Should he be suspended for the year?

So we're going to suspend that player for the whole year (for a relatively minor loss of temper) and suspend Augie for 4 games (for drunk driving). Hmmmmm

TX- Are you serious? A relatively minor loss of temper. I'm not talking about UT's coach, I'm talking about the thug who could have injured someone INTENTIONALLY! Let's give the kid a concussion or put an eye out and let him miss the whole year or worse.

Maybe that's whats wrong with our youth today, a slap on the wrist!!

He definetly retaliated but I don't think that this calls for a year's suspension. JMO and I am serious.

I don't agree with what the kid did at all. I'm just suggesting we seem to have a hard time making the punishment fit the crime. He did the same thing Christian Laitner did years ago. No one was hurt in either situation...just like no one was hurt when Augie drove drunk. I'm suggesting a whole year for that is as extreme as a 4 game for drunk driving is on the other end of the spectrum.

quote:

I am serious

and so am I!

quote:

Originally posted by Tx-Husker:
I don't agree with what the kid did at all. I'm just suggesting we seem to have a hard time making the punishment fit the crime. He did the same thing Christian Laitner did years ago. No one was hurt in either situation...just like no one was hurt when Augie drove drunk. I'm suggesting a whole year for that is as extreme as a 4 game for drunk driving is on the other end of the spectrum.

We teach our children that they must do the work and the best they can, the outcome is out of their control.

Whether someone gets hurt is not and should not be the litmus test for punishment. Recently on our basketball team, one player shoved an opponent in the back going for a loose ball, technical foul called. It was a frustration foul after the other player hacked and pushed our player to the floor with no call. The pushed player landed on some chairs on their bench and needed stiches to his shin. Our player suspended 4 games. Three weeks later, similar circumstance, our player pushes opposing player in the back after a no call hack and steal. Intentional foul called. Our player sits one quarter.

The outcome is not relevant, only the act. The act in this case was an intentional foul with intent to injure. Garrido didn't kill anyone, but he committed the same act as someone that did. That doesn't make him any better or the killer any worse, they did the same thing with different outcomes.

You're missing my point, CPLZ. The point is we have a hard time matching punishment to the crime. To say this kid should be punished for the whole season for losing his cool in frustration, and Augie should be suspended for just 4 games for drunk driving is a joke. If it was 4 games for this kid and a season for Augie, that would be more appropriate.

I'm just comparing two situations and how extreme the punishments (one suggested, one real) are. We seem to be throwing the book at the young black kid for losing his cool in the spur of the moment on the court, and giving the old white guy a break who knowingly drank for hours and then jumped in the car to drive impared. I actually agree if there was injury shouldn't be the key factor...but it shouldn't be in either case and there's been lots written about Augie's penalty should be less severe since no one was hurt.

Tx-

Just so you know I'm not racist, I say suspend both the "young black kid" and the "old white guy" for the year. To even interject race into this situation is very sad. They are both two different situations dealt with by two different organizations.

In my opinion, sitting out the whole year for trying to injure a player in the manner in which he did IS punishment fitting the crime. As I stated, if the kid would have lost an eye or suffered a career ending injury you probably would be saying something different, but he didn't so it's ok.

Sorry, but I can guarantee you that I, my son or anyone I coached would not intentionally stomp on someones face out of frustration. Let's stop making excuses for our youth and have them live up to the rules.

I wasn't saying you were a racist. Sorry, didn't mean it that way. I think race is a consideration here since Christian Laitner did the same thing. What was his penatly (I don't recall)?

Also, you can see from the video he was not looking where he stepped...so to say he stepped on the kid's face on purpose is a stretch. Stepped on him on purpose, for sure. Several game suspension seems appropriate to me.

My larger question is Augie. What do you think the appropriate suspension should have been there if a season suspension to this kid is appropriate?

I do not think the player should be suspended for the year, but I do think he should serve a multi-game suspension and also serve some additional punishment meted out by his coach. I would say that if he does something of this nature again, that appears intentional or at least avoidable, then he should serve a very harsh penalty up to the loss of a year and perhaps being kicked off the team completely.

As for Coach Garrido's crime, I'm not sure that he should be suspended at all if his drunk driving was done outside his coaching job. I do believe that he should be subjected to the same exact punishment that anyone else who is convicted of drunk driving serves, including hefty financial penalties, loss of driving privilege and jail time. I do not believe that being suspended from one's job is appropriate, unless possibly they were driving drunk on the job. In that case, I believe the employer should have complete discretion on how to penalize the employee above and beyond the courts, which in many cases would result in termination. Do the rest of you believe that everyone who drives drunk should be suspended from their jobs, regardless of what they do for a living? If so, then I understand why you think he should be suspended, but if not then perhaps you should give your position further consideration. Are you singling Coach Garrido out just because of his stature? Would you suspend him if he were the janitor who cleans up the rooms in the science department?

quote:

Originally posted by CPLZ:
We teach our children that they must do the work and the best they can, the outcome is out of their control.

Whether someone gets hurt is not and should not be the litmus test for punishment. .....

The outcome is not relevant, only the act. The act in this case was an intentional foul with intent to injure. ....

I understand the teaching and how important it is to "do the work .. the best they can" and that the "outcome is out of their control."

Unfortunately, however, our system does NOT work that way at all. The outcome is very, very important. One kid, or maybe even you or I once a upon a time, went 25mph over the limit. Perhaps, it was mistake in not knowing the signage at the same time of doing some minor speeding. Doesn't matter why, it can be "wreckless driving" in some states. If an accident occurred and someone was hurt you could spend time in prison. When is an accident wrecklessness? ... it's always some mistake of some kind. What if you let your tire pressure get low and have a blow-out and cause an accident and someone gets hurt?

How many of us is not guilty of some act in our past that could have been a terrible tragedy? How fortunate are we who have made semi-wreckless or careless mistakes but have had little consequence? I submit many if not all of us fit into this category.

Regardless of right or wrong or philosophy, the courts consider the outcomes.

If I was caught driving impaired I would expect the penalty as descibed by the law, not to have my salary garnished for a year and my family tipped upside down.

If I got pessed at someone at work and purposly assualted him I would expect to lose my job.

quote:

Do the rest of you believe that everyone who drives drunk should be suspended from their jobs, regardless of what they do for a living? If so, then I understand why you think he should be suspended, but if not then perhaps you should give your position further consideration.

Apples and oranges in my opinion. Some people and their jobs hold them to a little higher standard than others. As a Parent I'm trying to set an example for my kids, but as an employee of a corporation I'm not. As a coach and mentor to many young adults, the coach (right or wrong) has the duty to set the right example by his actions. He may have different rules than I because of his involvement in the public eye and with the youth.

quote:

I wasn't saying you were a racist. Sorry, didn't mean it that way

No Tx, I didn't think you were, and I understand what you're saying. I just happen to see it differently and have a different opinion.

If I understand an article I found right, Christian Laettner was not even ejected from the game on two occasions...one where he kicked a player on the ground and the other where he stompted on the player's chest who was on the ground. The reason in both cases was it was deemed "unintentional" by the NCAA. Had it been intentional, it sounds like the penalty was a 1 game suspension. That sounds a little light, but consistency with the rule on this topic seems in order.

Maybe it's me that's being unfair to Augie, I don't know. To me, the penalty for an emotional on the field/court act that is spur of the moment should be less severe than the penalty for an act that took place over several hours with many chances to think about ones actions. Especially, if the former is done by an emotional kid in the heat of the moment, and the latter is done by a man clearly old enough to know better.

Saw the video. Made me feel like the guy is a real knucklehead...an idiot.

Then I got to thinking. What about a pitcher who drills a guy in the back (head?) with a 95 mph fastball due to his home run trot 3 innings ago? We all know it happens.

Is it any different? The pitcher had 2-3 innings to think about it...maybe the manager was even involved in 'thinking about it?'...BUT this guy reacted on the spot.

Lots of examples in hockey and football too. Whats the difference?

Ejected from game? Yes, definitely.
Suspended for a week? Maybe, probably.
Suspended for a season? Don't think so...prefer he writes a 10,000 word essay on being nice to his fellow human beings!

Two different items---DWI happened in the jurisdiction of local police

Stomping happened on a n basketball court under the jurisdiction of who only know?


Apples and oranges in my mind

The kid shouldn't be suspeneded for the year. He should be suspended for a handful of games if the NCAA feels there was intent. Had this been a conference game there would have been a decision today. I'm guessing the NCAA takes it's time unless they have a knee jerk reaction.

I have abosolutely no problem with a year long suspension. Might even suggest that he needs more than that.


Everyone makes mistakes. The problem is the "level" of the mistake. Each time someone does something somewhat outrageous it sets a new "tolerance".

Mistakes can and should be made. However I feel they should also be corrected and better monitored at younger ages. If smaller mistakes were corrected more often and more severly, the "big" mistakes would be less frequent, and much less severe.

CWM

Apples: I say the kid getting 4 game suspension is about right.
Oranges: I say Augie just gets whatever the law dishes out.. he will get plenty of residual bad press etc... and i would think the chacellor or President of the Univ. would let him know he is on pretty thin ice.

that's my 2 cents

I did not see any "mistake" in that video. The player looked straight at where the player on the floor was located, then lifted his gaze intentionally higher to appear to not see the player. He had already lined up "the shot" and knew where he was stepping. On year is barely long enough.

How about guys that deliberately go after the 1st baseman's foot??? Man that makes you mad doesn't it??

A cleat full speed to the ankle/achilles is pretty dangerous.... I know, now we got apples, oranges and tomatoes in the mix of the conversation.

quote:

Originally posted by trojan-skipper:
How about guys that deliberately go after the 1st baseman's foot??? Man that makes you mad doesn't it??

A cleat full speed to the ankle/achilles is pretty dangerous.... I know, now we got apples, oranges and tomatoes in the mix of the conversation.

How about the intentional beanball justbaseball brings up?

quote:

Originally posted by Tx-Husker:
If I understand an article I found right, Christian Laettner was not even ejected from the game on two occasions...one where he kicked a player on the ground and the other where he stompted on the player's chest who was on the ground. The reason in both cases was it was deemed "unintentional" by the NCAA. Had it been intentional, it sounds like the penalty was a 1 game suspension. That sounds a little light, but consistency with the rule on this topic seems in order.

Maybe it's me that's being unfair to Augie, I don't know. To me, the penalty for an emotional on the field/court act that is spur of the moment should be less severe than the penalty for an act that took place over several hours with many chances to think about ones actions. Especially, if the former is done by an emotional kid in the heat of the moment, and the latter is done by a man clearly old enough to know better.

I was watching the Duke vs. UofK game when Laettner stepped on Aminue Timberlake. He absolutely stepped on him "intentionally", but he did it as a message sent and didn't actually put his weight down on him. I think he should have been ejected, but no further discipline other than a warning of a more severe penalty if it ever happened again. I'm a UofK fan by the way, so no bias here.

The situation in question as far as this thread goes, it was absolutely intentional with the intent to injure the player. Yes, he wasn't looking down as he stepped on him, but he knew where he was stepping...stomping. Even if you argue that he didn't know where he was stepping, he certainly knew he stepped on his face afterwards and he never even looked back. I don't know if a full year for a first offense is the right punishment, but a message has to be sent that this kind of thing is not going to be tolerated.

Someone brought up the comparison to a Pitcher nailing a "hitter in the back/head?" after someone hitting a Home run 3 innings earlier. Hitting them in the back, leg, arm is sending a message, hitting them in the head is assault in my opinion.

Do we really want basketball to turn into hockey?

quote:

Originally posted by powertoallfields:
Someone brought up the comparison to a Pitcher nailing a "hitter in the back/head?" after someone hitting a Home run 3 innings earlier. Hitting them in the back, leg, arm is sending a message, hitting them in the head is assault in my opinion.

Could be walking a fine line. Is potentially breaking a wrist, cracking a rib, or any other structural body damage excluding a head shot an exceptable "message" that goes without punishment?

My son pitches so you are correct in guessing where my opinion is However the other side of my Sybil personality comes out at times.

Men's Basketball Player Aubrey Coleman Apologizes for Incident vs. Arizona

From that video it is far from clear to me that he did this intentionally.

Apparently the referees felt it was intentional, or else they would merely have called the foul and not ejected him. But before you go banning the kid, you should be sure he did it on purpose.

What I see is, he commits a charge, hears the whistle, turns to look at the ref but is still being carried forward by his momentum. He turns back around and his foot lands on the guy's face. ESPN's commentary is obviously inflammatory, but I could not tell from that video whether he was in fact looking at the guy and therefore knew he was going to step on him, much less that he set out to do so.

With respect to this guy and Augie Garrido, you guys would make a tough jury. We do punish people even for first offenses. Both are being punished. But we don't typically impose the death penalty for everything that gets a few people incensed, especially when it's a first offense for the accused.

It's not being soft to recognize that punishments need to be proportional to what was done, nor to recognize that repeat offenders should be punished more than first offenders -- which means, when applied in reverse, that first offenders don't typically get the book thrown at them.

By all means, punish them. But then it's over, unless they repeat.

Midlo Dad,

You must be watching a different video than I am.

He is not being carried by his momentum, he almost stops, dribbles the ball, looks down at the kid and continues on with a step directly down on his face.
I've watched it ten different times and don't see how you could come to any other conclusion other than it was intentional. Just my take and opinion!

quote:

Originally posted by rz1:

quote:

Originally posted by powertoallfields:
Someone brought up the comparison to a Pitcher nailing a "hitter in the back/head?" after someone hitting a Home run 3 innings earlier. Hitting them in the back, leg, arm is sending a message, hitting them in the head is assault in my opinion.

Could be walking a fine line. Is potentially breaking a wrist, cracking a rib, or any other structural body damage excluding a head shot an exceptable "message" that goes without punishment?

My son pitches so you are correct in guessing where my opinion is However the other side of my Sybil personality comes out at times.

No, I don't think it should go without punishment. I think they should be ejected from the game, but the "message" was sent none the less. If the hitter didn't show up the Pitcher, he wouldn't have had to have the message sent in the first place.

Just realized I left out "home run trot" from my quote.

quote:

Originally posted by powertoallfields:
No, I don't think it should go without punishment. I think they should be ejected from the game, but the "message" was sent none the less. If the hitter didn't show up the Pitcher, he wouldn't have had to have the message sent in the first place.

Just realized I left out "home run trot" from my quote.

Accidental HBP happen, however, IMHO, sending a message is throwing inside, hitting a player is usually called "following dugout orders". Nowadays if every pompous home run "trot" deserved a "message" WHIP numbers would be way up.

I found the player's behavior to be unbelievable. It was obvious in watching the replay yesterday that it was intentional. I don't know if I think he should be gone for the year, but certainly several games.

I had forgotten about Laetner and the UK player he walked on until I was talking to a friend yesterday about the Houston/AZ incident. Nothing happened to Christian which was unfortunate then which was terribly wrong.

Yes and not for the entire season but 4 games sounds about right.

quote:

Originally posted by gimages:
Yes and not for the entire season but 4 games sounds about right.

I think four games sounds about right. I also think it might send a message if the coach institutes some other punishment such as some community service along side the four game suspension. As a coach, I'd want to send a strong message to my current players, recruits, and future players.

quote:

Originally posted by Danny Boydston:
Men's Basketball Player Aubrey Coleman Apologizes for Incident vs. Arizona

That's the most pathetic apology I've ever seen and if I were Chase Budinger, I'd tell him what he could do with his apology.

quote:

Originally posted by Midlo Dad:
From that video it is far from clear to me that he did this intentionally.

Apparently the referees felt it was intentional, or else they would merely have called the foul and not ejected him. But before you go banning the kid, you should be sure he did it on purpose.

What I see is, he commits a charge, hears the whistle, turns to look at the ref but is still being carried forward by his momentum. He turns back around and his foot lands on the guy's face. ESPN's commentary is obviously inflammatory, but I could not tell from that video whether he was in fact looking at the guy and therefore knew he was going to step on him, much less that he set out to do so.

With respect to this guy and Augie Garrido, you guys would make a tough jury. We do punish people even for first offenses. Both are being punished. But we don't typically impose the death penalty for everything that gets a few people incensed, especially when it's a first offense for the accused.

It's not being soft to recognize that punishments need to be proportional to what was done, nor to recognize that repeat offenders should be punished more than first offenders -- which means, when applied in reverse, that first offenders don't typically get the book thrown at them.

By all means, punish them. But then it's over, unless they repeat.

Midlo Dad,

Watch the video again. He clearly looks down, looks back up to play it off. When they show it from the back, it clearly shows him taking two small steps before he gets to Budinger, Budinger sees him and starts to protect himself with his right arm, so Coleman steps high with his right leg and stomps on his face! How else can you explain the high lift of his right leg???

4 games for the Texas coach is absurd. Players get ejected from schools and teams for DUI, and he gets a 4 game suspension.

UT should get creative-make him write an essay (longhand to make sure there's no ghost writer), go to AA meetings, do public service spots, public speeches, etc.

As for the stomp, Marcus Vick got booted from school for doing the same thing with cleats on, and nobody argued that was excessive.

Hokie, exactly, Stephen Locke, U of Florida senior weekend starting pitcher was just removed from the team yesterday for a DUI arrest. He was one of the top two pitchers on the team. I guess it's possible that there were previous circumstances in Locke's case so it may not be the same but from reading other boards Garrido supposedly has a reputation for the night life.

He should be suspended for 3 or 4 games for the act, which was clearly intentional. Then he should be suspended for the rest of the year for laughing and high fiving with his teammates as he was leaving the floor.

This was also, in my opinion, a racially motivated act of jealousy and hatred. Perhaps his school should also make him attend some tolerance classes.

quote:

This was also, in my opinion, a racially motivated act of jealousy and hatred. Perhaps his school should also make him attend some tolerance classes.

Hmmmm.... Good point. If it were a white player that stomped on a black player you can bet Sharpten et all would be all over it.