Player Benched For Refusing to Cut Hair

 

Coach- But it wasn't a dictatorial rule passed down from the coach. It wasn't a "get a haircut or don't play" gesture. What you describe is obviously a completely different situation. I'm all for team bonding. I'm not for rules that are irrelevant to the on-field play.

 

Georgetown University baseball players shaved their heads this spring for a cancer fundraiser. That's far different than a coach forcing them to look a certain way.

 

I wanted to add that this "tradition" included so much more.  For example wearing team jerseys to class for conference games, having all players practice in matching practice clothing, having the team do community service, having the seniors rotate one night per each week hosting the team without girlfriends etc., ... all of this stuff that might be considered "stupid" produced teams that consistently won 30+ games and did so for 12+ straight years. 

 

JH, yes somewhat different but the fact is that the first years when that program changed and began to dominate area baseball, it was a mandate.  The players then took it over and made it tradition. 

Experience not only from being in and around successful baseball programs, but from building teams of far greater importance as a non-commissioned officer.

I've seen this type of stuff others would say doesn't have to do with baseball work at 2 different schools.  I left that school and came to my present school.  I implemented the same rules.  There was little discipline here at that time and, to be honest, I was told that if I came to this school, I would destroy my coaching career.  At that time, this school was considered a "coaching graveyard."  Only those that couldn't get hired at other places got hired here.  I was an outcast and so ...  The attitude, effort, motivation and success all changed and we became an area power overnight.  If you believe it was me, you are crazy.  It was the discipline and commitment demanded of them to be in this program.  Some of you think this is of little value and yet, as I like to say to my teams, "Attention to detail is EVERYTHING!"

So how many wins was it worth each year?

And I've seen unsuccessful programs with similar approaches. And I've seen successful programs with dissimilar approaches.

Whether the rule is right or wrong, it is the rule. The player knew the rule. And like was stated in the video, the player made a decision. If that's a decision he's going to make, then he must also live with the consequences. 

Pointing out an exception doesn't disprove a rule.  If a guy won't cut his hair for the team, why would the coach think he'll bunt when he gets the sign?  If a pitcher, why would the coach think he'll throw the change up when called instead of the fast ball to protect his ego?  If he's really trying to make a statement for cancer, why not shave his head instead?  Life is about choices and dealing with the consequences of decisions.  If he doesn't want to abide by the coaches rules, fine.  But that doesn't mean he's entitled to play on the team.  Hopefully he learns that lesson now because he has to live with it the rest of his life.  This coach is doing him a service he will appreciate later in life.

Nothing of the comparisons you made are relevant to hair. Rules for the sake of rules are dumb. If the kid has issues with directives on the playing field, then that's the issue. Adding more rules just means that there are more places for more kids to fail.

 

And yes, pointing out an exception does disprove a rule. However, that's not what I was doing (I think that comment was directed at my last post.) I was pointing out two issues with the logic presented--that because the rule existed, it led to success (correlation does not equal causation) and that the information presented from his viewpoint was not sufficient (the plural of anecdotes is not data.) 

I like the rule and the coach has a right to enforce it. Play baseball and look like a ballplayer. Just look at the Red Sox. They look like a bunch of slobs with those scraggly beards and long hair. The Yankees do it right. They look like ballplayers

 

Yeah, the Yankees did it right from 1981-1995 when they didn't allow any facial hair or long hair. Phil Rizzuto, Bobby Murcer, and Tom Seaver don't know what they are talking about because they are beard wearing, scraggily long haired hippies: "The most infamous incident involving facial hair occurred in 1991. Although Steinbrenner was suspended, the Yankee management ordered Don Mattingly, who was then sporting a longish or mullet-like hair style, to get a hair cut. When Mattingly refused he was benched. This led to a huge media frenzy with reporters and talk radio repeatedly mocking the team. The WPIX broadcasting crew of Phil Rizzuto, Bobby Murcer, and Tom Seaver lampooned the policy on a pregame show with Rizzuto playing the role of a barber sent to enforce the rule."

 

It was in 2004, 2007 or 2013 when the Red Sox were too busy sitting at home while the Yankees were winning the World Series. Or maybe it was that slob mustache Randy Johnson was wearing in 2001 that caused the Yankees to win the World Series. Or, maybe the early 1970's A's would have won if only Charlie Finley had paid them not to grow facial hair. The We Are Family Pirates, if only they had looked like ballplayers, maybe they would have won a damn World Series. All these teams needed to look like ballplayers, that's why they lost!

"Pincher Creek Minor Baseball Association statement about recent events

Pincher Creek Minor Baseball Association

A situation arose with the Junior team this last week and it quickly escalated due to inappropriate use of the social media. The board has discussed the incident and decided to release a statement. The PCMB board made this decision in order to fully inform the public and hopefully put a stop to all the negativity and perhaps get back to what is important, playing baseball.

There are two sides to a story and by now, we hope most have heard them both. The board, as well as many of the parents on this team feels it is important to stand behind the coach involved. It comes down to respect an all parties, respect for the sport, your team and your coach. Playing on a team is not a right just like having a job is not your right. A person has to want it and perhaps even earn it, it is a privilege and sometimes people forget that. Of course we want all kids to play, but we also want them to respect/appreciate being on a team, and for the people that volunteer their time to ensure that privilege.

Each team has its own rules/guidelines, whatever you choose to call them, just like each employer has their own rules or each teacher has rules for their classroom. It is important we teach our children this early and explain that you may not agree or like the rules, but if you want to play, work or be in the classroom, you must abide by them or there will be consequences. Its called respect.

This coach has had the same rule for a number of years now as many boys will attest to. It was not a way to single out any player or force his will on anyone. It was in his words “respect for the sport, the team and yourself.” He did not ever say how short it had to be, “just make an effort”. Every boy on the team did just that because they want to play baseball except for one. He said “No”, right from the start. No explanation until days later when all the wrong actions were already starting to take place. Every situation is resolvable when dealt with in the appropriate channels. The parent in this situation knows very well what these channels should have been but she chose not to use them and instead manipulated the situation using social media. This is totally unacceptable if not only because it sets a terrible example for our children. There was no respect in this situation whatsoever.

The board believes fully in the coach’s values and expectations for these boys.

This isn’t a form of bullying or power tripping. It is a case of setting up expectations for a team and expecting everyone to try to live up to them.

Thank you!

Pincher Creek Minor Baseball Executive"

~~~

Most organizations have a rule book, where parents and athletes have to read and sign, before being allowed to participate. Many rules, very clearly spelled out.
We read and signed them. Old school...hair, uniform, on and off the field behavior, representing their school and program.  He did it. Didn't kill him. But, it did teach him respect for himself, his school, his team, for authority, and those aren't bad things to learn going through your teenage years into adulthood. And if you've got problems that you can't handle without Mommy at 16, or the ability to follow a Coaches rules, better hang up your cleats, cause you're never gonna play beyond High School.

The Mother made a fool of herself, and her son. He never should have allowed it, to begin with. Shame on the Mother. Not the way to handle things.

JH.....was a proud donor of the Hoyas efforts and was at the "shaving event" after a game.all of the players let everything go hair, facial hair leading up to the event.....their team captain could have gotten a role in any movie as "Jesus"....all of the players participate.....if you did not know what the team was doing you would have thought the team was a biker gang rec team....the team all pulled together and the coaching staff was smart enough to realize the positive impact this effort had on the team and the larger community. I wonder if the mom had approached the coach with the idea of allowing other players to support her son's efforts or maybe the coach could have diffused the situation and used it as a way to build team unity there could have been a better outcome. I think it is the right of any coach to set standards, as you well know Georgetown has dress code for when the team travels but I also believe there are times when rules can be bent, broken, ignore ( choose your own word) for a greater cause and this coach should have allowed this player to do this. I also think the mom should have handled this in a much different way and tried to find a solution versus being confrontational. Kind reminds me of our current situation in DC....no one looking for common ground and solutions just "dig in and don't give in"

Heavens, we can't have him learn how to fail, push on and succeed.  Too many rules for the sake of rules.  Let's have them show up to games whenever they want.  Let's have them do whatever they want pregame.  Let's have them wear whichever uniform top and bottom they want.  Let's not have them ride the bus to away games...let them drive and take public transportation.  Let's not make them pass their classes in school.  After all, those are just a few of the rules for the sake of rules .... just like the one of being respectful to umps.  We don't need that.

Oldskool, you asked how many wins were these rules worth?  It is the difference between playing in a program and simply on a team.  It is the difference between someone who goes to the local high school and someone who moves their kid into a district because they know that district will win at baseball and their child stands a better than average chance of getting a college scholarship.  It is the difference between teams that have winning seasons and teams that go 40-0 one season and one that a few years earlier won 64 in a row.  It makes the program stand out even among outstanding programs. 

 

Bulldog, I am so glad that you are a member here.  You know me well and so, know that when I posts these things about my time at Edwardsville and Triad, you know the traditions of what I speak of and what those programs represent. 

I will make another point in a following post.

So, what we have here is a coach who has rules, has clearly stated those rules and a player/parent who disagree with those rules.  I noticed that the dad clearly supports the coach.  IMO, the player should leave the team to support his position and good for him supporting his beliefs.  I wonder if the posting of this in social media is directly linked to the mom wanting to get revenge because the coach demonstrated that her son is not a main cog on this team and can be replaced. 

 

What we also have here is others passing judgements on this coach when, the reality is, should we have a clandestine filming of everything that posters do and think, we could find fault.  This is his team and his rules.  We have turned into such an age of entitlement that people believe that they get to tell the coach what he will do with his program.  That is why I hold a parent meeting.  I set the rules and then encourage parents to take their child off of the team if they can't support that.  I don't want a cancer in the form of player or parents in my program.  I was fortunate that my program was the program everyone wanted their child in.  Ironic isn't it that I received so much support.  JH asserted that the length of one's hair does not a ball player make.  I agree.  What about a teammate?

So this kid is growing his hair out "for cancer", but Georgetown shaved their heads "for cancer"? Sounds like the cancer people need to figure out a consistent hair management strategy...

 

In all seriousness, I find it interesting that the player didn't happen to mention the whole "cancer" angle until several days after the coach lay down the ultimatum.

 

I am in agreement with the consensus here, I think. It's a silly rule, but it's this guy's rule and if you want to play baseball on his team, you're going to have to live with it. The mother committed a horrible act by surreptitiously recording the conversation, in which the coach showed great restraint (maybe he knew he was being recorded, or suspected it). It's not a whole lot different than the woman who recorded Donald Sterling, except that this guy didn't say anything that showed him to be a terrible human being, probably because he isn't actually a despicable human being like Sterling.

 

The only thing that's too bad is that if you want to play baseball and you live in Pincher Creek, Alberta, you're pretty much stuck with this guy - or a lot of time on the highway going to games and practices elsewhere. It's not like there's a rival program on the other side of town you can jump to if this coach and program aren't a good fit.

 

The player quit this team. And a neighboring team has offered him to play on their team. No mention of required hair length, etc. The player had yet to decide. Mom, is likely telling him to wait it out, that he is such a 5-Tool player, they can't possibly win without him. After all, she states how he is a leader of the team. That surely, this Coach will come to his senses, make an exception, just for this stud. And beg forgiveness, pleadingly ask this boy to come back and lead this team. For without his leadership, all is lost, including their chances of winning. Or, if all else fails... Mom will tell him to hold out, play for another rival team, make the TV Talk Show circuit rounds with her. And maybe even Brad Pitt will play him in the future movie about his story and journey to the big leagues, in how he changed Baseball. Mom is already dusting off the fireplace mantle for their Oscar, even having a spotlight installed...

NOT!!!

This 2 day old thread reminds me of one of my favorite movies.....It's a Mad Mad Mad Mad World.  Ridiculous shenanigans all around.  I can't wait for the upcoming lawsuit where the "crazy no-haircut lady" sues the "my way or the highway" coach.  Riveting drama.

 

 

Sorry, what's the difference between a program and a team? What you wrote above seems to be more result oriented, so if a team wins a lot more games, it becomes a program? At what point can you call yourself a program? Is it based on number of rules or number of wins?

So basically what i'm reading is, as long as the player knows about the rule beforehand, it's an OK rule because the coach is the final say. Is that a fair assessment of your argument?

Oldskool, the difference is worth of another thread. 

 

Per your statement that whatever the coach says is ok because they are the coach then, yes.  Playing for that team is a choice.  If you don't like the coach, don't play for him. If it is a HS program, the AD, Administration ... all will determine the effectiveness of that coach and his program and if he warrants renewal.  I can't speak for all school districts but the two I have worked in guarantee the HC nothing.  They are hired year to year.  They have high expectations.

 

In your opinion then, the player tells the coach what the rules are that they will follow.

I can’t help but stick up a bit for the mom. I know it seems like a terrible thing to record someone without their knowing it, but for those of you who haven’t been in a situation where it was he/she said-he/she said and one of the people lies about what they said, what’s the alternative? Take your lumps and move on?

 

Remember, sometimes people record conversations like that to protect themselves rather than to make the other person look bad. In the end, not all coaches have the experience and integrity of someone like B25, and they shouldn’t all be given carte blanche just because they have the word ‘coach’ on their hat or shirt.

Just to make the facts clearer, the kid was growing his hair (or so he says) in order to shave it and donate it to cancer victims. I do know that it has to be a certain length tobe donatable. Just sayin'.

I would have some more questions. First, having looked at the kid, his hair was long enough to shave and donate already. Second, did their season just start? I'm just wondering if this coach had a standing rule or if he just decided he didn't like the hair. It's pretty long. If the season didn't JUST start, I'm not sure I'd like a coach laying out a new rule just for me on the spot.

Is the game of baseball going to shrivel up and die without this kid and his agent mother? Or will baseball go on for another century? Next!

maybe not. they are Canadian. Just kidding...eh.

 

I would like to know the difference between "Team" and "Program."

 

Would you be OK if a coach mandated all hair must be down to shoulder in length and those who cannot grow it must wear cornrows? Would you be OK if boxers (or briefs) were mandated to be worn outside of the pants? Would you be OK with a rule that says the cross must be worn around your neck at all times? Would you be ok with a rule that says the star of David must be worn around your neck at all times? Would you be ok with a rule that says starting pitchers must complete all games they start, no matter what (the team still wins)?

Is the game of baseball going to shrivel up and die without another authoritarian coach? Or will baseball go on for another century? Next!

I'm a rules guy.

However, I think this coach erred by having this particular rule.

But I support him 100%.

Maybe I'm missing something here but I think that it is important to consider the intent behind the player's and the coach's actions. If we accept the player's word at face value, we see that he was growing his hair long for a noble reason: to benefit cancer victims ("locks of love" program, I believe). On the other hand, the coach's intent behind his directive--"get your hair cut because that's my rule"--stems from complete egotism: "follow my rules because I am in charge (and if you don't, then I'll lose some authority.."). Because the player's intent in growing his hair long is noble and selfless, the coach's rule that he cut it is heartless and selfish.

 

I can speak for only myself: I have my son involved in baseball primarily because I think that the sport has the potential to imbue young men with the noble characteristics of perseverance, diligence, and, perhaps most importantly, selflessness. I also want my son to learn those necessary behaviors for functioning under stress, including making wise decisions when under irrational authority.

 

Although we know only minor details of the situation, it seems like the mother erred by involving herself. She should have instead helped her son reach a wise decision with respect to this conflict, which I think would be for the player himself to argue the righteous motivation behind his long hair. Had the player presented his case as such, the coach's selfish motivations would have been exposed.

 

Finally, given that it is likely this young man and his mother know cancer victims and cancer survivors personally--for who doesn't?--I see the mother's anger as justified, which leaves me troubled by of the harsh comments that are directed at her.

When my son was in LL he was punched out on a horrible third strike call. He came back to the bench complaining. After reviewing the semantics of the situation I reminded him regardless of the umpire's skill level he was still out. The reason is the umpire had been in the game long enough to accrue some power.

 

In the situation of this thread the coach has the power. He's earned it through experience and seniority. In Canada youth coaches are certified after testing and review. Hair code rules are not new to baseball or other sports. If the kid can stay in the game long enough to become a coach he can have a no haircut rule. But for now he can cut his hair or go home.

 

As a coach I would be appalled the kid has his mommy standing up for him. The kid never brought up the reason why he wasn't cutting his hair. His mommy did it for him. Get him a binkie and bankie and send him home for a nap.

Geesh....just give this kid his "Participation Trophy" and let's move on...lol

 

Oldskool, I didn't simply post that the difference between coaching a team and building a program was a topic worthy of a thread.  I created a thread.  While there are many typos etc. as I rushed it during my lunch, it is there for all to read.  Per the Cross or Star of David, that would violate the law and so, would not do it. 

 

Again, this coach made it clear what the rules were for playing ball for him.  If you don't like it, move on.  There are other teams out there and other high schools.  The Dad didn't seem to have a problem at all.  The coach didn't throw the young man off of the team.  He said he won't play until that hair gets cut.  The coach stated that the mom and the player are making choices.  He made a choice.  Somehow this coach is being portrayed as some egomaniac and yet, that is not the impression I get from the video.  In fact, he seems to be to be pretty level headed.  JMHO!

I haven't been able to view the video - just read the stories. My question is did the coach make it clear what the rules were to play for him? Or did this come out of nowhere? I'm asking becasue I didn't see anyhting in writing and didn't see the actual video.

8" of chemically untreated hair is what Locks of Love requires. And even seeing this boys hair covered with a hat, it looks long enough. The boy did not mention his reason of growing out his hair, until the Mother approached the Coach about it. Likely after she had come up with a plausible explanation to give the Coach.  I have a grandchild who grew out his hair in grade school.  For that purpose, because at a former school, he had a classmate with cancer. Until all the little boys at school, kept chasing him at recess to kiss him. And he'd say: I am a boy!! Blue eyed blond, prettier than his sister. 

Based on the fact that they admitted that the kid was offered a spot on a neighboring team, I'm thinking this isn't a HS team.   If it was, I can see the coach having rules about the length of a kid's hair.  If not....not so much.  My question is how long has the kid been a member of this team?  It says he's been growing his hair out for a year?  Was it long at tryouts?   If he was on the team last year...I have a hard time believing a coach would boot him because he let his hair grow long...again, especially on a non-HS team.  Got to be more to this....

First of all, it sounds like the kid took a week to let the coach what he was doing.  The coach says you should have told me last Thursday what was going on.  Wouldn't have made a difference, but you should have told me then.  I agree with Shelby and have a suspicion that it took them a while to come up with a good reason to not cut his hair.

 

For those of you that have seen the video - and especially for those who haven't.  Notice the picture of the kid at the top of the article as opposed to what the kid looked like in the video.  The kids hair is NO WHERE near as long in the video as it is in the picture at the top of the article.

 

I understand that some people agree with the rule about hair and some people don't.  The fact of the matter is that it really isn't THAT unusual of a rule.  I know it doesn't make it right in your mind, but it's not like the coach is doing something outlandish like making the kids wear their underwear on their heads or something.  The kid should have gotten his hair cut and left it alone.  JMHO.

Ok, for all you "rules are rules" guys, is there ever a time to relax a rule?  And if so, why isn't growing your hair for cancer the time?  Is it really that absolute? 

 

I know you all drive the speed limit on the highway, right?   

Wow...to address several posts above:

 

1) Military having short hair ACTUALLY goes back to the Romans and has little to do with wearing gas masks. Today's military has short hair for unity, uniformity and discipline.

 

2) JH and other dissenters, why do coaches have players tuck their shirts in?  It certainly doesn't affect performance.

 

3) Call me a cynic but why didn't the kid (or the helicopter mom) disclose his "growing hair for cancer" reason when the coach told him the rule?  I'm betting that wasn't the real reason given the mother's videotaping.