hit singularly on the fact the kid was
wearing pads. I watched the tape, saw the hit, and saw the kid immediately
get up. ND does not appear to have 100 pounds on CSA. More like 40-50
and that doesnt appear to be much more than CSA has on IV.
This was not a fight. Period. Saying it was is simply hyperbole. Nothing about
the hit says that ND was trying to cause an actual injury to CSA. ND did not wrap
CSA up and drive him into the ground. ND did not come in low and take out CSA
at the knees. ND did not pummel CSA after he was down. CSA had the same
expectation of contact that IV did.
ND and CSA essentially commited the same offense. To grant CSA the mediating
circumstance of being wrapped up in the game and not grant ND the same is
simply biased. Should ND be held to a higher standard for being an adult and
a coach? Yes. Should ND be vilified? No. He was protecting his kid and/or
player. Are there better ways to do that? Yes. Is there a better way to make
CSA understand that he was out of line? I doubt it. Thats just the way bullies
operate.
As of today, the guy’s only being charged with a misdemeanor. He’ll probably plead it down to simple assault, with lengthy probation and perhaps a few weekends in jail…that is, if he can ever show up to court on time.
It does seem like the kid had it comin’ – he’s probably one of those schoolyard bullies who signed up for football just to knock around smaller, weaker kids with impunity. Too bad none of the coaches or referees bothered to reprimand that behavior, and unfortunately this Angry Dad incident only serves to teach him that HE’S the real victim here! :rolleyes:
So the way to teach a bully - you’re presuming that CSA is a bully - that cheap shots are wrong is to attack them bodily by somebody bigger then themselves? Do you see a problem with the logic in that?
Yes, ND is an adult. Therefore, he should know how to deal with CSA as the rules require. We don’t know if CSA is a bully or if this was his first attempt - you’re just guessing that the might be a bully who signed up to shove other kids, but he could just as well be a nice kid retaliating for an earlier cheap shot by IV. We don’t have the whole story (of the game) on the video. We don’t know the personalities of any of these people - ND, CSA or IV.
But the way to teach a kid not to use violence is to use other methods of dealing with problems. If we knew that CSA was a bully, and penalties and other methods had failed, we would move to higher scores. But hitting a child does certainly not teach him compassion and fairness to those who are smaller! :eek:
Yes, Im presuming that CSA is a bully. Like you im forced to view this incident in isolation
and the admittedly limited information available (timing of the hit, nature of the hit, the target
chosen, etc ) suggests this to be a reasonable presumption.
You claim hitting a child does not teach compassion and fairenss to those that are smaller.
I think the truth or untruth of that statement depends on the context. Getting knocked down
as a punishment for knocking somebody else down seems about as fair as you can get.
Also, one could argue that teaching someone that their actions have concequences and
cheapshotting people is a good way to get yourself laid out can be compassionate. Its best
to learn that lesson in a way that has relatively minor concequences, less they sucker punch
some kid at school or a party and find themselves the victims of a drive-by or similar escalation
of violence.
Claiming that violence can not teach is inaccurate. Negative re-enforcement is a well documented teaching method
I’m sorry, but even assuming that Cheap Shot Artist (CSA) is a bully, and that this wasn’t his first offence, that does not mean that what Nimrod Dad (ND) did was morally equivalent.
CSA (again, assuming that this was a deliberate action) was cheating in a game. What ND did was assault and battery.
If this had been outside the context of a football game, and CSA had decked Innocent Victim (IV) during an outing in the park, then ND would have been fully justified in shoving him away. As retaliation for a perceived cheap shot against his kid? No way.
Since this is a first offense, fine the guy and ban him from coaching kids in ANY sporting event.
And yes, I am a father.
For the record, I introduced the concept that the kid who was run over by Nimrod Dad might have been a cheap shot artist who had been going at it all game. My theory, based on nothing more than a wild hair up my ass, was that something more than a random late hit in a football game set off the dad, and was formed when the kid refused to acknowledge the late hit on a CNN interview the next day.
I also noted that I remember playing sports that age, and occassionally getting tunnel vision. You put in your mind you are going to do something, and that’s it. Unlike an adult, all those little cues that should make you re-evaluate your action are missed. I posited the Cheap Shot Artist first because I got a bad vibe from the CNN interview - nothing more.
Please, let’s not change wild theory into presupposed fact any further in this thread.