Rick Reilly raises ethical dillema in youth sports

i keep telling myself not to be lured into this discussion any more, but i just can't help it.

1 -- let's forget the kid is a cancer victim. let's just think of him as a weak hitter batting behind a star hitter. THE INTENTIONAL WALK WOULD STILL BE WRONG.

2 -- the kids on both sides wanted to win, of course. you play to win the games, sure. but at this level, you play to win the games within the rules of good sportsmanship -- which means by not going out of your way to pick on any particular kid. ths isn't at all about "respecting" the slugger by walking him intentionally. it's about an adult going for the stupid title by going after a weak cog in the wheel. that's fine at the real competitive level. at this level, it was just wrong on so many levels.

3 -- in the movie recreation, the ending would be the weak link batter knocking in the winning run. no such happy ending here. just an adult coach being left with nothing to feel good about. just left with lame excuses.

again, why is all this so hard to understand?

 

shockey, I'm continually amazed that you keep posting the same things and yet still add nothing to the discussion.

It's truly a gift.

 

Actually, Shockey nailed it, as have several other people on this thread. It's a shame that not everyone can see that.

 

thanks, brooadway joe. i haven't understood a single one of zeke's criticisms, but why should those make any sense, given his point of view? ??? ??? ???

 

Got no problem with the empathy for the stricken boy. This was poorly handled.

But the side issue with this, and what a few of YOU don't get, is that a 9-10 year old championship game DOES actually mean something. Whether you think it's right or wrong. It means something to the participants.

 

Joining this late, but I blame the coaches for the kid with cancer. Why was he batting behind the best hitter on the team?

I suggested to our head coach to walk the best hitter in a 11-12 playoff game this year to load the bases with one out. But the kid after him could hit, too.

Worked out, though.

 

What did he nail?

That it's wrong to go after the weak kid in competition between 9-10 year olds? I might or might not agree. But to act like this is the only time it happens is ludicrous.

Is it wrong to steal when the other team has a weak catcher?

Is it wrong to go first to third on a weak right fielder?

Is it wrong to bunt in the direction of a weak third baseman?

Is it wrong to take a walk from a weak pitcher?

Is it wrong to strike out a weak batter?

And, furthermore, if your position is that it's wrong to take advantage of the other players' weaknesses, how shall each coach know these weaknesses? Shall we have them exchange cards at home plate before the start of the game? "OK, Timmy has a shunt in his head, Joey has asthma, Billy has ADD and little Johnny over there is a girl trapped in a boy's body."

People have made good points all along this thread on both sides. To continue to post the same simplistic drivel followed by WHAT IS SO HARD TO UNDERSTAND? is the height of stupidity.

What these coaches did might well have been wrong, but no one on this thread knows for sure, and they certainly don't deserve the righteous condemnation they've been given from a few here, either.

Go nail that for a while.

 

It does mean something, Shot, but it doesn't mean EVERYTHING. There are a lot of issues involved in a game like that that are much more important than who wins or loses. It's the job of adults to make sure that kids realize that. These coaches failed to do that.

 

OK, would this have been a good way to handle it?

Go to the mound and huddle with the pitcher and catcher.

Tell them, "Look, no way we are pitching to Muscles here in this situation, but Cancer Kid is on deck and everyone is going to howl if we intentionally walk him. So I want you to look like you are pitching to this guy but don't throw anything he can put the bat on and get the next kid out."

Would that be OK?

 

What that would have done is accomplish the same result with much fewer people getting mad, for sure.

You have to wonder, though, if the 9-10 year old pitcher has enough control to pull that off.

 

I know you haven't read the whole thread, but that was suggested early on. And yes, in my opinion that would have been OK. It's fine to pitch carefully to the slugger. Nobody's saying you have to lay it in there and let him whack it. But an intentional walk at that level? Bush.

 

Yes, it means something. Nobody has argued otherwise.

The argument is how much it means. I, for one, don't think a 9- and 10-year-old league championship means so much that you're willing to make a kid who is obviously nowhere near as healthy and able as the other kids feel like shit.  

And zeke, if you can't see the difference in stealing on a weak catcher and walking a good player to pitch to a kid who is physically disabled because of a disease, that's a problem.