Outstanding article on handshake

[stick1]

Outstanding article by Mark Maynard of the Ashland Dailey. http://m.dailyindependent.com/Independent/pm_102879/contentdetail.htm?contentguid=udFfzjOU

[stick1]

The Independent : Mark Maynard: Handshake lines a thing of the past? 10/10/13

[True blue (and gold)]

Excellent article. It sums up my thoughts very well. It isn't the handshake that indicates sportsmanship or the lack thereof.

[Bluegrasscard]

Is really a new 'state' of affairs? Or is it that the very, very, very few incidents now get high profile attention from the never blinking eye of videos, cameras, iphones, etc? Hasn't there always been an issue here or there but that they were, and still are, very few and far between?

 

This overarching condemnation of the next generation of our own society seems to have gone overboard.

 

Last night we asked our son about what goes on in the line. He said 'I called a fagot' once this year after a game in the line. He just ignored it and kept going. One kid, who didn't even even play in the game, getting their immature verbal cheap shot in. Football is a game where player literally beat on each other for 2 and half hours. If there was a sport where you would expect post game antics its this one. This is the same for hockey and lacrosse (non-KHSAA sports) as well. These are direct physical contact sports where 'paybacks' would be the most expected. Yet, these sports seem to be on the lower end of incidents. The most cited incident - a girls volleyball game - a sport where the opponents do not even touch other during normal play.

 

This seemed to come down to 'who is responsible for monitoring' this post game activity. It is clear that the original and following directives, statements, etc. were to take that responsibility off the game officials. In football I do not believe it was common or expected that the referees 'monitor' the handshake line. I know that in many if not most or almost all cases the officials usually did what the directive indicated they should do - leave after play has completely concluded. Maybe this is or was not the case in other sports. In hockey referees have to be the last to 'leave the ice' after a game. So their duties (as defined by USA Hockey) extend to the point where the ice is clear after a game.

 

Relieving the referees of being responsible for this activity is reasonable. The action in and of itself was reasonable. The communication was a disaster. The negative publicity for the state was terrible. The commissioner seems to listen to concerns of referees and game officials. There is nothing wrong with that and even commendable. But the wording, notification, timing and out-of-the-blue communication of the directive was a disaster. It has lead to a black eye for the entire state. It has also given an entire generation a black eye that it probably does not deserve.

[Hellbird]

Is really a new 'state' of affairs? Or is it that the very, very, very few incidents now get high profile attention from the never blinking eye of videos, cameras, iphones, etc? Hasn't there always been an issue here or there but that they were, and still are, very few and far between?

 

Bingo!!!

 

This is nothing new, this same type of stuff has gone on since I was little. The big difference, just like concusions in football...it's the media and coverage they get today. They've always been around, but in todays world of instant messaging, social media, 24 hour news networks etc. something that happens tonight in a game at 7pm could be national news by 7:05