First of all, you have absolutely no idea if there was a “lazy administration.” You don’t know what prior situations have occurred, you don’t know what other steps were taken, you don’t know anything except a minimalist report on a news service wire, as edited to show up wherever you found it. You aren’t competent to judge what happened on the basis of that.
Secondly, as has been noted, the tag games did not simply involve willing participants, as noted. And more than one person has shown up here complaining that they were the victims of such behavior, yet your only response to that sort of statement is to ridicule the assertion. How about accepting that, perhaps, something you thought of as fun and games, enjoyable for those you remember, wasn’t always so enjoyable for everyone involved? Perhaps, things weren’t quite what you thought they were, eh?
Thirdly, there is nothing in what I said previously that was an indictment of competitiveness. After all, there are plenty competitive games where the inability to be physically active at a level equivalent to others isn’t the spotlight of the game. Soccer, for example, or baseball, or football, or basketball, or… See the point? Compare another old time favorite: KeepAway. Set up as a team activity, it’s not so bad, … until you notice that what is happening is that the mean spirited players are playing keep away from the less agile, refusing to let them have a chance at touching the ball, or whatever is involved. CAN it be played in an enjoyable fashion? Sure. Will it always? NO.
Now, anyone who carefully read what I wrote before will understand that I did NOT say that Tag was an evil sport always to be avoided (unlike Dodgeball, which, frankly, I don’t see any redeeming value in, see recent post). What I said was that, in today’s resource strapped schools (think about that the next time you vote on a levy or tax for them), to assert that it is “idiotic” to ban a game of this nature on the playgrounds during recess is itself idiotic. The game simply cannot be properly supervised, in all likelihood. And to assert that such a ban is “idiotic,” without having experienced for yourself the difficulties inherent in trying to keep such behaviors from deteriorating to troubled situations is simply wrong. In making such an assertion, you are talking out of your arse. And no, you can’t rely upon your memories of having been a child on a playground to act as a guide.
In a society that worries about why people like Dylan Klebold exist, refusing to accept that part of the problem may be how we “play” is simply playing Wise Monkeys with the issue. :rolleyes: