The Weak In Rock

File this one under the heading of “Idiotic Lengths Parents Will Go To.”

Concerned with potential injuries, a group of “concerned” parents in Toronto have started up a non-contact ice hockey league for their kids.

I’ll let that sink in for a minute.

Yes, you read that correctly.  Non-contact ice hockey.  You can read all about it here.  Gee folks, what’s next?  Non-moving bicycling?   Non-swallowing eating?

Yes, I’m belaboring the point, but I really am getting tired of my fellow parents.  Yes, we love our kids, and we don’t want to see them get hurt.  I certainly don’t think getting is a concussion is a good idea for an 11 year old boy, but it definitely seems like the world of parents is overpopulated by the overly cautious and incredibly confused.  Ice hockey is a full-contact sport, just like American football or rugby.  Take the contact out of ice hockey and you’ve turned it into figure skating with sticks and a puck.  Not only does that sound stupid, it sounds boring.

Personally, I don’t think the problem is with kids playing ice hockey.  Anyone who grew up in Canada or the northernmost parts of the US will tell you that kids have been playing ice hockey forever.  The problem, friends, is the same problem I see with Pop Warner Football and Little League Baseball - too much adult involvement.

Let me explain - games are things that kids play for fun.  When a handful of kids grab a football and head to the nearest park (or street) to play a game fun happens.  Likewise when a bunch of kids take their bats, gloves and a ball to the nearest empty lot or haul their sticks and skates over to the local frozen-over pond.  When a bunch of dads get together and drag their kids to a ballfield, an ice rink or football field, suit them up and commence to yell at them because they’re doing everything “wrong,” there is a distinct absence of fun.  In that circumstance what there is an abundance of are frustrated kids who want to be somewhere else, fancy/expensive uniforms that make the kids look like mini versions of pro sports stars and lots and lots and lots of structure.

What we parents forget way too easily is that our children don’t like structure.  They honestly get plenty of that at school (and they’ll get an ass-load of it in their adult lives).  So why do we insist on enforcing more and more and more of it on them?  Play, including play in the context of games, is by its nature an unstructured activity.  We adults tend to view things like rules, time limits and whatnot as things that are necessary, but kids don’t see the world that way at all.  Rules in a game are just tools to keep things moving (3 strikes in baseball, offsides in hockey or soccer, etc.).  Uniforms are pretty, but they’re really unnecessary to a bunch of kids playing a game - they know who is and isn’t on their team - they’re only necessary for spectators to tell the teams apart.

So, let me try to drag this back to this idiotic attempt by some parents in Toronto to overprotect their kids with a non-contact hockey league.  The problem isn’t that ice hockey is horribly dangerous in and of itself.  Sure, bumps and bruises and maybe even gashes and broken bones will happen from time to time playing a full contact sport, but I think the problem is the parental involvement.  By organizing the league, keeping stats (heck, keeping score), and dressing their kids up like midget NHL players the parents are not setting up games for the kids to play, they’re creating a forum for the kids to play at being NHL players.

What do I mean by this?  Simple - not only are the kids emulating what they see pro hockey players do, namely hit each other really, really hard and at full speed, but because of the stats, the scorekeeping and the other parents acting as spectators there’s pressure to perform and win.  That pressure causes the kids to play like there’s something more on the line than simple personal pride.  And the organized teams, complete with pre-season tryouts and coach drafts, encourage the kids to see not their schoolmates and neighbors in the uniforms of the opposing teams, but adversaries.

Now don’t get me wrong.  I think organized sports are a good thing, but I question their value for kids 11 and younger.  I certainly don’t think that all this organization, structure and parental involvement makes the games very much fun for the kids at all.  So instead of trying to take all the bumps and bruises out of a game, maybe what we ought to be doing is taking ourselves out of the game.

As a side note: One of thing I’ve observed in my own neck of the woods is that there are so many organized sports leagues that for a good portion of the year it’s nearly impossible to find an unoccupied ball field in a park.   So, if you do have a bunch of friends, a pile of gloves, a bat and a ball you’re going to find it pretty tough to find anywhere to pull together a friendly and unstructured game.  Same thing happens during soccer or football season around these parts.

Selig comes out today and says that A-Rod “shamed the game” by using
performance enhancing drugs.

You have got to be kidding me. So, one player, albeit a very high
profile player, brought shame to the game through PED use, but Selig,
all 30 MLB team owners and the half-wits who run the Players’
Association who conspired to keep a lid on PED use for 20 years
because more home runs meant more money for MLB are blameless?

Give me a friggin’ break.

And don’t even get me started on what’s happening to Miguel Tejada,
who is looking at the very real possibility of spending time in
Federal Prison because he used PED’s and lied about it (along with
Selig, Donald Fehr and a host of other jackasses) to Congress.

I have said it before and I will say it again - so what? Professional
sports are entertainment, pure and simple. They are not
“institutions” nor do any other overblown, hyperbolic
characterizations of pro sports deserve anything but a sneer and
derision by anyone with half a functioning brain. We do not threaten
movie & TV actresses with jail time for wearing inflato-bossoms or
claim that Bruce Willis or any other follicularly-challenged actor is
setting a bad example for our youth when they sport a rug in order to
appear more attractive or youthful. No one is horrified that the
crowd scenes in recent epic films like Gladiator are digitally
enhanced rather than populated by real live extras, the way they did
it in the olden days.

This obsession with purity in sports has got to stop. It has to stop
if only because it cannot be reconciled with our cultural preference
for everything else around us being completely fake and
technologically enhanced. We love fake stuff in the country and we
love technology. Heck, we even love technology when it’s applied to
sports. Do you see anyone moaning about the mechanically wound
baseballs that are precisely manufactured to ridiculous industrial
tolerances in automated factories and how that’s detracting from the
game because we don’t use hand-wound baseballs anymore? How about
bats - ever hear anyone complain about the finely machine crafted bats
(other than about the handles breaking too often these days) that
allow a player to whip the bat around with considerably more speed
than Babe Ruth ever had at his disposal? And every year you hear a
new chorus of malcontents who want to replace the live umpires behind
the plate with sophisticated cameras that can precisely call balls and
strikes with no risk of error. We love that shit.

We also love things that are bigger than big and grander than grand.
Stadia full of tens of thousands of people do not pay outrageous
prices to watching low scoring pitchers’ duels (much as I wish they
would, but that’s more about the general stupidity of the modern
baseball fan and is fodder for another post some other time). People
come out to pay piles of money ($20 for ticket + $20 for parking + $8
for a beer + $7 for a hot dog = $55 - and that’s not counting
transportation to and from the game) to watch a ballgame because they
want to see dingers, and if they pay any attention to the pitching at
all they want to see 100 mph fastballs. We are not a nation of people
who appreciate nuance and subtlety.

The shame here is that the old white men in suits are wagging their
accusing fingers at players for doing precisely what the league
bosses, union heads and team owners wanted them to do - hit the ball
farther, throw it harder and break some records.

On the one hand I’m depressed at the disintegration of print journalism as the result of the economic non-viability of the newspaper business model.  On the other hand we have this whole Michael Phelps bullshit bong brouhaha that makes me eager for the demise of what passes for journalism today.

I’d like, very much, for someone to explain to me what public interest has been served by outing Phelps as a guy who stuck a bong up to his face at a party (because, absent any blood tests proving anything else, that’s all we know for sure that he did).  Even being generous, there’s no public interest served by labeling him as a drug user.  Plenty of halfwits will argue that “he broke the law” or “set a bad example for kids who look up to him.”  I call bullshit on both counts.

Let me ask this question - if the photo in question was of Michael Phelps hoisting a can of Bud instead of smoking bud would any news outlet have run it?  The answer is no, and the reason the answer is no is because our national attitude towards intoxicants is illogical, hypocritical and blatantly stupid.  America isn’t at war against drugs.  Americans love drugs.  We ingest 1.5 cups of coffee per day, with about 135 mg of caffeine per cup.  Read up on your caffeine folks.  It’s a powerful and extremely addictive drug and it’s not entirely benign.  I had to eliminate caffeine from my diet 7 years ago in order to correct a serious medical condition (the details of which I’d rather keep to myself).  And I’m not even touching on the amount of caffeinated sodas consumed per capita in the US each year.

Then, of course, there’s alcohol.  Sure, there are a fair number of teatotaling Americans who would tsk tsk Phelps for drinking booze as much as for taking a bong hit, but generally speaking we Yanks love our hooch.  We’ve built elaborate consumer industries around alcohol, not to mention entire segments of popular culture that are utterly dependant on the presence of liquor to sustain themselves.  If you like popular music you can thank the distilled beverage industry for heavily subsidizing rock, country and jazz and making their continued practice possible.  Confused?  Let me explain - live music venues depend on the revenue generated by the consumption of beer, wine and spirits to sustain themselves.  Without the money brought in through selling drinks none of these venues would stay open and the opportunities for live music fans and people who just like to dance to pre-recorded music would evaporate.

I can’t leave this subject behind without talking about prescription pharmaceuticals.  Mood altering prescription chemicals make up a gigantic segment of the pharma business.  The generation that once gobbled illicit chemical mood alterers at outdoor rock festivals now consumes larger quantities of compounds that have many of the same properties of their hippy precursers.

Yup.  We Americans love our dope.  But in typically puritanical hypocritical fashion we only approve of people who get stoned or stimulated in very specific ways.  Business people who get jacked on caffeine every day = fine.  Bars full of tottering boozers = no problem.  Suburban tract homes full of mood-altered residents funneling their savings into big pharma = it’s the American way.  One of the greatest Olympic athletes in history sucks down a bongload with some friends at a party = he’s a bad example who needs to be punished.

Again, bullshit.

The real message of that photo, and the teaching moment, if you want to call it that, is that when someone works hard to acheive great things he needs to chill every now and then, and most people who are under great pressure and stress need a chemically induced nudge to successfully take the edge off.  Instead of telling our kids that Michael Phelps is a bad guy and a disappointment we ought to tell our kids that what he did was very little different from the successful business person who caps off his or her day with a Martini.  And then follow that with explaining that yes, pot is currently illegal, but it was not always so.

Instead of telling our kids that some drugs are evil and some are good, which is really what we do as a society today, is to tell them that all drugs are potentially dangerous and should be approached with caution and care.   Instead of preaching this ridiculous and blatantly false story that gets sold in the D.A.R.E. program that if you ingest intoxicants your life will get messed up (a story that most kids figure out is nonsense, by the way, which leads them to mistrust adults and to discount and toss out good advice that comes from the same parents and teachers as equivalent manipulative bullshit), we should be using someone like Michael Phelps to say, “in spite of that crap they’re teaching you in school it should be obvious to you that Michael Phelps is not a loser or a failure, so it is possible to imbibe on occassion without it ruining your life.”

Of course that’s a complex and layered story to tell, and we Americans are getting progressively worse at complexity as times goes on.  But I can dream, can’t I?

Technorati Tags: Michael Phelps, bong

Can’t say it better than this…

Dock Ellis’s No-No
by Chuck Brodsky

It was a lovely summer’s morning
An off-day in LA
So thought one Dock Ellis
As he would later say
His girlfriend read the paper
She said, “Dock, this can’t be right…
It says here that you’re pitching
In San Diego tonight”

“Got to get you to the airport”
And so off Dock Ellis flew
His legs were a little bit wobbly
And the rest of him was too
Took a taxi to the ballpark
An hour before the game
Gave some half-assed explanation
Found the locker with his name

Time came to go on out there
Down the corridor
The walls were a little bit wavy
There were ripples in the floor
He went out to the bullpen
To do a bunch of stretches
Loosen up a little
Throw his warm-up pitches

All rose for the national anthem
People took off their hats
Fireworks were exploding
The cokes were already going flat
Dock was back there in the dugout
So many things to watch
Some players spit tobacco juice
Others grabbed their crotch

The umpire hollered, “Play Ball!”
And so it came to be
Dock’s Pirates batted first
And when they went down 1-2-3
Dock’s catcher put his mask on
And he handed Dock the ball
It was 327 feet
To the right & left field walls

The Pirates took the field then
And Dock stood on the rubber
He bounced a couple of pitches
And then he bounced a couple others
You might say about that day
He looked a little wild
The lead-off batter trembled
Nobody knew why Dock Ellis smiled

You walk 8 and you hit a guy
The things that people shout…
Especially your manager
But he didn’t take Dock out
Dock found himself a rythym
And a crazy little spin
Amazing things would happen
When Dock Ellis zeroed in

Sometimes he saw the catcher
Sometimes he did not
Sometimes he held a beach balll
Other times it was a dot
Dock was tossing comets
That were leaving trails of glitter
At the 7th inning stretch
He still had a no-hitter

So he turned to Cash, his buddy
Said, “I got a no-no going”
Speaking the unspeakable
He went back out there throwing
Bottom of the ninth
& He stood high upon the mound
3 more outs to go
He’d have his name in Cooperstown

First up was Cannizzaro
Who flied out to Alou
Kelly grounded out for Dean
The shortstop yelled, “That’s two”
It must’ve been a mad house
The fans upon their feet
The littler ones among them
Standing on their seats

Next up would’ve been Herbel
But Spezio pinch-hit
He took a 3rd strike looking
And officially, that was it
It was a lovely summer’s morning
An off-day in LA
So thought one Dock Ellis
As he would later say

Technorati Tags: Dock Ellis

And no, I’m not talking about Santa.

Everyone has heard the cliche, those who do not learn from history are
doomed to repeat it. Mostly that old saw is nonsense. History
doesn’t repeat. Study it in even a cursory manner and you’ll see that
clearly. People, however, generally do make the same stupid mistakes
over and over again regardless of what historical period they live in.

Thus we have this
story from today of Illinois Gov. Rod R. Blagojevich who has been
arrested for blatantly shaking people down over various things,
including the appointment of President-Elect Barrack Obama’s successor
in the US Senate.

The historical lesson that I’m hoping the Democratic Party learns from
is that of the Republican Party of the Reconstruction period following
the US Civil War. Republicans held sway over practically the entire
US government for 9 years following the end of the Civil War. They
did so primarily because theirs was the party of victory in that war -
the party of loyalty to the Union. When a Republican ran against a
Democrat for an office all the Republican needed to do to discredit
his opponent was call the man a traitor, and it worked. It stopped
working in 1874 for a number of reasons. One of the big ones, and the
one that put the GOP at a significant political disadvantage for
decades afterward was rampant corruption.

One of the greatest military leaders in US History, Ulysses Grant,
became President in 1869 and has gone down in history as one of the
worst, if not the worst, chief executives this country has ever had.
That evaluation is mostly based on the hot and cold running corruption
in his Administration that he was never able to get control over. The
Grant Administration sold influence like no other in our history. It
is also based on the horrid mismanagement of the first economic
depression in US history. These two events led to the Democrats
(remember, these folks were literally traitors to the Union and
defeated combatants in a recent civil war) retaking Congress in 1874.

Part of the problem for President Grant was his unwillingness to
denounce the members of his Administration or party who were caught
with their hands in the cookie jar. By refusing to come out against
people who had clearly broken the law and the public trust he lost the
confidence of the public and was viewed as a political puppet by the
news media and portrayed as such often by his political opponents.
One of the weaknesses of the current Democratic Party is their history
of being lead like puppies by lobbyists and political donors. In 1994
the GOP knocked the Democrats out of their majority in the House by
successfully branding the Dems as crooks and liars. One of the
weaknesses of the GOP in the last two Congressional elections was
their own recent tendency to let the donors and the lobbyists call the
shots.

If Barrack Obama, and the rest of the Democratic Party leadership,
hope to maintain control over the government beyond the next
Congressional mid-term elections they will need to make sure that
Blagojevich and anyone else who conducts their affairs in a less than
scrupulous manner in the Party is not only rooted out but also
ridiculed and vilified. Otherwise the American people will most
likely choose another “change” in 2010.

Technorati Tags: Illinois Gov. Rod R. Blagojevich, Barrack Obama, US Senate, Democratic Party, US Civil War, Republicans, GOP, Ulysses Grant