Rick Reilly raises ethical dillema in youth sports

Who gets the story at ESPN? Schaap? Bob Ley for OTL? Stu Scott?

 

Connelly. Definitely.

 

They're engraving the cancer kid's name on an ESPY as we speak.

 

Let me try this a different way -- and somebody might've said this already and I just missed it.

Let's say that the coach didn't walk the star player. It doesn't matter what happens from there -- he could hit a HR or K, makes no difference. After the game is over, the coach says he didn't walk the star because he didn't want to cheapen this for his kids. He didn't want to take the easy way out. He didn't want to take advantage of a rule that forced a kid with a disability into a tough spot. He didn't want people -- his players, the opposing players and the parents from both sides -- to remember the one walk instead of all the other wins.

Would there be people here criticizing this coach? That's assuming that this became a story after that.

 

I don't know what's the most disturbing:

1. That the coaches did it
2. That the coaches lied about not knowing about the kid's health issues
3. That apparently half the country seems to think the coaches did the right thing (at least according to Reilly on the radio today)

 

Shot, in no way was I flaming the kids who play in the LLWS. I was simply pointing out that while the league I played in wasn't elite, it was a good league.

 

Or let's say the coach just orders the pitcher to pitch around the hitter -- which he probably would have done anyway -- and he walks him on five pitches. It doesn't become a story after that, either.

And, according to Reilly's account, what happened after the final out? The Yankees celebrated. So, that tells me these 10-year olds knew what was at stake . . . and wanted to win.

 

The point that hasn't been dwelled on enough - but someone finally said it - was the fact that the so-called weak kid had a chance to be a hero.

A long shot? Of course. But a shot nevertheless. If he does something to drive in the tying - or even winning - run, then does Reilly write about it ... after the local sports scribe does something?

I despise it as much as anyone when a parent or other reader makes entirely too much of youth sports. But the Yankees' coach did the right thing. If this wasn't a competitive situation, why was there a championship game? Why was the cancer survivor in the game?

And the first person who claims I'm not sympathetic to cancer situations doesn't know the first thing about me. (Hint: see handle)

 

Well of course they wanted to win. Nobody's claiming these kids were mentally handicapped and didn't know what was going on. We're saying the coaches cared waaaaayyyyy more about winning than the kids did.

Had it happened that the star player walked, so be it. That's the game.

My point in this has always been the same -- don't make this game any different than it would be if the adults weren't there.

And Sam, come on. There are different levels of competition. And 9- and 10-year-old league competition is way down near the bottom. This is a league that's less about winning and more about teaching kids. Yes, score is kept, but that's also more to teach the kids than it is about won-loss records.

There was a chance here to teach these kids that taking the easy way, even though it meant almost a sure win, isn't necessarily the right thing to do. There was a chance for these kids to learn that stepping up and taking on the best gives you a helluva lot better feeling than taking the easy road.

Instead, all these kids learned was goofy little baseball lesson about walking a strong hitter to get to a weaker one.

To me, the best way to judge what was right or wrong in this case are the results for these coaches: They made a kid who has felt like shit a good part of his life feel like shit again. They took a helluva lot meaning away from that trophy for your kids. They have been made to look like heartless pricks to most of the country.

 

I won't argue against your points, dog. All legit.

I got lucky in that my first youth coach overseas taught us the fundamentals, had the patience of Job, NEVER yelled at us and we were lucky to learn something, learn to count on one another and have a lot of fun. It was a basketball team ... we were about .500 most of the year, but surged to the tourney championship game. We learned first and foremost ... like you're saying (correctly), it's about teaching the kids fundamentals.

A couple of years later, I was that kid who fanned at the plate for the last out to get my team eliminated from the postseason tournament. No, the batter in front of me wasn't issued a free pass - I wasn't that bad :-\ - and yeah, I felt like crap. Thank goodness the opposing coach was a good man and better human being ... he wasted little time running up to give me a hug and lauded the effort. Helluva nice thing for the opposing coach to do ... but you can also bet that he wasn't about to give back the win simply to make me feel better.

All I'll say is if the league, the team and the coach thought the kid belonged in the game, then he's a part of the game. Do we kid ourselves and make him a pitcher or shortstop or any other strong field position because that would make him feel better? From what we've read and from what Rick Reilly described, the kid already has perspective that some of us adults lack (and a few trolls on this board for that matter).

At the risk of trying to placate everyone, the counterpoints are good. But if this is truly a non-competitive league, then why not just end the season at the end of the regular season and hand out those participation trophies we've panned in past threads?

 

They knew what was at stake? And what was that, exactly? Probably nothing but a handful of plastic trophies, half of which will be gathering dust in the parents' garages by the end of the month. The people who defend the coaches' actions can't seem to see the difference between a little boys' championship game and the 7th game of the World Series. The coaches did the wrong thing because they put winning above all else. A youth coach is supposed to know better than that.

 

I'm not reading through all 16 pages of this thread, so my apologies if this has already been said, but intentional walks should be illegal until at the very least Babe Ruth-level ball. Absolutely asinine that the IBB is even an option in a game like this.