Rick Reilly raises ethical dillema in youth sports

A week-and-a-half? 9 and 10 year olds probably will be over it in an hour-and-a-half, and it would only take 90 minutes if it takes that long to get ice cream after the game. The game is for the kids, not the parents or coaches.

 

dog --

Now you're speaking my language.

 

So because I disagree with you, I have no argument to make. I've never once said I agree with what the coaches did (though obviously I don't believe they're evil incarnate, as so many of you do). All I've said is that I think it absolutely stinks that most of you seem to think this little boy's got one foot in the grave. Excuse me for giving him the benefit of the doubt.

By the way, I never said you were a jerk. But if I have "no argument," simply because I disagree with you, it seems you need to take a look in the mirror.

 

Dog, if that's what you think I said, then we aren't communicating very well. I never said I thought the game was "meaningful." Like others, all I've done is point out that when you put your kid out there, success and failure are both possible outcomes. If this little boy is so sick that he can't possibly succeed on his own, then yes, I do think the parents put him in a heck of a spot.

 

This whole thing kind of points to one of the things that's been bugging me about youth sports. In so many cases, it's not about the kids any more. It hasn't been for a long time. Kids didn't organize all these ridiculous baseball and softball world series that are played every year. They're happy enough winning a city title, and most of the time they're just happy enough playing. But their parents want to be able to say, "Little Johnny was on the best team in America." So they trot their kids all around during the summer, saying it's the best thing for them, that this is what their kids want. But 999 times out of 1,000, their kid would be happy playing in their hometown against the kids they know. Probably happier because they could tease each other about it later. Sure, the kids get some cool trips and memories. But they lose time spent just horsing around with friends to time being drilled in strategy and yelled at for not being good enough, sometimes by coaches, sometimes by parents.

Parents and coaches (not all in either case, but some, and in some places a lot) lose track of what the kids want to be doing and place all sorts of controls on their children's pursuits. Outside of basketball, how often do kids any more play pickup games of baseball or football or anything else at the park? Heck, even basketball is becoming less common. It's all about signing your kid up for a league (which thanks to the high cost prices out some poor kids), getting him a paid coach and putting restrictions and controls on his experience. Some of my best memories when I was little was just playing football in the back yard when I was a kid. Know how many times we took a knee, a common strategy for winning? None.

And I'm not the first to say it, but this is a big reason, maybe the big reason, why a lot of kids who would make great athletes quit sports when they're young. They get burnt out because of the pressure put on them. And they don't have fun, which, whether you believe it or not, is the No. 1 thing in sports. They're called games for a reason. We have fun playing them. Winning is great, but it's not the only thing about the game that we love, and it's not even the most important.

I think the pressure from adults is another reason why you see so many kids who get into skateboarding or other action sports. Adults don't care about these things, so they can go out and have fun without some grown-up saying, "You should try this, or that, and you can't do that or that or that." They get to be themselves and have fun. Action sports are FAR more about having fun and being the best you can than they are about winning.

Kids wouldn't have walked the star. You know why? Think about when you were little playing with your friends. Did you imagine yourself in the bottom of the ninth, one-run lead with two outs and a runner on third, the star hitter for whatever team you hated (Yankees, Red Sox, whatever) at the plate? Did you imagine yourself giving the dude a pass to get to the next guy? Hell no! You fanned the fool with three straight fast balls, strategy be damned.

There's plenty of time for these kids to learn strategy. Let them be kids while they can.

 

buckdub --

I think I have perspective. But I don't ever, ever recall in little league having our worst hitter hitting behind our best.

I was on a couple of teams where it didn't really make a difference, and I hit 1 or two sometimes and 7-8-9 some times. But I don't think I ever hit four or five, and I was never the worst hitter on the team.

Anyway, it's an argument that could go on and on, especially with new people jumping in and making arguments that have already been addressed.

 

I think we both agree that adults are the biggest problem with youth sports. Too many folks out there trying to recapture the "glory" of their youth. I'm still glad the kid got to bat, though. I only wish he'd knocked it out of the yard. Next time, and I pray there is a next time, I wouldn't be surprised if he does.

 

No, you never said the word "jerk" but you implied about as much. But can you honestly sit there and say you'd have been watching this game, knowing this kid's story, and said, "Hey, we've got a great chance to win now"?

I don't buy that any sensible person would think this kid had a GOOD chance to get a hit. Like I said before, if you read it, yes, he had a chance, and I wish he had gotten the winning hit. But did he have a GOOD chance? From everything I've read on it, I'd have to say no.

Besides, the point is that the opposing coaches made this assumption. Whether he got the hit or not is moot. The assumptions of the crowd are moot. That's why you have no argument. The point is the coaches, including one who coached him before and knew a little more about him than you or I, figured the kid to be an easy out so they walked the star to get to him. You're arguing about what people who weren't in the situation are thinking, which isn't the point. The point is that people in this situation, with knowledge of the kid, decided to take advantage of him.

The kid's a fighter and stronger than a lot of grown-ups. I wish he would've gotten the hit and made the coaches look like idiots. But neither of those statements absolve the coaches from assuming they could use a kid with cancer to get a title.

 

The kid who got IBB'd certainly didn't.

 

In-fucking-arguable

 

I might be the 39475934857439 person to point this out - I don't feel like reading through so many pages - but the Yankees are always the assholes. How fitting.

 

I reread Reilly column and realize now that the kid cheated - he took human growth hormones.

He deserves no special treatment.