OT-Coach Arrested
Just had to vent about the HS coach in Kentucky that got arrested in Kentucky. Now if facts surface that I am unaware we can re examine, but if things stand as is this is a disgrace. This fucking country has spiraled out of control and this is another disgusting pile of shit thrown on top. The game is football it is violent and dangerous if you don't want your kid playing don't let him. All these fucking pussies are now whining the heat index was 94...give me a break. I would guess the heat index in the south is over 94 9 of 10 days in July and August. Every other team was practicing that day in the state. This is just ridiculous...if I was Mike Barwis I would put all my money in a duffle bag and head to Canada because the State Police should be descending on Ann Arbor to arrest him any minute for what he puts these kids through. Is there any common sense anywhere??? Why must someone always be to blame?? This country has gone soft, if something bad happens to you hire a fucking lawyer and get what you can. It's the american way. I'm sure the case will be thrown out of court and the coach will be sued for every dime he has in civil court and his life will be ruined if it already hasn't. A child died and it is tragic, but instead of mourning and moving on let's ruin some more lives and feed some more starving lawyers....nice going prosecuter.
FBI Most Wanted List
Urban Meyer
Jim Tressel
Any coach in Florida, Miss, Ala, La, stc...
Lucky they died to beat the rap
Bear Bryant
Woody Hayes
Bo Schembechler
I want to scream!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
January 26th, 2009 at 8:55 AM ^
who didn't allow his players a water break, thus causing the said player to collapse?
January 26th, 2009 at 9:13 AM ^
a heat index of 94 is a lot more potent when you combine it with 45 minutes of high intensity workouts and no water. I don't know that it necessarily warrants criminal charges, given that all of the other kids on the team made it through without incident, but civil charges don't bother me.
January 26th, 2009 at 9:39 AM ^
You can't go "Junction Boys" and get away with it these days. In all seriousness though, I agree, civil charges should be expected.
January 26th, 2009 at 9:22 AM ^
I’m not a coach but I do believe in a few things. As a parent, when kids get on that field He/She is in his coaches hands. Also, as a parent, I don’t believe that it is too much to ask for any coach to use common sense and good judgment. Not every kid is at the same place when it comes to being in shape. Most kids will not speak out if there is something wrong because they don’t want to be seen as weak (Especially in football and during two-a-days). It is up to the coach to look for signs that something is not right and take corrective action. I don’t know the whole story with this situation. There could also have been other health issues that were not reveled in a general health appraisal form.
January 26th, 2009 at 10:01 AM ^
So a kid dies during football practice, and you're mad that his coach is getting punished.
Dying isn't something he can just "suck it up" on.
You write "Now if facts surface that I am unaware we can re examine". The awesome thing about google is that you can find this information BEFORE you type out an ill-informed screed.
For instance, THE VERY FIRST article on google's news reader, from USA Today, explains that during this workout, the players weren't given water-breaks and two other kids spent days in the hospital afterwards. That is virtually the definition of negligence.
January 26th, 2009 at 11:17 AM ^
I died once and you know what I did? I grew a pair and hiked myself up by my bootstraps and said "KRK, you need to be a fucking man" And you know what, I'm still alive.
In all seriousness, what's the point of not giving waterbreaks? Mental toughness?
January 26th, 2009 at 10:33 AM ^
Do us all a favor and castrate yourself, douche.
January 26th, 2009 at 10:49 AM ^
Ziff - I'm guessing you don't work in a Prosecutor's office. There are always more facts that underlie the office's reasons to charge someone with a crime then are fit into a one page article in the local news about it.
That's not to say every time a prosecutor brings a case, he/she is right. It is to say you probably don't know 1% of the factual basis for this case.
January 26th, 2009 at 10:57 AM ^
if you're worried about our country getting 'soft', which it is, read this rivals article:
http://highschool.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=904726
unbelievable that this coach got fired. so his team kicked the other teams ass and everyone must feel sorry for the losing team. even espn made a big deal out of this.
January 26th, 2009 at 11:14 AM ^
I think there was more to it than that. He kept pressing most of the game and afterwards was asked by school officials to apologize and he refused. Also, I think there was something where he posted some harsh comments about the school officials on a webpage. 100-0 is just being a dick. If I'm the ref in that game I'm calling fouls on his team if they breath hard on the other team.
January 26th, 2009 at 11:22 AM ^
the other team couldn't get the ball past half court, he left his starters in until the 4th quarter and they were shooting threes in an attempt to break 100. the other school is a special needs school for kids with (short attention span/dyslexia) learning disabilities that has 20 girls total.
on top of that his AD apologized for the game, and the coach took it upon himself to write an email to the local paper and "un-apologize".
January 26th, 2009 at 11:28 AM ^
Maybe his getting fired isn't a sign of the softness of our nation. Maybe it's a sign that sometimes jerkoffs get fired. Happens at my office all the time. When your boss apologizes to another school for running it up on their special needs children, and you go out of your way to say, "fuck all that noise, we laid triple digits on you, yo!", then maybe he's just being fired because he's an unprofessional a-hole?
January 26th, 2009 at 11:55 AM ^
What's sad is that type of behavior is more prevalent in youth sports. Being competitive is a good trait to teach kids, but kicking people when their down is just BS. Maybe we are getting soft but a lot of people are turning into assholes, more so than before. It goes both ways
January 26th, 2009 at 12:04 PM ^
Steve Spurrier doesn't see a problem with how this coach acted either.
But seriously, there is no reason high school kids should be pressing and shooting 3s when you are up 59-0 at the half. I know, it is harder to "run the clock out" in basketball than in football (where you can just run right up the gut every down), but at some point the coach should have gone to the 4-corners offense and done his best to minimize the damage. And the coach knew how bad this team was - they had been blown out most games during the year, and had won a total of 4 or 5 games the past couple of years. This was a blowout before the two teams stepped on the court, and so both coaches should have acted appropriately.
That does not absolve Dallas Academy of blame, at least partially, for what happened out there on the court. The administrators of that school need to realize that throwing out 8 girls with various medical and psychological issues to play basketball against far more talented teams may lead to more events like this (they lost the next game 41-8), and perhaps should consider whether or not these games remain a positive experience for all the girls involved on both teams (because most high school kids do feel bad about running up the score after a while).
And this isn't someone whining for PC purposes - I went to a high school in Michigan that fielded incredibly small male track teams. For some reason, my school decided that even though they only had about 200 guys to choose from, it should field JV and Varsity lacrosse and baseball teams, golf, AND T&F. We actually had 8 boys on the varsity team my junior year, leading to 80+ point losses most of the year. That beat on you after a while, and at least T&F is largely an individual sport - even when we lost as a team, I at least felt I did my part by finishing in the top 3 for some races. When you lose in a TEAM sport by so many points, I can't imagine how destructive that can be on a high school psyche.
January 26th, 2009 at 4:18 PM ^
It's actually not that hard to run out the clock in basketball. In high school there is no shot clock, so theoretically, the team could have kept the ball for the entire 4th quarter without taking a shot. But more realistically, they could have just dribbled around for a minute each possession before taking a shot. Instead they scored 41 points in 16 second-half minutes. Ridiculous.
January 26th, 2009 at 4:24 PM ^
Yeah, as tasteless as it is to run up 100 points on a team that obviously has no chance of winning, it makes me wonder why in God's name this school with 20 girls is trying to field a basketball team. It is often said that sports build character and teach life lessons, but there is no value in getting publicly humiliated like that. I doubt that the girls will look back in this game in 15 years and think of it is a moment where they learned something important or improved their self esteem.
January 26th, 2009 at 11:15 AM ^
First and foremost, this coach was negligent in his one job, nurturing his athletes. He didn't give the kids water breaks. Your argument that, all of the before mentioned coaches, work(ed) their players just as hard and therefor they should "run for the hills" because the police are coming is fucking stupid. I am sure those coaches understand the importance of water in 90+ heat. There is a difference between being a tough coach and a stupid coach. Tough coaches sometimes win games, stupid coaches sometimes go to fucking jail.
Secondly, This has nothing to do with lawyers, money, etc., if this was your child and facts similar to this case compiled about the coaches practices, I guaranfuckingtee you would be all over his ass too. Parents understand the dangers of putting their children in football. Broken bones, bruised ribs, etc, but no parent expects their child to die while in the hands of a coach at an organized practice. But, since your a John Wayne type hard ass, I guess when your son died you would say, "Fuck it, that's football. Let the coach be, no consequences, I am going to be a testament and model for how 'hard' this country used to and should be."
January 26th, 2009 at 11:19 AM ^
I really don't see how this impugns the character of the nation
January 26th, 2009 at 11:21 AM ^
Taking a water break does NOTHING to hinder your players' performance, except take a couple minutes away from practice time. There's no reason NOT to have plenty of water breaks.
There is a legitimate reason for having kids take shorter breaks before lifting sets or between sprints or something. High intensity training increases muscle performance. But a lack of hydration not only increases the chances of heat stroke, but it decreases the performance level of your players.
If one of my players asks for a water break, I let them have a water break. I'm not going to deny them water. But if it becomes a habit and I realize they're just trying to get out of working hard, then I a) tell them I think they're slacking and/or b) decrease their playing time. But I'm not going to let a kid die or go to the hospital to make them "tough."
January 26th, 2009 at 11:26 AM ^
My grandfather has been dead for 12 years - that makes him REALLY tough, right? He doesn't complain.
January 26th, 2009 at 11:27 AM ^
Cremation makes you extra tough.
January 26th, 2009 at 11:57 AM ^
No way. Cremation is for Susan's. Being forced to sit in a confined box for an eternity forces you to be mentally tough.
January 26th, 2009 at 11:37 AM ^
Which is what the coach is charged with, is below, according to a legal dictionary:
In general, "recklessly" means that a person acts recklessly with respect to circumstances surrounding the conduct or the result of the conduct when the person is aware of, but consciously disregards, a substantial and unjustifiable risk that the circumstances exist or the result will occur. The risk must be of such a nature and degree that its disregard constitutes a gross deviation from the standard of care that an ordinary person would exercise under all the circumstances as viewed from the accused person's standpoint.
Based upon this, there are shades of gray legally. While I believe in general that 1- we are FAR too litigious in this society, that 2- parents and people in general are way too eager to blame everything and everyone but themselves, and that 3- sometimes awful things happen and we have to accept them instead of placing blame, in this case you can easily make the argument that the coach's action meets the legal standard. Now, was his action a "gross deviation" from what a normal person would do? Probably so.
Because he was negligent however, does this mean he should be charged and go to jail? Or is the knowledge that he contributed to a 15 year old's death enough punishment (in addition to the certain fact that he will be found guilty in a civil court)? Do we as a society gain anything by sending someone like him to jail? I'm not sure, but lean towards no.
If he hadn't denied water, I would agree with the posters view, inelegant written though it was. However, the facts in this case don't support the conclusion.
January 26th, 2009 at 1:13 PM ^
But it's an odd point to bring up in this context - a criminal case. That is, prosecutor's offices have bottom lines and limited resources. Your talk about "are we as a society or a community" better off charging people like this is easily resolved. The office that makes that decision is accountable to the community. Comparing the litigious-ness of medmal and slip and fall cases to a prosecutor's decision to bring charges is inapt. Different animal, different priorities, etc.
As for what society gains, and whether or not the knowledge that contributed to someone's death is punishment enough. I imagine that argument could be made, with equal force, in 90% of criminal cases.
January 26th, 2009 at 2:35 PM ^
because most criminal cases involve people committing crimes with an outcome they INTENDED to happen, e.g. stealing, killing, embezzlement etc. That point would only be relevant to crimes such as drunk driving, where people don't intend to cause harm but they should have known better.
With regard to the litigious point, I generally agree although a litigious mentality can also be true of a prosecutor's or government office, and arguably some crimes should not be pursued given limited resources. However, my original post did in fact argue that they are within their rights and I did not argue they shouldn't have pursued the case.
January 26th, 2009 at 11:47 AM ^
Hasn't George O'Leary had several players die on him in the last couple years? Can you imagine if he had gotten hired at Notre Dame and tried those kind of workouts? Brady Quinn probably would've sued O'Leary himself! Especially if he didn't let Quinn take his Myoplex afterwards...the workout never would've been over!
January 26th, 2009 at 11:49 AM ^
Hey man you got a joint?
January 26th, 2009 at 1:28 PM ^
You are a fucking moron. I bet if your kid dies because his coach was a sadistic asshole you'd be trying your hardest to quell the prosecution, right?
Oh, and if you are at all literate - read the statute. It's not at all clear that he hasn't committed a crime. If this guy really purposefully denied water to kids while working them to death in 95 degree heat, that's at a minimum negligence, probably recklessness, and arguably knowing (in Model Penal Code parlance) manslaughter.
January 26th, 2009 at 3:01 PM ^
I apologize for not doing my due dilligence. If in fact this coach denied the kids water then he is a douche and send him away. With how over the top parents are and the litigous nature of the world today and all the health information out today it seems unbelievable that no one on the staff mentioned the problems involved with not having water. I think these "facts" may be being provided by the prosecuter at this time which may not be totally accurate. I was going by the outpouring of support by his players...doesn't seem like you get that support from kids you "tortured".
If I was putting money on it at this point I think they had water.
January 26th, 2009 at 3:12 PM ^
Again - 3 kids wound up in the hospital that day, all of them stayed more than 2 nights, and one never left.
This wasn't a flukey thing with this kid's health - there were numerous kids who showed up with heat stroke and dehydration.
Further, your willingness to scream bloody-murder about something you admit to "not having facts on" is just weird.
January 26th, 2009 at 4:09 PM ^
My last word Chitown is that if the facts you found prove to be correct I have no problem with this guy getting punished I am not a lunatic. After you correctly pointed out I was reacting with no facts I looked up some of the stories. It appears the facts are indeed conflicting and it will need to be sorted out in court. This is what the great media has told us.
They took 3 10 minute water breaks within a 1 hour period(very productive hour of practice with half spent drinking water....doesn't make much sense.)
Soccer Mom nosing into something she's not involved notices kid pass out at 5:45(Probably bloated from too much water)
The kid's dad was at practice he was so upset at how things were being run he went home without saying anything and sat in his air conditioning.
The entire community is rallying around the guy.
It doesn't add up so hopefully the courts get it right, because it appears the media has some holes in their stories.
January 26th, 2009 at 4:13 PM ^
your default position is to blame the victims. Neutrality is optimal when you don't have all the facts, siding with and sympathizing with the victims is forgiveable, but immediately blaming the victims is pretty fucked up. What's your countervailing argument? Judicial efficiency?
January 26th, 2009 at 3:12 PM ^
All you have are ridiculous, empty talking points that do not even apply to this situation. Do you even understand that running around screaming "everyone's so damn litigious!" doesn't make an ounce of sense? This is not a private tort action (yet, that I know of, but could be in the future)...it's a crime. An action brought by the government to enforce a law.
It's kind of like when you and your 16 year old buddies get caught drinking. It's not "litigious" for the cops to arrest you and for a DA to prosecute you. That's their job. If you want to bitch, then bitch to the state legislature to repeal negligent and reckless homicide laws (good luck).
So, turn off the Bill O'Reilly and try thinking for yourself. If you want to complain about society being too litigious from a private tort standpoint, I'd be happy to have that debate.
January 26th, 2009 at 3:29 PM ^
Say that again and i'll sue you
all of you
twice
January 26th, 2009 at 3:44 PM ^
News stories and I saw the man's attorney and 1 of his players on tv this morning. None of the stories mentioned any of these "facts" Let's agree that the MSM blows. The only things of note I heard I didn't even bring up. No teams in Kentucky cancelled practice due to the heat and the practice was cut short that day(they didn't mention all the kids were dropping dead Junction style). Do you find it hard to believe an entire staff would deny water and they had no trainer on their school staff that said this is nuts. Maybe I give people too much credit but this sounds insane in todays enviornment. You seem to have access to all the facts, but didn't this man continue to coach the rest of the year?? If the facts are how you say they are how is this possible?? He would have been lynched on the spot.
Promote RichRod I apologize for offending your profession and not crafting my debate properly in my 10 minutes before work.
January 26th, 2009 at 4:09 PM ^
your entire argument was a non-sequitur. I'm not picking on your grammar here, you flat out failed to make a point. A prosecutor wants to put a guy in jail for recklessly killing kids and you start ranting about society being litigious. You might as well have started complaining about the quality of fast food service, your point would be equally pointless.
So, you pretty much failed in every way. You had all the facts wrong and made sweeping generalizations to make a point that was completely unrelated to the (incorrect) facts.
January 26th, 2009 at 4:25 PM ^
I don't know what went on, but I can tell you this: if the coach of my kid's school had a player drop dead on him, I sure as hell wouldn't want that coach to remain employed there. It's easy to play the tough guy, but imagine if it were *your* son being hospitalized. Would you applaud the coach and chastise your boy for being "soft"?
January 26th, 2009 at 4:22 PM ^
Ziff, broseph, go back to listening to THE SAVAGE NATION and remember LIBERALISM IS A MENTAL DISORDER (but autism isn't).
January 26th, 2009 at 4:29 PM ^
I dont know the particulars of the situation (but I did read the article on it a few days ago)... if it is true that the coach did not allow a water break for a kid who was suffering from heat exhaustion...then fuck him... let him get prosecuted.
If it happened to your kid, maybe you would feel differently.
The story has nothing to do with "what has happened to our country...blah blah blah"
January 26th, 2009 at 4:44 PM ^
This prosecutor is prosecuting alleged crimes!! What has our country come to?? I bet this is all Obama's doing.
January 26th, 2009 at 8:07 PM ^
on his watch...
January 26th, 2009 at 7:21 PM ^
Is pounding away at me for some misplaced argument because your sensitive about lawyer bashing more productive than addressing the point about which while not crafted well is easily understood. If the coach acted in a humane manner does he deserve judgement for an unfortunate accident??
The dad attended the practice then left, should he be charged with child abuse for allowing his son to be tortured and doing nothing.
What would I do if that were my son is a popular argument, but isn't that the last frame of mind you should be in when determining policy. A little emotionally biased I think.
While I admit the litigous comment should not be in the argumentent...if i have a warning label on my wifes coffee and my company is being strangled not by the recession but by liability insurance than yeah the country is too litigous.
January 26th, 2009 at 8:44 PM ^
Doesn't bother me. I was just pointing out that your arguments make no sense, at all.
Now you've gone and made some new shitty arguments, complete with new logical fallacies. Yay.
First is a strawman - coach acting humanely and being prosecuted for an accident. That's not what happened for one, so it's a strawman argument. Also, the law does not punish accidents unless the defendant has the requisite state of mind. Here, it requires reckless behavior, which is acting without regard for a substantial risk that the defendant should have known about. It is common knowledge that what he did had a very high probability of causing injury. The kid died and he is liable for the injury. End of story.
Your coffee example is typical of the uninformed public with respect to tort claims and punitive damages. First, even if that was a frivolous case (it wasn't, plaintiff suffered severe 3rd degree burns and McD's was warned repeatedly to stop making the defective cups and serving their coffee so hot that it burns through clothes and melts skin), that is useless anecdotal evidence. A favorite fallacy. Also, the plaintiff's award was cut significantly on remittitur to the court of appeals. Of course, safeguards like these are often overlooked by people looking for scapegoats.
I could go on, but I just don't feel like it.
January 26th, 2009 at 11:28 PM ^
The kid died and he is liable for the injury. End of story.
There's that word, again. I believe this connotates negligence. Him being negligent doesn't make him a criminal. It just means he breached his duty as an active coach.
January 27th, 2009 at 12:44 AM ^
that you don't understand? There are 4 states of mind for criminal acts, 5 if you go by common law and 6 if you include strict liability crimes. Negligence, recklessness, knowledge, and intent are all possible states of mind for homicide crimes. He is being charged under a reckless homicide statute, which means he must be...reckless!
Liable is not a term of art. I could have been more precise and said "criminally liable." Or "found guilty." But liable is the same thing.
January 26th, 2009 at 11:19 PM ^
I played D-I ball for a University that had to deal with a similar issue. I won't name the school. We had a player collapse and die on the field right in front of us. It was the first day walk-ons were allowed at practice in full-pads...he was a first day walk-on. Shortly after warm-ups and the usual Monday gassers for loafs, the team broke for it's regularly scheduled 12 period practice (10 mins per period). I actually ran right past the kid, I looked him in his face and thought to myself he doesn't look so good and never thought anything else about it until I heard the kid passed away. We even had a coach that was basically picking the kid up off the ground and urging him to get off his a$$, in lighter terms. I tell you this, because I have some first hand insight on this situation. I as a player thought nothing to help someone that I knew was in obvious in pain. A coach poked and proded this young man to continue. The fact of the matter is, no one knew he was going to die that day. IF WE KNEW HE WAS AT THAT POINT SOMEONE WOULD HAVE CERTAINLY INTERVENED. A coach has tough duty. They don't carry the responsibility of one young man, but yet that of 50/60 odd something players. The owe a duty to all of these players and that is to push them to become the best player they can possibly be...unfortunately there is a thin line. This line is dangerous and scary. Anyways w/o righting book...all I am trying, it is 100% impractical to believe this man should face criminal charges. BTW, in my studies as a Sport Mangement Major, I believe that negligence falls under TORT Law. Which in most instances, is civil law. Yes, this coach acted in an extremely negligent manner. But, I at the same time when does the red light go off to say enough is enough???? I have been there and trust me it is not as easy you may want to believe it is....JUST SOME FOOD FOR THOUGHT!!!
January 27th, 2009 at 12:31 AM ^
But criminal negligence is a 'misfeasance or 'nonfeasance' (see omission), where the fault lies in the failure to foresee and so allow otherwise avoidable dangers to manifest.
Negligence arises when, on a subjective test, an accused has not actually foreseen the potentially adverse consequences to the planned actions, and has gone ahead, exposing a particular individual or unknown victim to the risk of suffering injury or loss. The accused is a social danger because he or she has endangered the safety of others in circumstances where the reasonable person would have foreseen the injury and taken preventive measures.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criminally_negligent
This is what the coach is charged with - the failure to foresee avoidable dangers. It is a criminal charge - not a tort claim.
January 27th, 2009 at 12:46 AM ^
This guy took Sports Management. He can teach us a thing or two about the law.