CradleandShoot - 1 Minute (2 Day) Penalty

[cradleandshoot]

[First - for the record: I like both posters involved here - both give good posts on lacrosse threads. I pay zero attention to non-lacrosse threads at Fanlax. That’s not why I visit this site. I’ve always felt nothing good comes from discussing stuff like that here, except for having an outlet to keep such discussions from bleeding over into the lacrosse discussions. - Wombat]

Admin - I have a question here.

Why are discussions from the Politics forum causing people to wind up in the Penalty Box?

I reviewed all three links you cited, and while it’s apparent that there’s been some fighting, I thought this was expected in the no holds barred world of those forums. To me, the “personal attacks” didn’t seem that bad. And there was a bit of sparring coming from the other direction too. “Penalty Box Denizen” is taunting and baiting.

In hockey, you fight, both of you go into the box.

I’m concerned that finger pointing can be one-sided if the finger pointer knows there are no repercussions for flagging posts and trying to get someone put in the box.

I’m sure there is a lot more history here behind this and that affects the sin bin decision making process.

But at some point, I’d say the fingerer has to go to the box too.

Wombat,
I agree with you that if I was instigating the fights or even throwing some big punches in response, I'd deserve a timeout in the doghouse. I've probably come close. But I generally don't instigate and I generally try to give an attacker a chance to chill and realize they've crossed the line, back off. Some don't, they keep at it. Example above, I suggested to Kram he back off when he popped off during a discussion...IMO, he was just exasperated and took a swing out of frustration. No big deal, no sweat, and he didn't take a second swing. But then three others, each of whom have recently made it to the penalty box, piled in though they hadn't been involved in the underlying discussion...no comment on the actual topic, just swipes at me.

Cradle made the mistake of "arguing with the ref" when he got a mild warning. Thus, back in the penalty box.

More broadly, we've been having a discussion about how to reduce the temperature on the Politics thread, just as there was a discussion at the beginning construction of FanLax on what the rules should be, including the option of Hamsterdam which is virtually no holds barred 'discussion'...should someone want to have such. Not surprisingly, Hamsterdam attracts few posts.

The attempt is to have a place where topics of interest can be discussed, including Politics, where the discussions are at least semi-respectful, informative. Fine to be passionate and to disagree strongly, but civil. We asked for a light hand on moderation, but not no moderation. We didn't want no holds barred.

However, a few posters seem to think that this is 'warfare' and they're keyboard warriors for their cause. That's not limited to those who skew hard right, but most of it comes that direction. And so, the pattern is to come into an otherwise fine conversation and, rather than to add some set of information or logic or perspective to that discussion, to instead make ad hominem attacks of fellow posters. And to constantly 'troll' the threads with outrageous statements generally about fellow posters in an aggregate way.

So, we've been discussing whether additional 'rules' are necessary to reduce the stuff that makes the threads so toxic that they aren't attractive to actual discussion.

Meanwhile, one pretty simple rule in all sports is to not argue with the ref.

You think I did not understand where my beef with the ref was going to send me? My beef and the reason I'm more than happy to pay my dues is that that i resent you trying to subliminally suggest what i should say and how i should say it. We have been having this back and forth for months. Then suddenly, it upset you enough to do what you felt you had to do. I'm fine with that, I'm not fine with you giving direction as to what is respectful and what is not. Had you chose to PM me and tell me how you felt, i would have apologized and respected your wishes. You do understand the abuse and insults that have been thrown my way from folks here busting my chops. We are 2 different breeds of cat. I am not going to change who i am. I will respect your feelings and not try to bust your chops. I expect only in return that you refrain from lecturing me on the contents of my post and how i state my opinions.

[cradleandshoot]

[First - for the record: I like both posters involved here - both give good posts on lacrosse threads. I pay zero attention to non-lacrosse threads at Fanlax. That’s not why I visit this site. I’ve always felt nothing good comes from discussing stuff like that here, except for having an outlet to keep such discussions from bleeding over into the lacrosse discussions. - Wombat]

Admin - I have a question here.

Why are discussions from the Politics forum causing people to wind up in the Penalty Box?

I reviewed all three links you cited, and while it’s apparent that there’s been some fighting, I thought this was expected in the no holds barred world of those forums. To me, the “personal attacks” didn’t seem that bad. And there was a bit of sparring coming from the other direction too. “Penalty Box Denizen” is taunting and baiting.

In hockey, you fight, both of you go into the box.

I’m concerned that finger pointing can be one-sided if the finger pointer knows there are no repercussions for flagging posts and trying to get someone put in the box.

I’m sure there is a lot more history here behind this and that affects the sin bin decision making process.

But at some point, I’d say the fingerer has to go to the box too.

+1

Cradles posts are done with obvious levity and humor, plus he avoids direct personal insults (most of the resident liberals constantly insult but never get sent to the penalty box ); ironically very few others here possess the same qualities. Until he’s released, I’m boycotting this site in solidarity with Cradle and the American way of life.

Please don't boycott anything in my name PB. I received what i deserved. I expected it and i understand it. My disagreement with the moderator in this regard is how does he define a personal attack? Maybe at some point in time our moderator can give us clearer guidance as to what a personal attack is and is not. Here is some food for thought in this regard. If I tell a fellow forum poster to go fly a kite is that a personal attack or merely a suggestion to enjoy a fun outdoor activity? Think about it, it becomes open to how you interpret what I said.

[Peter Brown]

[First - for the record: I like both posters involved here - both give good posts on lacrosse threads. I pay zero attention to non-lacrosse threads at Fanlax. That’s not why I visit this site. I’ve always felt nothing good comes from discussing stuff like that here, except for having an outlet to keep such discussions from bleeding over into the lacrosse discussions. - Wombat]

Admin - I have a question here.

Why are discussions from the Politics forum causing people to wind up in the Penalty Box?

I reviewed all three links you cited, and while it’s apparent that there’s been some fighting, I thought this was expected in the no holds barred world of those forums. To me, the “personal attacks” didn’t seem that bad. And there was a bit of sparring coming from the other direction too. “Penalty Box Denizen” is taunting and baiting.

In hockey, you fight, both of you go into the box.

I’m concerned that finger pointing can be one-sided if the finger pointer knows there are no repercussions for flagging posts and trying to get someone put in the box.

I’m sure there is a lot more history here behind this and that affects the sin bin decision making process.

But at some point, I’d say the fingerer has to go to the box too.

+1

Cradles posts are done with obvious levity and humor, plus he avoids direct personal insults (most of the resident liberals constantly insult but never get sent to the penalty box ); ironically very few others here possess the same qualities. Until he’s released, I’m boycotting this site in solidarity with Cradle and the American way of life.

Please don't boycott anything in my name PB. I received what i deserved. I expected it and i understand it. My disagreement with the moderator in this regard is how does he define a personal attack? Maybe at some point in time our moderator can give us clearer guidance as to what a personal attack is and is not. Here is some food for thought in this regard. If I tell a fellow forum poster to go fly a kite is that a personal attack or merely a suggestion to enjoy a fun outdoor activity? Think about it, it becomes open to how you interpret what I said.

You were wrongfully convicted. The people are with you. Do you need any funds for the commissary?

[Nigel]

CLM.

[cradleandshoot]

[First - for the record: I like both posters involved here - both give good posts on lacrosse threads. I pay zero attention to non-lacrosse threads at Fanlax. That’s not why I visit this site. I’ve always felt nothing good comes from discussing stuff like that here, except for having an outlet to keep such discussions from bleeding over into the lacrosse discussions. - Wombat]

Admin - I have a question here.

Why are discussions from the Politics forum causing people to wind up in the Penalty Box?

I reviewed all three links you cited, and while it’s apparent that there’s been some fighting, I thought this was expected in the no holds barred world of those forums. To me, the “personal attacks” didn’t seem that bad. And there was a bit of sparring coming from the other direction too. “Penalty Box Denizen” is taunting and baiting.

In hockey, you fight, both of you go into the box.

I’m concerned that finger pointing can be one-sided if the finger pointer knows there are no repercussions for flagging posts and trying to get someone put in the box.

I’m sure there is a lot more history here behind this and that affects the sin bin decision making process.

But at some point, I’d say the fingerer has to go to the box too.

+1

Cradles posts are done with obvious levity and humor, plus he avoids direct personal insults (most of the resident liberals constantly insult but never get sent to the penalty box ); ironically very few others here possess the same qualities. Until he’s released, I’m boycotting this site in solidarity with Cradle and the American way of life.

Please don't boycott anything in my name PB. I received what i deserved. I expected it and i understand it. My disagreement with the moderator in this regard is how does he define a personal attack? Maybe at some point in time our moderator can give us clearer guidance as to what a personal attack is and is not. Here is some food for thought in this regard. If I tell a fellow forum poster to go fly a kite is that a personal attack or merely a suggestion to enjoy a fun outdoor activity? Think about it, it becomes open to how you interpret what I said.

You were wrongfully convicted. The people are with you. Do you need any funds for the commissary?

No the old man is fine. I was not not wrongfully convicted. I only know that for myself, i will have a zero tolerance policy in the future for fellow posters that want to bust my chops. Good for the goose is good for the gander...

[cradleandshoot]

CLM.

Your Braves are looking pretty darn good. They are in the thick of the sectional race with Victor and Thomas.

[Nigel]

CLM.

Your Braves are looking pretty darn good. They are in the thick of the sectional race with Victor and Thomas.

Braves beat Victor tonight 7-5 in a slow burn type of game. Actually, more emphasis on s l o w. Certainly didn't represent the 'fastest game on two feet'. At times it was actually quite dull, but had a burst of excitement in last few minutes. A win is a win.

[cradleandshoot]

CLM.

Your Braves are looking pretty darn good. They are in the thick of the sectional race with Victor and Thomas.

Braves beat Victor tonight 7-5 in a slow burn type of game. Actually, more emphasis on s l o w. Certainly didn't represent the 'fastest game on two feet'. At times it was actually quite dull, but had a burst of excitement in last few minutes. A win is a win.

I can't stand stall ball. What is your opinion of CAs new uniforms? I like the helmets but that light gray lettering on the white jerseys, tough to read the players number from the stands.

[cradleandshoot]

[First - for the record: I like both posters involved here - both give good posts on lacrosse threads. I pay zero attention to non-lacrosse threads at Fanlax. That’s not why I visit this site. I’ve always felt nothing good comes from discussing stuff like that here, except for having an outlet to keep such discussions from bleeding over into the lacrosse discussions. - Wombat]

Admin - I have a question here.

Why are discussions from the Politics forum causing people to wind up in the Penalty Box?

I reviewed all three links you cited, and while it’s apparent that there’s been some fighting, I thought this was expected in the no holds barred world of those forums. To me, the “personal attacks” didn’t seem that bad. And there was a bit of sparring coming from the other direction too. “Penalty Box Denizen” is taunting and baiting.

In hockey, you fight, both of you go into the box.

I’m concerned that finger pointing can be one-sided if the finger pointer knows there are no repercussions for flagging posts and trying to get someone put in the box.

I’m sure there is a lot more history here behind this and that affects the sin bin decision making process.

But at some point, I’d say the fingerer has to go to the box too.

Wombat,
I agree with you that if I was instigating the fights or even throwing some big punches in response, I'd deserve a timeout in the doghouse. I've probably come close. But I generally don't instigate and I generally try to give an attacker a chance to chill and realize they've crossed the line, back off. Some don't, they keep at it. Example above, I suggested to Kram he back off when he popped off during a discussion...IMO, he was just exasperated and took a swing out of frustration. No big deal, no sweat, and he didn't take a second swing. But then three others, each of whom have recently made it to the penalty box, piled in though they hadn't been involved in the underlying discussion...no comment on the actual topic, just swipes at me.

Cradle made the mistake of "arguing with the ref" when he got a mild warning. Thus, back in the penalty box.

More broadly, we've been having a discussion about how to reduce the temperature on the Politics thread, just as there was a discussion at the beginning construction of FanLax on what the rules should be, including the option of Hamsterdam which is virtually no holds barred 'discussion'...should someone want to have such. Not surprisingly, Hamsterdam attracts few posts.

The attempt is to have a place where topics of interest can be discussed, including Politics, where the discussions are at least semi-respectful, informative. Fine to be passionate and to disagree strongly, but civil. We asked for a light hand on moderation, but not no moderation. We didn't want no holds barred.

However, a few posters seem to think that this is 'warfare' and they're keyboard warriors for their cause. That's not limited to those who skew hard right, but most of it comes that direction. And so, the pattern is to come into an otherwise fine conversation and, rather than to add some set of information or logic or perspective to that discussion, to instead make ad hominem attacks of fellow posters. And to constantly 'troll' the threads with outrageous statements generally about fellow posters in an aggregate way.

So, we've been discussing whether additional 'rules' are necessary to reduce the stuff that makes the threads so toxic that they aren't attractive to actual discussion.

Meanwhile, one pretty simple rule in all sports is to not argue with the ref.

Never argue with the ref.. wasn't that Earl Weavers philosophy? He was thrown out of alot of games in his day. You know you will never win the argument. That does not stop you from doing so.

[MDlaxfan76]

[First - for the record: I like both posters involved here - both give good posts on lacrosse threads. I pay zero attention to non-lacrosse threads at Fanlax. That’s not why I visit this site. I’ve always felt nothing good comes from discussing stuff like that here, except for having an outlet to keep such discussions from bleeding over into the lacrosse discussions. - Wombat]

Admin - I have a question here.

Why are discussions from the Politics forum causing people to wind up in the Penalty Box?

I reviewed all three links you cited, and while it’s apparent that there’s been some fighting, I thought this was expected in the no holds barred world of those forums. To me, the “personal attacks” didn’t seem that bad. And there was a bit of sparring coming from the other direction too. “Penalty Box Denizen” is taunting and baiting.

In hockey, you fight, both of you go into the box.

I’m concerned that finger pointing can be one-sided if the finger pointer knows there are no repercussions for flagging posts and trying to get someone put in the box.

I’m sure there is a lot more history here behind this and that affects the sin bin decision making process.

But at some point, I’d say the fingerer has to go to the box too.

Wombat,
I agree with you that if I was instigating the fights or even throwing some big punches in response, I'd deserve a timeout in the doghouse. I've probably come close. But I generally don't instigate and I generally try to give an attacker a chance to chill and realize they've crossed the line, back off. Some don't, they keep at it. Example above, I suggested to Kram he back off when he popped off during a discussion...IMO, he was just exasperated and took a swing out of frustration. No big deal, no sweat, and he didn't take a second swing. But then three others, each of whom have recently made it to the penalty box, piled in though they hadn't been involved in the underlying discussion...no comment on the actual topic, just swipes at me.

Cradle made the mistake of "arguing with the ref" when he got a mild warning. Thus, back in the penalty box.

More broadly, we've been having a discussion about how to reduce the temperature on the Politics thread, just as there was a discussion at the beginning construction of FanLax on what the rules should be, including the option of Hamsterdam which is virtually no holds barred 'discussion'...should someone want to have such. Not surprisingly, Hamsterdam attracts few posts.

The attempt is to have a place where topics of interest can be discussed, including Politics, where the discussions are at least semi-respectful, informative. Fine to be passionate and to disagree strongly, but civil. We asked for a light hand on moderation, but not no moderation. We didn't want no holds barred.

However, a few posters seem to think that this is 'warfare' and they're keyboard warriors for their cause. That's not limited to those who skew hard right, but most of it comes that direction. And so, the pattern is to come into an otherwise fine conversation and, rather than to add some set of information or logic or perspective to that discussion, to instead make ad hominem attacks of fellow posters. And to constantly 'troll' the threads with outrageous statements generally about fellow posters in an aggregate way.

So, we've been discussing whether additional 'rules' are necessary to reduce the stuff that makes the threads so toxic that they aren't attractive to actual discussion.

Meanwhile, one pretty simple rule in all sports is to not argue with the ref.

Never argue with the ref.. wasn't that Earl Weavers philosophy? He was thrown out of alot of games in his day. You know you will never win the argument. That does not stop you from doing so.

I'm an old-time Orioles fan, grew up with those great teams with Brooks and Frank etc and 4 20 game winners. Weaver was quite the character, certainly entertaining...never did him or the team a bit of good, but it was definitely entertaining.

Never did John McEnroe a bit of good either, though it was certainly entertaining and he managed to parlay that reputation into some good TV ads...but he was/is embarrassed by the actual behavior when he became a dad and grew up. He's been pretty clear that he thinks his competitiveness would have been better focused on winning the next point rather than at the ref.

I didn't think your shots at me were so terrible as to warrant game expulsion, just a gentle warning maybe, but arguing with the ref is likely what got you into the temporary doghouse.

Fun games this weekend!

Both Tillman and Tiffany had their moments of disagreement with the refs, undoubtedly expressed themselves clearly, but managed to do so in a way that presented a good example of sportsmanship and self-control to the fans, including youngsters coming up. Admirable in my book.

[cradleandshoot]

[First - for the record: I like both posters involved here - both give good posts on lacrosse threads. I pay zero attention to non-lacrosse threads at Fanlax. That’s not why I visit this site. I’ve always felt nothing good comes from discussing stuff like that here, except for having an outlet to keep such discussions from bleeding over into the lacrosse discussions. - Wombat]

Admin - I have a question here.

Why are discussions from the Politics forum causing people to wind up in the Penalty Box?

I reviewed all three links you cited, and while it’s apparent that there’s been some fighting, I thought this was expected in the no holds barred world of those forums. To me, the “personal attacks” didn’t seem that bad. And there was a bit of sparring coming from the other direction too. “Penalty Box Denizen” is taunting and baiting.

In hockey, you fight, both of you go into the box.

I’m concerned that finger pointing can be one-sided if the finger pointer knows there are no repercussions for flagging posts and trying to get someone put in the box.

I’m sure there is a lot more history here behind this and that affects the sin bin decision making process.

But at some point, I’d say the fingerer has to go to the box too.

Wombat,
I agree with you that if I was instigating the fights or even throwing some big punches in response, I'd deserve a timeout in the doghouse. I've probably come close. But I generally don't instigate and I generally try to give an attacker a chance to chill and realize they've crossed the line, back off. Some don't, they keep at it. Example above, I suggested to Kram he back off when he popped off during a discussion...IMO, he was just exasperated and took a swing out of frustration. No big deal, no sweat, and he didn't take a second swing. But then three others, each of whom have recently made it to the penalty box, piled in though they hadn't been involved in the underlying discussion...no comment on the actual topic, just swipes at me.

Cradle made the mistake of "arguing with the ref" when he got a mild warning. Thus, back in the penalty box.

More broadly, we've been having a discussion about how to reduce the temperature on the Politics thread, just as there was a discussion at the beginning construction of FanLax on what the rules should be, including the option of Hamsterdam which is virtually no holds barred 'discussion'...should someone want to have such. Not surprisingly, Hamsterdam attracts few posts.

The attempt is to have a place where topics of interest can be discussed, including Politics, where the discussions are at least semi-respectful, informative. Fine to be passionate and to disagree strongly, but civil. We asked for a light hand on moderation, but not no moderation. We didn't want no holds barred.

However, a few posters seem to think that this is 'warfare' and they're keyboard warriors for their cause. That's not limited to those who skew hard right, but most of it comes that direction. And so, the pattern is to come into an otherwise fine conversation and, rather than to add some set of information or logic or perspective to that discussion, to instead make ad hominem attacks of fellow posters. And to constantly 'troll' the threads with outrageous statements generally about fellow posters in an aggregate way.

So, we've been discussing whether additional 'rules' are necessary to reduce the stuff that makes the threads so toxic that they aren't attractive to actual discussion.

Meanwhile, one pretty simple rule in all sports is to not argue with the ref.

Never argue with the ref.. wasn't that Earl Weavers philosophy? He was thrown out of alot of games in his day. You know you will never win the argument. That does not stop you from doing so.

I'm an old-time Orioles fan, grew up with those great teams with Brooks and Frank etc and 4 20 game winners. Weaver was quite the character, certainly entertaining...never did him or the team a bit of good, but it was definitely entertaining.

Never did John McEnroe a bit of good either, though it was certainly entertaining and he managed to parlay that reputation into some good TV ads...but he was/is embarrassed by the actual behavior when he became a dad and grew up. He's been pretty clear that he thinks his competitiveness would have been better focused on winning the next point rather than at the ref.

I didn't think your shots at me were so terrible as to warrant game expulsion, just a gentle warning maybe, but arguing with the ref is likely what got you into the temporary doghouse.

Fun games this weekend!

Both Tillman and Tiffany had their moments of disagreement with the refs, undoubtedly expressed themselves clearly, but managed to do so in a way that presented a good example of sportsmanship and self-control to the fans, including youngsters coming up. Admirable in my book.

As a former goalie you never any harsh words with the refs for a crease violation? When both my boys were playing HS lax in 2005 the coaches and fans were merciless on the refs. I mean brutal at times. Going way back to my little league years it was just as bad. The one thing that is always a constant.. you will never win an argument with the ref. The other constant is folks will always keep on trying.

[MDlaxfan76]

[First - for the record: I like both posters involved here - both give good posts on lacrosse threads. I pay zero attention to non-lacrosse threads at Fanlax. That’s not why I visit this site. I’ve always felt nothing good comes from discussing stuff like that here, except for having an outlet to keep such discussions from bleeding over into the lacrosse discussions. - Wombat]

Admin - I have a question here.

Why are discussions from the Politics forum causing people to wind up in the Penalty Box?

I reviewed all three links you cited, and while it’s apparent that there’s been some fighting, I thought this was expected in the no holds barred world of those forums. To me, the “personal attacks” didn’t seem that bad. And there was a bit of sparring coming from the other direction too. “Penalty Box Denizen” is taunting and baiting.

In hockey, you fight, both of you go into the box.

I’m concerned that finger pointing can be one-sided if the finger pointer knows there are no repercussions for flagging posts and trying to get someone put in the box.

I’m sure there is a lot more history here behind this and that affects the sin bin decision making process.

But at some point, I’d say the fingerer has to go to the box too.

Wombat,
I agree with you that if I was instigating the fights or even throwing some big punches in response, I'd deserve a timeout in the doghouse. I've probably come close. But I generally don't instigate and I generally try to give an attacker a chance to chill and realize they've crossed the line, back off. Some don't, they keep at it. Example above, I suggested to Kram he back off when he popped off during a discussion...IMO, he was just exasperated and took a swing out of frustration. No big deal, no sweat, and he didn't take a second swing. But then three others, each of whom have recently made it to the penalty box, piled in though they hadn't been involved in the underlying discussion...no comment on the actual topic, just swipes at me.

Cradle made the mistake of "arguing with the ref" when he got a mild warning. Thus, back in the penalty box.

More broadly, we've been having a discussion about how to reduce the temperature on the Politics thread, just as there was a discussion at the beginning construction of FanLax on what the rules should be, including the option of Hamsterdam which is virtually no holds barred 'discussion'...should someone want to have such. Not surprisingly, Hamsterdam attracts few posts.

The attempt is to have a place where topics of interest can be discussed, including Politics, where the discussions are at least semi-respectful, informative. Fine to be passionate and to disagree strongly, but civil. We asked for a light hand on moderation, but not no moderation. We didn't want no holds barred.

However, a few posters seem to think that this is 'warfare' and they're keyboard warriors for their cause. That's not limited to those who skew hard right, but most of it comes that direction. And so, the pattern is to come into an otherwise fine conversation and, rather than to add some set of information or logic or perspective to that discussion, to instead make ad hominem attacks of fellow posters. And to constantly 'troll' the threads with outrageous statements generally about fellow posters in an aggregate way.

So, we've been discussing whether additional 'rules' are necessary to reduce the stuff that makes the threads so toxic that they aren't attractive to actual discussion.

Meanwhile, one pretty simple rule in all sports is to not argue with the ref.

Never argue with the ref.. wasn't that Earl Weavers philosophy? He was thrown out of alot of games in his day. You know you will never win the argument. That does not stop you from doing so.

I'm an old-time Orioles fan, grew up with those great teams with Brooks and Frank etc and 4 20 game winners. Weaver was quite the character, certainly entertaining...never did him or the team a bit of good, but it was definitely entertaining.

Never did John McEnroe a bit of good either, though it was certainly entertaining and he managed to parlay that reputation into some good TV ads...but he was/is embarrassed by the actual behavior when he became a dad and grew up. He's been pretty clear that he thinks his competitiveness would have been better focused on winning the next point rather than at the ref.

I didn't think your shots at me were so terrible as to warrant game expulsion, just a gentle warning maybe, but arguing with the ref is likely what got you into the temporary doghouse.

Fun games this weekend!

Both Tillman and Tiffany had their moments of disagreement with the refs, undoubtedly expressed themselves clearly, but managed to do so in a way that presented a good example of sportsmanship and self-control to the fans, including youngsters coming up. Admirable in my book.

As a former goalie you never any harsh words with the refs for a crease violation? When both my boys were playing HS lax in 2005 the coaches and fans were merciless on the refs. I mean brutal at times. Going way back to my little league years it was just as bad. The one thing that is always a constant.. you will never win an argument with the ref. The other constant is folks will always keep on trying.

Yes, some knuckleheads keep trying...

No, as a player I certainly let refs know my opinion, but I worked to keep on good terms...friendly and respectful with them, so that when I said "Sir, he stepped in the crease" or "Sir, that was interference" I had some credibility...not that they were going to call it after the fact!

My son tells me he was the same way, works better. Same too as a coach, though I've seen him get hot when he felt a player was in danger. But refs respect that.

As a youth coach, I was plenty vocal, but we made a big deal about not being like other programs in how we modeled good sportsmanship. We demanded the same from our players and parents, focusing early in the season on making this clear. Joined the Positive Coaching Alliance for helpful guidance on how to teach respect for the game, respect for the refs, the opponents, each other. Parents bought in. Clear differentiator for our program, which was reliably one of the very best in Maryland.

But man, some coaches and fans are total a-holes...loved beating the tar out of those teams!

[Nigel]

CLM.

Your Braves are looking pretty darn good. They are in the thick of the sectional race with Victor and Thomas.

Braves beat Victor tonight 7-5 in a slow burn type of game. Actually, more emphasis on s l o w. Certainly didn't represent the 'fastest game on two feet'. At times it was actually quite dull, but had a burst of excitement in last few minutes. A win is a win.

I can't stand stall ball. What is your opinion of CAs new uniforms? I like the helmets but that light gray lettering on the white jerseys, tough to read the players number from the stands.

Seems like an annual thing with the Cdga uni upgrades (across all sports); I just see my school taxes consistently going up.

[youthathletics]

Certainly seems like the admin and a certain someone, are the same person, or someone like to hit the "report" button.....reminds me of the story about a guy that steels your wallet, then helps you look for it.

[cradleandshoot]

Certainly seems like the admin and a certain someone, are the same person, or someone like to hit the "report" button.....reminds me of the story about a guy that steels your wallet, then helps you look for it.

[cradleandshoot]

https://nypost.com/2021/05/29/washingto ... h-village/

All the FLP folks on this forum love to critique all the failures they observe socially involving the right. When even the FLP liberal elitists that live in Greenwich Village can see the problem...

[cradleandshoot]

https://www.dailywire.com/news/biden-bl ... ccountants

This must be Joes stuttering problem causing a short circuit in his brain. I thought black entrepreneurs were well aware of the need for lawyers and accountants.

[cradleandshoot]

Indeed, there's a big part of America who actually see police violence, and over incarceration, against minorities as necessary,

A huge load of hogwash coming from between the pipes. What the heck is over incarceration?? Does that mean too many guilty people are put behind bars. I think I spent 20 minutes laughing and shaking my head at the brain numbing logic being used here. Does anybody on this forum pay any attention to the daily violence being used AGAINST the police?

[MDlaxfan76]

Indeed, there's a big part of America who actually see police violence, and over incarceration, against minorities as necessary,

A huge load of hogwash coming from between the pipes. What the heck is over incarceration?? Does that mean too many guilty people are put behind bars. I think I spent 20 minutes laughing and shaking my head at the brain numbing logic being used here. Does anybody on this forum pay any attention to the daily violence being used AGAINST the police?

cradle, you'll be back soon on the regular threads and you'll undoubtedly have lots of opportunities to disparage my views, but I happened to see this post and thought, well why not respond?

Yeah, over incarceration of minorities is when you put minority "criminals" behind bars for offenses of equivalent severity, disproportionately per infraction relative to whites. Same crime, different time, different likelihood of prosecution.

And then you have discriminatory sentencing for certain types of drug offenses relative to others, heavy sentences for possession of crack cocaine, light sentences for coke...different set of "criminals", thus different sentencing restrictions.

And, of course, the whole criminalization of some substances, no crime for others...

and, the reality that populations with less wealth (of all races) are most likely to turn to crime. And this particular issue exacerbated by redlining and other practices ghettoizing by ethnicity.

But hey, call it "hogwash" or "mind numbing" if you want...OR bother to actually ask what is meant with an open mind...

Want to change the subject to violence against police? It's a very, very serious issue. Absolutely.

What's your prescription? More incarceration?
We already have the highest incarceration rate of any first world country...

My prescription is decriminalization of drug use. All drug use.

[cradleandshoot]

Indeed, there's a big part of America who actually see police violence, and over incarceration, against minorities as necessary,

A huge load of hogwash coming from between the pipes. What the heck is over incarceration?? Does that mean too many guilty people are put behind bars. I think I spent 20 minutes laughing and shaking my head at the brain numbing logic being used here. Does anybody on this forum pay any attention to the daily violence being used AGAINST the police?

cradle, you'll be back soon on the regular threads and you'll undoubtedly have lots of opportunities to disparage my views, but I happened to see this post and thought, well why not respond?

Yeah, over incarceration of minorities is when you put minority "criminals" behind bars for offenses of equivalent severity, disproportionately per infraction relative to whites. Same crime, different time, different likelihood of prosecution.

And then you have discriminatory sentencing for certain types of drug offenses relative to others, heavy sentences for possession of crack cocaine, light sentences for coke...different set of "criminals", thus different sentencing restrictions.

And, of course, the whole criminalization of some substances, no crime for others...

and, the reality that populations with less wealth (of all races) are most likely to turn to crime. And this particular issue exacerbated by redlining and other practices ghettoizing by ethnicity.

But hey, call it "hogwash" or "mind numbing" if you want...OR bother to actually ask what is meant with an open mind...

Want to change the subject to violence against police? It's a very, very serious issue. Absolutely.

What's your prescription? More incarceration?
We already have the highest incarceration rate of any first world country...

My prescription is decriminalization of drug use. All drug use.

What is your prescription?? Over incarceration means the criminals were over arrested and over convicted in the first place. Don't do the crime if you can't do the time. Yes I do understand the irony when it concerns Robert Blake. Here in my neck of the woods we just had a 3 time parolee arrested for armed bank robbery only shortly after being released from prison. Define for me what you mean by "over incarceration"
Is there also then such a thing as " under incarceration" ?You are the one who brought up the term. Your the one who has some "splainin to do" You do know that most of these folks busted selling drugs also are quite the business folks. They have other sideline businesses to add to their drug dealing income. I bet you did not know that quite a few of them dabble in a number wide variety of illegal activities. Your answer is to release them to the streets. These folks were all arrested because they sang too loud in the church choir on Sunday. FTR, would you have a problem hiring any of these ex-cons to drive for your company? I know how you feel about not hiring WP types. I'm wondering where your belief system stands when it comes to trusting ex-cons who may be black or brown? Even if maybe they were convicted of armed robbery... Here is your chance to shine.