Fork and Beans

[PDad]

Anyone who is a "non-pitchforker" is condoning the act.

"Condone: to regard or treat (something bad or blameworthy) as acceptable, forgivable, or harmless"

That is exactly what the non-pitchforkers are doing. They are, in effect, telling everyone to move along.....nothing to see here. They don't want to see the offenders punished, effectively holding them harmless for their actions.

"Forgivable" is the only standard most of the non-pitchforkers meet for condoning the act - only the wackos have considered the act acceptable or harmless. "To err is human; to forgive, divine."

From what I've seen, the non-pitchforkers probably know more about what happened that night and afterward. The pitchforkers continue their condemnation in the naive belief that there are no ramifications (or not enough) because they haven't heard about any.

[fastpitchdad05]

I'm quite convinced. In fact, let's scrub the sport and make it squeaky clean, so our children never again have to be exposed to bad conduct, or douchebags, or moral dilemmas. Everyone should make a list of everything that offends them and/or the delicate sensibilities of their little angels. Make a list of everything you consider to be harmful, and let's enact rules prohibiting all of it. Protect the children from danger, I say!!

No, let's not do any of that foolishness (especially since no one even came close to suggesting that be done in the first place).

But when the "danger" occurs let's talk to them about it so that they understand that these things do unfortunately happen but that it is WRONG and should not happen.

And then after we have educated our children let's do our best to make certain that SOMETHING is done so that it doesn't happen again.

[fastpitchdad05]

Anyone who is a "non-pitchforker" is condoning the act.

"Condone: to regard or treat (something bad or blameworthy) as acceptable, forgivable, or harmless"

That is exactly what the non-pitchforkers are doing. They are, in effect, telling everyone to move along.....nothing to see here. They don't want to see the offenders punished, effectively holding them harmless for their actions.

"Forgivable" is the only standard most of the non-pitchforkers meet for condoning the act - only the wackos have considered the act acceptable or harmless. "To err is human; to forgive, divine."

From what I've seen, the non-pitchforkers probably know more about what happened that night and afterward. The pitchforkers continue their condemnation in the naive belief that there are no ramifications (or not enough) because they haven't heard about any.

I challenge the notion that it is naive. Uninformed maybe, but it is not naive to think that something like this could happen and there be little to no consequences (see Mike Fox chokes coach in front of players, parents, etc).

Until we hear of some sort of consequence for the blatant wrongdoing, we will likely continue to be "naive".

[as the world turns]

I am surprised he didn't use the "If I like the umpire, I can keep the umpire" argument. It seems to be an effective line for the dimwitted. And when questioned on why the beaning, he can say "What I said I can keep the umpire only if I like the strikezone"

Sorry, it has been at least a month since I posted something political, I just had to do it. I am so excited because I got my White House Holiday Card today.

[as the world turns]

I challenge the notion that it is naive. Uninformed maybe, but it is not naive to think that something like this could happen and there be little to no consequences (see Mike Fox chokes coach in front of players, parents, etc).

Dude, if there was a video of that, I am sure it could get 1 million hits on youtube.

[fastpitchdad05]

I challenge the notion that it is naive. Uninformed maybe, but it is not naive to think that something like this could happen and there be little to no consequences (see Mike Fox chokes coach in front of players, parents, etc).

Dude, if there was a video of that, I am sure it could get 1 million hits on youtube.

That's so funny...I thought just the same thing. Do I hear 10 million?!

[anonlooker]

ATWT, please quote where anyone condoned this. I must have missed that post.

Anyone who is a "non-pitchforker" is condoning the act.

"Condone: to regard or treat (something bad or blameworthy) as acceptable, forgivable, or harmless"

That is exactly what the non-pitchforkers are doing. They are, in effect, telling everyone to move along.....nothing to see here. They don't want to see the offenders punished, effectively holding them harmless for their actions.

Wrong again. Exactly wrong. No one is condoning the act.

What you apparently have a problem with is that some us don't condone the hysterical pitchforking mentality. We aren't calling for the coach's head on a pike, or for the players to lose their scholarships, or calling college coaches, especially to rat out a girl that wasn't even there, not even on the team. That is what we don't condone.

One thing is not the other.

[fastpitchdad05]

ATWT, please quote where anyone condoned this. I must have missed that post.

Anyone who is a "non-pitchforker" is condoning the act.

"Condone: to regard or treat (something bad or blameworthy) as acceptable, forgivable, or harmless"

That is exactly what the non-pitchforkers are doing. They are, in effect, telling everyone to move along.....nothing to see here. They don't want to see the offenders punished, effectively holding them harmless for their actions.

Wrong again. Exactly wrong. No one is condoning the act.

What you apparently have a problem with is that some us don't condone the hysterical pitchforking mentality. We aren't calling for the coach's head on a pike, or for the players to lose their scholarships, or calling college coaches, especially to rat out a girl that wasn't even there, not even on the team. That is what we don't condone.

One thing is not the other.

Anonlooker,
Who on this board called for any of those things you mentioned? It may be there, but I haven't seen it and it certainly isn't prevalent. Perhaps Sam did...I would have to look again.

I have actually never said what I thought should be done, only that I felt that SOMETHING should be done. I will reserve my opinion of whether or not the punishment fits the crime when/if there actually is a punishment.

So if non-pitchforkers are saying there should be no punishment than, yes...this pitchforker is going to sharpen his pitchfork.

Perhaps we are not so far off in this discussion than first thought?

It's okay if we aren't, you can still hate me all the same.

[Sam]

ATWT, please quote where anyone condoned this. I must have missed that post.

Anyone who is a "non-pitchforker" is condoning the act.

"Condone: to regard or treat (something bad or blameworthy) as acceptable, forgivable, or harmless"

That is exactly what the non-pitchforkers are doing. They are, in effect, telling everyone to move along.....nothing to see here. They don't want to see the offenders punished, effectively holding them harmless for their actions.

Wrong again. Exactly wrong. No one is condoning the act.

What you apparently have a problem with is that some us don't condone the hysterical pitchforking mentality. We aren't calling for the coach's head on a pike, or for the players to lose their scholarships, or calling college coaches, especially to rat out a girl that wasn't even there, not even on the team. That is what we don't condone.

One thing is not the other.

Exactly where did you see that I proposed any of those things? I called for the removal or suspension or probation for the coach by the governing bodies or by the team. Thats it. So are you saying that we are actually proposing what you are proposing to be done? I really don't know what you think should be done.

[PDad]

From what I've seen, the non-pitchforkers probably know more about what happened that night and afterward. The pitchforkers continue their condemnation in the naive belief that there are no ramifications (or not enough) because they haven't heard about any.

I challenge the notion that it is naive. Uninformed maybe, but it is not naive to think that something like this could happen and there be little to no consequences (see Mike Fox chokes coach in front of players, parents, etc).

Until we hear of some sort of consequence for the blatant wrongdoing, we will likely continue to be "naive".

It is naive to think nothing has changed just because you haven't heard about it. It is naive to think the public censure they've received has had no effect on them. It is naive to think this hasn't affected their relationships with the team, college coaches, umpires and TDs.

Be careful what you wish for regarding consequences because there are also unintended consequences. Fox is a great example - he was booted from Renegades as a consequence and ended up with his own BB franchise as an unintended consequence. Has Fox done anything remotely like that again? If not, it isn't because of these consequences. More likely, it is from being ashamed of what he'd done - and that didn't receive nearly the publicity this has.

What we all want is for this to not be repeated - by them or anyone else.