When does Trash Talking go over the line?

it's been documented that a number of pro athletes do "opposition research" in order to do proper trash-talking. Jordan, Garnett, Bird, Gary Payton are a few of the guys who I've seen in print that would do such research.

That post wasn't safe for Kass

I also feel that if it were bad enough that he felt a need to retaliate, his teammates would have been involved. If I acted like an idiot on national tv, I'd probably be trying to hide behind poor excuses myself. I do not see a thing wrong with trying to provoke him into a penalty. In fact, I'll go one step farther. Let's assume that he manages to go to the NFL. What do you think the opposing players are going to do? He has exposed his own weakness, let the show begin, I've been ready!

Trash talk IMO part of playing sports. It is not admirable, but getting the opposing team/ players to react and do stupid things can aid your team. Not necessarily to penalize opponents, but moreso to help them make mistakes. It seems like Lewan knew how to get inside Ghoulston's head, causing him to overreact. I'm not buying the notion that Ghoulston was "really jacked up for the game and made a split second poor decision." When you get under someone's skin, they go insane and do really stupid things. Ghoulston was obviously pissed off and couldn't harness his anger without throwing a punch. I'm not sure where the neck twist came from though. Personally, I think that was just a characteristic of his play. He was dirty at Southeastern too.

Trash talking goes too far when you throw a punch.

In all seriousness, trash talking is just a means to get inside to opponent's head to gain a mental advantage that you hope translates into a physical advantage.  Trash talking goes too far when it's insulting to the opposing player and the statements are made in public.  In the trenches, or downfield after a pass breakup, fire away.

I mean, I get what you're saying, but your hypothetical quotes kind of made my skin crawl.

Once you start calling people Tom then all hell should break loose.

That it be limited to stuff actually about the game. I got into it pretty good with a notre dame fan on the golf course, but I never made it personal.

Ummm uh... wait what?

Stephen

Normally you and i see things very similarly (probably cause we're close to the same age) but i think your examples went "over the line".

You should probably dial those down a bit.

It goes over the line when the other player turns into a bitch and tells the media.  That's the only line.  Even your hypothetical lines that are over the top are just words.  If you are so offended say the same thing back to the guy.  Now you're even. 

It's all ridiculous.

"Safety school"

OR

"300 was a crappy movie"

First:  Gholston has not specified what the provocation was.  Verbal provocation?  That would not justify a punch.  Physical provocation?  No doubt Lewan got a hand into Gholston's face mask, and also held Gholston's head down as a play came to conclusion.  But of course, the Big Ten is not accepting that kind of provocation as a defense to a punch.  And Gholston knows a thing or two about getting hands into face masks after a whistle.

Jonas Mouton was physically provoked; he still got suspended.  Gholston had no defense to at least a one-game suspension.

I'm sort of loathe to talk about verbal provocation, when Gholston isn't going to specify what sort of provocation it is that he has claimed.

Second:  I'm not the thread police, and I am not suggesting that this thread be taken down, but the entire suggestion that Lewan used any sort of racial epithet against Gholston is a story that has been so completely lacking in merit (ZERO confirmation of Lewan saying anything like that; ZERO credible reporting on the subject; and a rather CLEAR alternative explanation -- the old name-joke left over from recruiting days) that it really shouldn't be mentioned at all without the sternest rebuttal, given the understandably sensitive nature of racial epithets.

was not provoked, unless playing football is "provocation" for the sake of his argument.  He acted like an asshat, his coach acted like a bigger asshat, their AD acted like the biggest asshat, and then he was used by his coaches to make an asshat statement to make them look like slightly smaller asshats.  Gholston was done a disservice by his coaches and AD by not being suspended by the program.  The Spartan difference........

     I myself have probably crossed the line on this posting board, calling Gholston a "penitentiary inmate" and Mark Dantonio "sub-human trash" probably went a little too far.

     But now I've had a chance to see that photo of Gholston smiling on several occasions, and I wonder if we haven't been a little hard on him.  This is a serious question, and while it could be interpreted as a slight, know that my intention is to lessen his culpability.

     Is Gholston operating at an intellectual level where he can be held responsible for his actions?

Ask Profit.

Ask Profit.

Ask Profit.

Ask Profit.

Ask Profit.

Ask Profit.

Ask Profit.

Ask Profit.

Ask Profit.

Ask Profit.

Ask Profit.

Whether Lewan went over it...most likely not. The line about Gholston being provoked...like duh, no shit sherlock, of course you were provoked. Usually everyone who throws a punch like that is provoked in some way. You can't use it as a defense that somehow what Lewan did to you made it slightly more OK to punch him like that.

MSU is absolutely clueless how to handle discipline. But I bet you Dantonio thinks they're the poster child of discipline after they were forced to suspend Gholston.

the truth.

I'm sure LeGarrette Blount was taunted as well.

for violence, IMO.  The only exception to this is when the words represent are a serious threat.

"I will now hurt you or your family with the weapon I am currently holding in my hand."  Well, that's provocation for violence and if someone says something like that, they should get neutralized, physically if necessary.  Other than that, you are never off the hook for assaulting someone.  Regardless of how mean they are.

Regardless of whether you think trash-talking befits Michigan Men, I'm guessing the following methods step over the line (or should):

1) Racially motiivated comments

2) Comments referencing mentally or physically handicapped family members

3) Derogatory gay references (e.g., "you're a fa**ot")

4) Terminal illness comments directed toward family members, coaches, etc.

However, Tom is likely breaking a code by simply acknowledging that he was upset by Lewan's comment(s).  In my estimation trash talk should stay on the field or in the lockerroom.  It isn't discussed with the press.  I rarely hear it publicly acknowledged as much as it probably occurs.

Like pornography, I think you'll know it when you hear it. Calling a guy a particular name or questioning his manhood or toughness, while dumb on an objective level, is probably safe. But when the speaker cringes even thinking about it, then it clearly is beyond the boundary. Also, when it just sounds dumb and mean-spirited without being that effective as an "inside-your-head"-type insult, that's also a sign. Like with Garnett and his whole Charlie V rant about cancer last year - it wasn't really that bright (shocking, I know, coming from that scholar) and, even if not true, was still more hurtful than effective. Yeah, it pisses off the other guy, but it is also attacking a perception that the man has/had cancer, which is such a personal attack.

With regards to Gholston, the whole "Tom" thing carries with it an unfortunate racial component that, while clearly not the genesis of the taunt, tinges the entire conversation and makes it bigger than it really was. If everyone had called Gholston "Bob", then Lewan's trash talk about have been equally effective and Gholston would have looked like the loose cannon he appears to be. But when you have a white player calling a black player "Tom", it makes the entire situation uncomfortable and gives Gholston an undeserved moral high-ground.

A tragic hero once said something along the lines of "Integrity is what you do when no one else is looking."    

Sticks and stones man, sticks and stones.

Not cool, man.

as soon as it starts.  Shut the @!%&*$ up and play ball. Everyone.

Probably references to race, religion, or sexual orientation. A player who makes a derogatory remark about an opposing player's race, religion, or sexual orientation is likely to have a teammate of that same race, religion, or sexual orientation. 

I would say that denegrating someone's ascribed characteristics would be "crossing the line" (i.e., race, ethnicity, gender, orientation, etc...), not to mention a few prescribed ones which are essentially personal (e.g., religion or politics). They should be discouraged, even disallowed, for the same reasons they are on this board basically. 

once something gets personal (ie. your mom type deal), it's cause for going "over the line". Trying to say something about someone else's family doesn't end well at almost any time.