J Scholastic Sports II - Women and Men
As with most other issues, when it comes to scholastic sports, women and men often have very different perspectives. Two recent examples come to mind.
I noted that in Sunday's JV hockey game, our younger son (OYS) and his good camp buddy went at each other like cats and dogs. After smacking each other around (OYS and his friend each had two penalties; in the case of OYS, they were only the second and third of the entire season) for 36 minutes, they were shmoozing and laughing as if there had been no game. One of the mothers in attendance, noticing this, said that girls would never have done that, that they would have taken the game much more personally. I don't know; could be.
The second example happened in our home. One of the boys in OYS's class did not make the team. He was a sophomore and, in the opinion of OYS, was equally as talented as a few of the freshman. This boy's mother was all upset and felt that it was not fair that her son was not chosen over the freshmen. She felt that it was his last chance to participate in scholastic sports and that he should have been chosen over equally talented freshmen. While we both sympathized with the boy, MHW tended to agree with his mother; I did not.
Scholastic sports is the ultimate meritocracy (assuming the selection process is not corrupted by wealthy or influential parents which, in this case, it was not). The coach has to deal with the future as well as this year. Had he taken our friend's son, he would not have played much (except for scrub time) and would not have done anything for next year's team. On the other hand, when a freshman plays in scrub time, it is training and experience for next year. From my perspective, the coach has a responsibility to field the best team possible and he made the right choice. From MHW's perspective, the coach's responsibilities go deeper.
Perhaps I would feel differently if OYS was in that position. But I doubt it.
As with most other issues, when it comes to scholastic sports, women and men often have very different perspectives. Two recent examples come to mind.
I noted that in Sunday's JV hockey game, our younger son (OYS) and his good camp buddy went at each other like cats and dogs. After smacking each other around (OYS and his friend each had two penalties; in the case of OYS, they were only the second and third of the entire season) for 36 minutes, they were shmoozing and laughing as if there had been no game. One of the mothers in attendance, noticing this, said that girls would never have done that, that they would have taken the game much more personally. I don't know; could be.
The second example happened in our home. One of the boys in OYS's class did not make the team. He was a sophomore and, in the opinion of OYS, was equally as talented as a few of the freshman. This boy's mother was all upset and felt that it was not fair that her son was not chosen over the freshmen. She felt that it was his last chance to participate in scholastic sports and that he should have been chosen over equally talented freshmen. While we both sympathized with the boy, MHW tended to agree with his mother; I did not.
Scholastic sports is the ultimate meritocracy (assuming the selection process is not corrupted by wealthy or influential parents which, in this case, it was not). The coach has to deal with the future as well as this year. Had he taken our friend's son, he would not have played much (except for scrub time) and would not have done anything for next year's team. On the other hand, when a freshman plays in scrub time, it is training and experience for next year. From my perspective, the coach has a responsibility to field the best team possible and he made the right choice. From MHW's perspective, the coach's responsibilities go deeper.
Perhaps I would feel differently if OYS was in that position. But I doubt it.
posted by MoChassid @ 9:10 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home