Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Poor sportmanship of the year?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Walkoff Balk
    replied
    Re: Poor sportmanship of the year?

    https://www.yahoo.com/sports/novak-d...202733116.html

    Be careful with the tennis balls.

    Leave a comment:


  • Walkoff Balk
    replied
    Re: Poor sportmanship of the year?

    http://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/more...2Hcn?li=AA54yf

    Their parents should have their wages garnished for a couple of years. And the young men will have to pull weeds afterschool for the rest of the school year.

    Leave a comment:


  • Walkoff Balk
    replied
    Re: Poor sportmanship of the year?

    http://thebiglead.com/2015/06/10/hig...icious-elbows/

    Chicken wing.

    Leave a comment:


  • Walkoff Balk
    replied
    Re: Poor sportmanship of the year?

    http://www.sbnation.com/college-foot...-oregons-hands

    FSU stands for F-Sportsmanship University.

    Leave a comment:


  • Walkoff Balk
    replied
    Re: Poor sportmanship of the year?

    Originally posted by Walkoff Balk View Post
    There's no hickey in sucka.
    Corrections:
    There's no hickey in world cup sucka.

    Leave a comment:


  • Walkoff Balk
    replied
    Re: Poor sportmanship of the year?

    http://msn.foxsports.com/soccer/stor...tch-ban-062414

    There's no hickey in sucka.

    Leave a comment:


  • Walkoff Balk
    replied
    Re: Poor sportmanship of the year?

    http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nfl-sh...9666--nfl.html

    The hoodie showed his class again.

    Leave a comment:


  • Walkoff Balk
    replied
    Re: Poor sportmanship of the year?

    http://www.hawaiinewsnow.com/story/1...-election-loss

    A nominee for this year's election is...
    Either one?

    Leave a comment:


  • Nords
    replied
    Re: Poor sportmanship of the year?

    Originally posted by Amati View Post
    Hahahaha. This site practically requires a scorecard to keep track of the offense vs the defense.
    ... as well as the offensive and the defensive...

    Leave a comment:


  • Amati
    replied
    Re: Poor sportmanship of the year?

    Originally posted by Walkoff Balk View Post
    Today is National Sportmanship Day. I want to see Frankie's Market and Kaonohi shake hands.
    Hahahaha. This site practically requires a scorecard to keep track of the offense vs the defense.

    Leave a comment:


  • Walkoff Balk
    replied
    Re: Poor sportmanship of the year?

    Today is National Sportmanship Day. I want to see Frankie's Market and Kaonohi shake hands.

    Leave a comment:


  • Walkoff Balk
    replied
    Re: Poor sportmanship of the year?

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FTxHu...layer_embedded

    We're number one!

    Leave a comment:


  • Walkoff Balk
    replied
    Re: Poor sportmanship of the year?

    http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091106/..._soccer_fracas

    Another nominee.

    Leave a comment:


  • oceanpacific
    replied
    Re: Poor sportmanship of the year?

    For one of his outbursts, McEnroe was first assessed a penalty point, then a game as he persisted, and then defaulted the match.

    For all his ranting, McEnroe did not threaten bodily harm, as I recall.

    Leave a comment:


  • Jim75
    replied
    Re: Poor sportmanship of the year?

    In resect to the Serena Williams incident, you can't have people threatening the referees. I think McEnroe's behavior should have been managed better back in his day. If you can intimidate the referee, you can control the outcome of the game. If a referee is found to be lacking, then the administrative body that hires the referee can deal with it. Baseball culture has kind of accepted the attempts of coaches to bully umpires. It has become part of the "show". Hockey has decided to accept almost any behavior, literally.

    It's kind of a tightrope with these college and professional sports. You get these highly charged situations where a lot is at stake. People's adrenalin is pumped up. Provocative remarks are made. Many sports offer plenty of opportunities for covert, unchecked violence that is beyond what is permitted by the rules. Some will engage in dirty pool, others won't. Dirty pool has to be penalized when it's identified. Rewarding cheap shot artists will not lead to better outcomes. It's not entirely different from the financial mess we're in today. Dirtballs carried the day and now the chickens have come home to roost. It's not unusual to have an enforcer who is willling and able to dish out violence that is beyond what is allowed by the rules. Players have a variety of personalities and capacities for impulse control.

    Bottom line, IMO, is that certain behaviors should not be tolerated. If you hit somebody with your fist during a game, you should be prosecuted. Then, you should face sanctions by the team and/or league.

    Sports certainly aren't primarily responsible for violence in society at large; but in their own way they can sometimes contribute. On the other hand, sports provide an outlet for aggression that has to decrease some violence in society. They teach teamwork, fair-play, "sportsmanship" and other positive values. The scales tip decidedly in favor of the positive contributions of sport, but it will only hold true as long as sport is synonymous with integrity. People idolize athletes. Like the quarterback who idolized Michael Vick. People experience euphoria or depression in response to how their "team" performs. Men, who aren't even participants, apparently have changes in testosterone levels in response to winning or losing.

    Like it or not, athletes at the college and professional levels are the role models for millions of people. If violence that has not been agreed upon within the rules of the sport appears, there must be consequences. Otherwise, people who don't have a strong inner-compass will follow the examples of the people they admire. It might even become widely accepted as normal, adaptive behavior. I suppose some might think that is a good outcome. If you want a society that functions at the lowest level of moral reasoning, i.e. "Might makes right", then condoning this behavior would be the way to go. I would suggeset that it is not the way to go.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X