From: jpglori@srv.PacBell.COM (John P. Gloria)
Subject: Re: taunting for 15
Organization: Pacific * Bell
Date: Sat, 12 Sep 1992 08:34:58 GMT

In article <1992Sep12.011839.1416@enterprise.rdd.lmsc.lockheed.com> marshall@force.ssd.lmsc.lockheed.com writes:
>In article <1992Sep11.181608.8578@PacBell.COM>, jpglori@srv.PacBell.COM (John P. Gloria) writes:
>>>Taunting doesn't indicate skill.  But it either indicates(to me),
>>>lack of skill or that person is an asshole.  I'm giving you the
>>>benefit of the doubt that you're not an asshole;-).  Good players
>>>let their play show for itself(thus, being showing sportsmanship
>>>[notice there is a penalty for 'unsportsman like conduct']).
>>>
>>Your analysis implies all assholes are taunters or lack skill. 
>>Car 54 where are you?  Look around.  There are plenty of assholes
>>out there who have never played sports and are not taunters.  They
>>could be unskilled or skilled and still be assholes or non-assholes.
>>What is your definition of an asshole and how does it equate to
>>being an taunter.  There are plenty of taunters who are not assholes.
>
>(Geez, I'm gonna be sorry to get into this)
>
>As for the last statement above : probably not, if you define an
>asshole as someone who is unpopular with the majority of players.
>
So this is YOUR definition of an asshole. Unpopular?  Tell me,
were you unpopular during high school/college or just now?
>
>Personally, I feel that anyone who intentionally wants to verbally 
>belittle someone, hurt their feelings, etc, is an asshole,
>
As you define it yes (in a non-sport arean), but when applied in a 
sports arean, then you are all wet.  Hey, I could care less if you 
personally disagree.  If you cannot accept that concept, taunting in 
sports, especially in the context that this thread is referring to, 
i.e., pro football taunting, then I have no desire to convince you.  
Secondly, that has never been my intention.  My intention is just to 
express my personal opinion and not to persuade you or any other asshole 
that I am right.

It seems to me that you and the others that are in alignment
with your views do not have a grasp of competition or the heat
of battle.  Simply because the possibility of taunting has never
entered your mind, should not give you the false concept that it is
categorically wrong or unacceptable in pro football.  That does not
imply that you or others agreeing with your views are superior. It
only means you do not agree with taunting. 

>whether it be on the playing field or in any walk of life (including
>network news discussions, John - read between the lines). On the other hand, 
>I think every player in the NFL is a big boy now, and they are immune 
>to the taunting. But on the non-professional level, I'm sure that it 
>bothers a lot of kids, and should not be condoned or encouraged. Of
>
What are you, some sort of righteous, over-protective parent that
doesn't want his son to be aware of the real world?  Come on, guys
like you have no backbone and should be lined up and shot to stop 
the gene pool from propagating.  Hey, did that get your hair to
raise on the back of your neck.  GRINNN! :-)  Got your attention huh?

>course, I didn't grow up in the tough environment you apparently grew
>up in, John, so my perspective is entirely different. I feel that
>
Depends on how YOU define a tough environment.  It wasn't tough for
me as I remember it.  It was very competitive though.  Some of the
dads where I was raised had boxing gloves and the kids who were not
afraid, use to have "boxing matches" (I was about 10 years old). If
you did not fight, you were called a sissy, etc.  Well, I was no
sissy, so I fought.  It was part of growing up.  I thought it was
normal.  There is certainly some differences in our respective
views.
>
>>Are non-taunters not assholes.  Come on, get REAL. :-)
>
>Well, you were talking about bad logic. Here's a perfect example.
>The statement "most taunters are assholes" does not imply "non-taunters
>are usually not assholes". No one ever said that it did.
>
Excuse me.  The following is from lines 14-15:

>>>Taunting doesn't indicate skill.  But it either indicates(to me),
>>>lack of skill or that person is an asshole.

I was referring to whoever that the above statement (there have been 
several add on comments and it is hard to tell who said what).
I merely attempting disprove the writer own logic.  The
poster is imply that taunting equates to being a asshole.
Therefore, following his logic, a non-taunter are not
assholes.  So you see, I was only shooting holes in his
water bucket. :-)

>As for the real underlying question here, i.e., should players be
>penalized for taunting; although I certainly done't condone it, I
>really don't see what good it does to penalize at the pro level. Like
>I said, I don't think it really affects the tauntee at that level.
>Since it does not give the taunter's team any edge, then let it go,
>unless a fight breaks out over it. Then you warn the involved players
>and tell them they'll be thrown out of the game the next time it happens.
>
After all these, you are in essence leaning toward what I have been
saying for the past few days, i.e., the taunting rule is a dumb rule
at the pro level.  Amem. There is hope after all.

-- 
  ---------  John Gloria - jpglori@sysengr.pacbell.com	--------	
  "I have great faith in fools - self-confidence my
   friends call it."        Edgar Allan Poe
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro