From: jpglori@srv.PacBell.COM (John P. Gloria)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
Subject: Re: taunting for 15
Date: 12 Sep 92 03:14:32 GMT
Organization: Pacific * Bell

In article <1992Sep11.163308.28736@oakhill.sps.mot.com> floydg@oakhill.sps.mot.com (Floyd Goodrich) writes:
>(John P. Gloria) writes:
>>floydg@oakhill.sps.mot.com (Floyd Goodrich) writes:
>>>(John P. Gloria) writes:
>>>>floydg@oakhill.sps.mot.com (Floyd Goodrich) writes:
>>>>>(John P. Gloria) writes:
>>[ text deleted ]
>>[ more text deleted ]

>>Let me ask you this:  Do you think a player in any sport has not 
>>intentionally injured someone purposely or with intent to maim?
>>What are the odds that a player would do this for the benefit of his team?
>
>Yes, I know this.  I have never attempted to injure someone purposely
>or intended to maim.  I'm not doubting that some people do; I don't think
>all people do.  It's certainly not explicitly stated that this would be 
>illegal, either.  I could hire 5 pro boxers for my basketball team.  At
>the opening tipoff, they beat the hell out of the other team's starters.
>We get 5 technical fouls and the boxers get ejected.  Who's gonna win the
>game?
>
Floyd, Floyd, Floyd. Let's be real for a moment.  Why in heavens
must you resort to hair brain scenarios that have nothing to do
with reality.  Your example is as flaky as I have heard. No
comment, beyond what I just stated.
>
 [ text deleted ]
>
>>Ok, so you are set dead against taunting.  Personaly, taunting does not
>>bother me.  Taunting was part of growing up for me. I don't subscribe to
>>calling your mother a whore or that type of taunting during any game.
>>I describe taunting as telling a player, "Hey nice catch", when they drop
>>the ball. Another example would be, "Oooh, is that as hard as you can
>>hit?"  What is wrong with that?  
>>
>>I would be happy to go along with taunting rules if only the penalties
>>excerised against players would be fair, across the board.  If the
>>penalties are called fairly and justly, then I can accept that. However,
>>to call an infraction on shooting imaginary guns one time of three is
>>not right.  Do you disagree with this point?
>
>Such is the case with subjective calls.  Should we do away with pass
>interference or holding because they're not always called the same?  
>Judgment calls are a bitch when the judgment goes against you; they're 
>fine when you get away with something.
>
We are discussing taunting, not other penalties.  No comment.
>
>I'm not saying the call was right.  At the very least, it was inconsistent.
That is my whole point.  At least you seem to grasp my point here.
Thanks. :-)
>
>
>You would be in agreement with taunting penalties if they were objective
>and consistent?  I thought you felt that taunting was a natural (and healthy?)
>part of the game.  Do you feel that the game cannot be played without taunting?
>
The whole issue of taunting and this thread is based on whether or
not rule is fair or if it is fairly called on what is considered
flagrant taunts.  Yes, I would be for the taunting rule if it was
judged fairly.  It is academic if I think it is natural or not.
I don't believe I ever said it was healthy. Taunting is a way
letting off steam or a way of irrating another person.  If a man
playing football cannot handle taunting then he should seek ballet
as a sport.
>
>>Taunting possibly cutting down on the number of fights in the NFL??
>>I don't know if I understand your question, unless you meant does taunting
>>create more fights. If so, that is hard to measure.  Again, it depends on the 
>>type taunting that is being directed at someone. If the opponent is calling the
>>other player's wife a slut, then I would expect some players to get very 
>>agitated and possibly have an altercation. On the other hand, the tauntee might
>>go back to the huddle and inform his teammates and before the game is over, 
>>someone will rack-up the taunter.  Hey, shit happens all the time. 
>
>Yes, it's hard to measure if taunting causes more fights.  But then again
>remember you brought up the fact that you would continue to taunt someone
>if it gave you a competitive advantage.  And that if the tauntee got angry
>enough to fight about it, you would fight.  (You also deleted that line
>from what I had quoted in my previous post.)  So, there is a possibility,
>even a probablility, that taunting increases the probability of a fight.
>Or at least, you acknowledge that the real possibility exists.
>
Listen, if a jock is stupid enough to fight over a taunt, then I
think he has major problems.  If you can't stand the heat, then
stay out of the kitchen.  I am not the type to back down and if
the other person was mad enough to fight, then I consider myself
having the upper hand. Just MPO.  I don't have any data/statistics
verifying your assumption that taunting would cause fights in Pro
sports.  I think most fights occur because one player thinks the
other player went beyond the limits. E.g., RB is tackled, on the
ground and an opposing player does a late hit. Words are
exchanged, and usually an altercation ensues.  Another E.g.,
WR has caught the ball and is run out of bounds. Just as he
cross the "line", a CB flattens him out. Now the CB was running
at full speed to cut him off and he was focused on getting a
clean, brutal hit and it was too late to stop.  It is still an
infraction and the flags are flying.  Typically,one of the WR's
teammates will shove, push the CB.  Usually, there is bunch of
big men shoving and punching. I don't think taunting was a factor.
Therefore, it is my consenus that the ratio of fights caused by
taunting vs my two examples is probably lower. FYI: I don't
believe I have ever gotten into a fight because of taunting.
I have received taunts, but if I can dish it out, then I can
take it as well. The couple of fights I did have in the playing
field had nothing to do with taunting.
>
>Competitive situations are pressure cookers for competitive personalities.
>By cutting down on unnecessary actions which would push these personalities 
>to fighting, the NFL has taken a stand against a league where fights
>are commonplace.  At least that's one explanation.
>
The thing about sports or life in general is that everyone of us
is different. A competitive personality does not mean this type
of person will be a taunter. Everyone handles pressure differently.
A Joe Montana feels pressure, but he is able to put is aside (so
it appears) and function effortlessly.  Montana is not the type
to taunt, but I doubt there are few men who have his competitivness.
I work with people who are very competitive, men and women, and
we taunt each other at work or when playing volleyball. It is more
of a social thing, never getting out of hand. 
-- 
  ---------  John Gloria - jpglori@sysengr.pacbell.com	--------	
  "I have great faith in fools - self-confidence my
   friends call it."        Edgar Allan Poe