|
Post by warpig on Mar 5, 2019 9:44:27 GMT -6
To be honest.. no. You wouldn't. That doesn't make you dumb, know nothing or uninformed. It simply makes you someone who has not been through that experience. That's it. That is the attitude I was talking about.
I’m sorry, BGH....but you don’t know everything
|
|
|
Post by BGH on Mar 5, 2019 16:04:17 GMT -6
You keep stating "following the law" as if there was any legal matter here. There doesn't seem to be one. Each State's statutes are written differently, but in every state, including Washington DC, it is a misdemeanor not to follow the instructions of a law enforcement officer. So when the officer asked the coach to leave the field and the coach refused, he committed a misdemeanor. No, we are not a police state where any rogue cop can impose his will on any citizen, but the police are given a wide range of latitude when they are simply asking for cooperation.
I do find it fascinating that you are more apt to obey an OFFICIAL than a lowly policeman. At least now I am beginning to understand why OFFICIALS are so dang arrogant.
At an LHSAA sanctioned event, the LEO’s aren’t initially in control of the proceedings. They are for crowd control & backup to those who ARE in charge- the officials. When they stepped in before the officials to make a decision, they did so without legal recourse. The coach has every right to have his team on the field, because those in charge had not deemed it necessary to ask him to leave. In any instance that we are referring to, though, you have failed to show where the LHSAA openly condones disrespect of LEO or administrators. Rather, they established precedence that the proper protocol must be followed in situations such as that. Changing your initial statement to “in my opinion” only shows that you overstated your original post. LHSAA has never Openly Condoned any such activity At an LHSAA sanctioned event, the LEO’s aren’t initially in control of the proceedings. They are for crowd control & backup to those who ARE in charge- the officials.
First, please tell me when the Officials take "control of the proceedings"?
Now, please tell me when the high school principal's authority ends? If I am not mistaken, the principal is supposed to have the ultimate authority on their campus at all times.
When they [LEOs] stepped in before the officials to make a decision, they did so without legal recourse. The LEOs did not make a decision, the high school principal did.
The coach has every right to have his team on the field, because those in charge had not deemed it necessary to ask him to leave.
I will stipulate to that, but lets first agree on who was actually in charge at that time. I have heard it was the principal, and I have heard it was the officials, so lets figure out which one is true. I honestly don't know, but let me ask you this question. If the officials were in charge why did they not step in and take control? I was told they left the field just like the home team did.
In any instance that we are referring to, though, you have failed to show where the LHSAA openly condones disrespect of LEO or administrators. Rather, they established precedence that the proper protocol must be followed in situations such as that. Changing your initial statement to “in my opinion” only shows that you overstated your original post. LHSAA has never Openly Condoned any such activity You are reading a message board and you JUST NOW figured out that it is just our opinions. But let me make this perfectly clear, I accuse the LHSAA of openly condoning a disrespect for law enforcement officers. The fact that they let a high school coach blatantly refuse to follow the instructions of a law enforcement officer (which is a misdemeanor), with no repercussions, is my proof. As I have tried to explain to retired, it does not matter who was in the right about whether the team is on the field or not, once the coach refused to follow the instructions of the police, HE BROKE THE LAW.
Is this how we want to prepare our children as they take their place in society? Do we want each one of them to decide for themselves whether they follow school rules or not based on whether or not they think they are in the right? Do we want them to ignore the police just because they think they are in the right? This is the basis of anarchy.
We should be teaching our children that there is recourse for unjust enforcement of school rules or unjust enforcement of laws. IN MY OPINION this coach and the LHSAA failed miserably in setting that example.
|
|
|
Post by BGH on Mar 5, 2019 21:45:55 GMT -6
That's it. That is the attitude I was talking about.
I’m sorry, BGH....but you don’t know everything
I know it ........ but I do have an awful lot of opinions.
|
|
|
Post by retired on Mar 6, 2019 8:01:39 GMT -6
I’m sorry, BGH....but you don’t know everything
I know it ........ but I do have an awful lot of opinions.
But in this case, your entire argument hangs on something that is not an opinion, but on an incorrect fact. You keep stating "he broke the law" when that simply is not true. Your interpretation of that "lawful order doctrine" (something generally dealing with traffic stops) is similar to someone claiming "free speech" when being fired from a private sector job because of something they posted online. It just isn't accurate. When is the last time someone received a $25,000 settlement for "breaking the law"? The lawful order doctrine is NOT, I repeat NOT a doctrine that states everyone must do everything a police officer tells them, just as the freedom of speech clause of the bill of rights does not state one can say whatever they want free from consequence. It does not result in anarchy as you put it. After reviewing the facts, the LHSAA decided that Parkway was the party in the wrong, and punished them. Regardless, the main idea of this thread is not about the lawful order doctrine, or the validity of the LHSAA to issue statements to parents regarding sports event behavior. The main idea is that there is a shortage of officials approaching crisis levels, and this WILL most certainly affect athletic events in the future.
|
|
|
Post by BGH on Mar 6, 2019 9:35:02 GMT -6
I know it ........ but I do have an awful lot of opinions.
But in this case, your entire argument hangs on something that is not an opinion, but on an incorrect fact. You keep stating "he broke the law" when that simply is not true. Your interpretation of that "lawful order doctrine" (something generally dealing with traffic stops) is similar to someone claiming "free speech" when being fired from a private sector job because of something they posted online. It just isn't accurate. When is the last time someone received a $25,000 settlement for "breaking the law"? The lawful order doctrine is NOT, I repeat NOT a doctrine that states everyone must do everything a police officer tells them, just as the freedom of speech clause of the bill of rights does not state one can say whatever they want free from consequence. It does not result in anarchy as you put it. After reviewing the facts, the LHSAA decided that Parkway was the party in the wrong, and punished them.
You keep stating "he broke the law" when that simply is not true. Every state has a statute on the book that makes it a misdemeanor to not follow the instructions of a law enforcement officer. Does that mean if the officer tells you to put a gun in your mouth and pull the trigger that you have too? Obviously not. But when given reasonable instructions that do not put you in in harms way, you should follow them. Then you have due process if you feel like you were wronged.
When is the last time someone received a $25,000 settlement for "breaking the law"? I can't back this up with any data, but my guess would be multiple times every day of the week. I am also guessing that is a very conservative estimate. Government entities are notorious for "settling" to avoid further costs legal.
After reviewing the facts, the LHSAA decided that Parkway was the party in the wrong, and punished them. Well that makes me feel better ...... after all, they are the ultimate authority in this state. Their punishment of Parkway has absolutely nothing to do with the coach not following the police officers instructions.
I am surprised you guys are arguing with me about this. Almost everyone on this board in on your side. They praise the coach for disobeying the police officer. I point to attitudes like that as being a contributing factor in our society falling into lawlessness and our classrooms falling into chaos. I may be a minority of one on this issue, but you are not going to change my mind about what this coach did that night and the effect I think it has on all those who saw it.
|
|
|
Post by retired on Mar 6, 2019 9:53:43 GMT -6
But in this case, your entire argument hangs on something that is not an opinion, but on an incorrect fact. You keep stating "he broke the law" when that simply is not true. Your interpretation of that "lawful order doctrine" (something generally dealing with traffic stops) is similar to someone claiming "free speech" when being fired from a private sector job because of something they posted online. It just isn't accurate. When is the last time someone received a $25,000 settlement for "breaking the law"? The lawful order doctrine is NOT, I repeat NOT a doctrine that states everyone must do everything a police officer tells them, just as the freedom of speech clause of the bill of rights does not state one can say whatever they want free from consequence. It does not result in anarchy as you put it. After reviewing the facts, the LHSAA decided that Parkway was the party in the wrong, and punished them.
You keep stating "he broke the law" when that simply is not true. Every state has a statute on the book that makes it a misdemeanor to not follow the instructions of a law enforcement officer. Does that mean if the officer tells you to put a gun in your mouth and pull the trigger that you have too? Obviously not. But when given reasonable instructions that do not put you in in harms way, you should follow them. Then you have due process if you feel like you were wronged.
The problem here is that you keep making an oversimplified generalization that I do not believe is factually correct. As stated, the statute that you keep quoting does NOT apply to such wide ranging situations. The statute you keep trying to apply is generally for the purpose of DIRECTING TRAFFIC. It is not "Cop said it, gotta do it" as you keep implying. You are making statements and supporting them with a law whose application you continually prove that you don't understand. As I mentioned, you are essentially making a similar argument to someone who is quoting "free speech" as a defense to being fired for making defamatory comments. That (as is your argument) is a misapplication of the law. You said you are surprised people disagree with you, but you don't seem to realize you are not correctly interpreting the law. Would you be "surprised" that people would not take someone's side when complaining about being fired for derogatory comments because of "free speech" ? No, but why are you surprised in this case? People correctly would not take his/her side because they understand the application of the 1st amendment does not cover this. Nor is the situation you described covered by the "Lawful Order doctrine"
|
|
|
Post by BGH on Mar 6, 2019 12:45:20 GMT -6
You keep stating "he broke the law" when that simply is not true. Every state has a statute on the book that makes it a misdemeanor to not follow the instructions of a law enforcement officer. Does that mean if the officer tells you to put a gun in your mouth and pull the trigger that you have too? Obviously not. But when given reasonable instructions that do not put you in in harms way, you should follow them. Then you have due process if you feel like you were wronged.
The problem here is that you keep making an oversimplified generalization that I do not believe is factually correct. As stated, the statute that you keep quoting does NOT apply to such wide ranging situations. The statute you keep trying to apply is generally for the purpose of DIRECTING TRAFFIC. It is not "Cop said it, gotta do it" as you keep implying. You are making statements and supporting them with a law whose application you continually prove that you don't understand. As I mentioned, you are essentially making a similar argument to someone who is quoting "free speech" as a defense to being fired for making defamatory comments. That (as is your argument) is a misapplication of the law. You said you are surprised people disagree with you, but you don't seem to realize you are not correctly interpreting the law. Would you be "surprised" that people would not take someone's side when complaining about being fired for derogatory comments because of "free speech" ? No, but why are you surprised in this case? People correctly would not take his/her side because they understand the application of the 1st amendment does not cover this. Nor is the situation you described covered by the "Lawful Order doctrine" If it makes you feel good to keep bringing up free speech, then please keep doing so, but has nothing to do with this situation. Don't get me wrong, I understand the correlation that you are trying to make.
The statute you keep trying to apply is generally for the purpose of DIRECTING TRAFFIC. Are you saying you don't have to do what the police tell you to do, unless they are directing traffic? Of course you are not, which is why you carefully said "generally for the purpose". That is the most narrow interpretation of the law and even that varies state by state.
This is not worth arguing about anymore. I am not going to change my opinion about this coach that refused to follow the instructions of a law enforcement officer. Everyone else here is on your side ...... be happy.
|
|
|
Post by retired on Mar 6, 2019 13:01:38 GMT -6
The problem here is that you keep making an oversimplified generalization that I do not believe is factually correct. As stated, the statute that you keep quoting does NOT apply to such wide ranging situations. The statute you keep trying to apply is generally for the purpose of DIRECTING TRAFFIC. It is not "Cop said it, gotta do it" as you keep implying. You are making statements and supporting them with a law whose application you continually prove that you don't understand. As I mentioned, you are essentially making a similar argument to someone who is quoting "free speech" as a defense to being fired for making defamatory comments. That (as is your argument) is a misapplication of the law. You said you are surprised people disagree with you, but you don't seem to realize you are not correctly interpreting the law. Would you be "surprised" that people would not take someone's side when complaining about being fired for derogatory comments because of "free speech" ? No, but why are you surprised in this case? People correctly would not take his/her side because they understand the application of the 1st amendment does not cover this. Nor is the situation you described covered by the "Lawful Order doctrine" If it makes you feel good to keep bringing up free speech, then please keep doing so, but has nothing to do with this situation. Don't get me wrong, I understand the correlation that you are trying to make.
The statute you keep trying to apply is generally for the purpose of DIRECTING TRAFFIC. Are you saying you don't have to do what the police tell you to do, unless they are directing traffic? Of course you are not, which is why you carefully said "generally for the purpose". That is the most narrow interpretation of the law and even that varies state by state.
This is not worth arguing about anymore. I am not going to change my opinion about this coach that refused to follow the instructions of a law enforcement officer. Everyone else here is on your side ...... be happy.
Your opinion that the coach should have vacated field ..I can see that under the guise of being the bigger person, or whatever. That is a valid position. Having a negative opinion on the coach because he didn't listen to an LEO --who has no right to do so (especially since YOU YOURSELF have stated he was doing so at the order of the principal, not any law!) asked him too..eh, that is kind of lame. Insinuating that the LHSAA somehow endorsed disrespect for Law Enforcement because they didn't punish the coach who apparently was in the right... ludicrous. If you understand the comparison between the misapplication of the 1st Amendment and your misapplication of this statue... why do you keep metaphorically pounding your fist on the table and saying "he broke the law " when it is clear that he did not?
|
|
|
Post by BGH on Mar 6, 2019 15:23:10 GMT -6
If it makes you feel good to keep bringing up free speech, then please keep doing so, but has nothing to do with this situation. Don't get me wrong, I understand the correlation that you are trying to make.
The statute you keep trying to apply is generally for the purpose of DIRECTING TRAFFIC. Are you saying you don't have to do what the police tell you to do, unless they are directing traffic? Of course you are not, which is why you carefully said "generally for the purpose". That is the most narrow interpretation of the law and even that varies state by state.
This is not worth arguing about anymore. I am not going to change my opinion about this coach that refused to follow the instructions of a law enforcement officer. Everyone else here is on your side ...... be happy.
Your opinion that the coach should have vacated field ..I can see that under the guise of being the bigger person, or whatever. That is a valid position. Having a negative opinion on the coach because he didn't listen to an LEO --who has no right to do so (especially since YOU YOURSELF have stated he was doing so at the order of the principal, not any law!) asked him too..eh, that is kind of lame. Insinuating that the LHSAA somehow endorsed disrespect for Law Enforcement because they didn't punish the coach who apparently was in the right... ludicrous. If you understand the comparison between the misapplication of the 1st Amendment and your misapplication of this statue... why do you keep metaphorically pounding your fist on the table and saying "he broke the law " when it is clear that he did not?
Your opinion that the coach should have vacated field ..I can see that under the guise of being the bigger person, or whatever. That is a valid position. My position is that it would have been the proper example to set for your students.
Having a negative opinion on the coach because he didn't listen to an LEO --who has no right to do so (especially since YOU YOURSELF have stated he was doing so at the order of the principal, not any law!) asked him too..eh, that is kind of lame. You say lame ... I say law abiding. I would take the same position for a student who refused to follow the instructions of a coach or teacher. Or a parent who is on campus and refused to follow the instructions of school officials. Still, neither one of those things is as bad a disobeying the police.
Insinuating that the LHSAA somehow endorsed disrespect for Law Enforcement because they didn't punish the coach who apparently was in the right... ludicrous.
I think showing students that you do not have to follow the instructions of someone in authority is shameful. To then turn around and be concerned about how fans, players, or coaches interact with officials becomes the ultimate hypocrisy. How did you determine the coach was "apparently in the right".
If you understand the comparison between the misapplication of the 1st Amendment and your misapplication of this statue... why do you keep metaphorically pounding your fist on the table and saying "he broke the law " when it is clear that he did not? I said I understood the correlation you were trying to make ...... I did not say that it was correct or that I agreed with it.
|
|
|
Post by retired on Mar 6, 2019 16:44:41 GMT -6
Your opinion that the coach should have vacated field ..I can see that under the guise of being the bigger person, or whatever. That is a valid position. Having a negative opinion on the coach because he didn't listen to an LEO --who has no right to do so (especially since YOU YOURSELF have stated he was doing so at the order of the principal, not any law!) asked him too..eh, that is kind of lame. Insinuating that the LHSAA somehow endorsed disrespect for Law Enforcement because they didn't punish the coach who apparently was in the right... ludicrous. If you understand the comparison between the misapplication of the 1st Amendment and your misapplication of this statue... why do you keep metaphorically pounding your fist on the table and saying "he broke the law " when it is clear that he did not?
Your opinion that the coach should have vacated field ..I can see that under the guise of being the bigger person, or whatever. That is a valid position. My position is that it would have been the proper example to set for your students.
Having a negative opinion on the coach because he didn't listen to an LEO --who has no right to do so (especially since YOU YOURSELF have stated he was doing so at the order of the principal, not any law!) asked him too..eh, that is kind of lame. You say lame ... I say law abiding. I would take the same position for a student who refused to follow the instructions of a coach or teacher. Or a parent who is on campus and refused to follow the instructions of school officials. Still, neither one of those things is as bad a disobeying the police.
Insinuating that the LHSAA somehow endorsed disrespect for Law Enforcement because they didn't punish the coach who apparently was in the right... ludicrous.
I think showing students that you do not have to follow the instructions of someone in authority is shameful. To then turn around and be concerned about how fans, players, or coaches interact with officials becomes the ultimate hypocrisy. How did you determine the coach was "apparently in the right".
If you understand the comparison between the misapplication of the 1st Amendment and your misapplication of this statue... why do you keep metaphorically pounding your fist on the table and saying "he broke the law " when it is clear that he did not? I said I understood the correlation you were trying to make ...... I did not say that it was correct or that I agreed with it.
Nope, you don't understand the correlation at all, because if you did, you would clearly see that it IS correct and you wouldn't continue to say that the coach was wrong.
|
|
|
Post by BGH on Mar 6, 2019 22:15:28 GMT -6
Your opinion that the coach should have vacated field ..I can see that under the guise of being the bigger person, or whatever. That is a valid position. My position is that it would have been the proper example to set for your students.
Having a negative opinion on the coach because he didn't listen to an LEO --who has no right to do so (especially since YOU YOURSELF have stated he was doing so at the order of the principal, not any law!) asked him too..eh, that is kind of lame. You say lame ... I say law abiding. I would take the same position for a student who refused to follow the instructions of a coach or teacher. Or a parent who is on campus and refused to follow the instructions of school officials. Still, neither one of those things is as bad a disobeying the police.
Insinuating that the LHSAA somehow endorsed disrespect for Law Enforcement because they didn't punish the coach who apparently was in the right... ludicrous.
I think showing students that you do not have to follow the instructions of someone in authority is shameful. To then turn around and be concerned about how fans, players, or coaches interact with officials becomes the ultimate hypocrisy. How did you determine the coach was "apparently in the right".
If you understand the comparison between the misapplication of the 1st Amendment and your misapplication of this statue... why do you keep metaphorically pounding your fist on the table and saying "he broke the law " when it is clear that he did not? I said I understood the correlation you were trying to make ...... I did not say that it was correct or that I agreed with it.
Nope, you don't understand the correlation at all, because if you did, you would clearly see that it IS correct and you wouldn't continue to say that the coach was wrong.
You remind me of the recent congressional hearing for someone in the Justice Dept. The lady congressman kept telling him to only answer YES or NO. As the guy tried to answer each time she would not listen to him and would then say I will take that as a YES. Finally he answered NO to a question, and once again she was not listening and said I will take that as a YES.
|
|
|
Post by retired on Mar 7, 2019 8:17:25 GMT -6
Nope, you don't understand the correlation at all, because if you did, you would clearly see that it IS correct and you wouldn't continue to say that the coach was wrong.
You remind me of the recent congressional hearing for someone in the Justice Dept. The lady congressman kept telling him to only answer YES or NO. As the guy tried to answer each time she would not listen to him and would then say I will take that as a YES. Finally he answered NO to a question, and once again she was not listening and said I will take that as a YES.
Interesting analogy in that the person testifying was trying to give nuanced and factually correct answers, while the congresswoman (not lady congressman) was trying to push her agenda through an inaccurate and narrow lens. BGH--[slamming on table] "He didn't listen to the cop...he broke the law" Others--"That isn't how the statute is applied, here let us explain" BGH--[slamming on table] "He didn't listen to the cop...he broke the law" Others--"No, you don't seem to understand. The statute you are referring to does not give complete powers to LEO, and clearly in this case the officer in question didn't have the authority to do what he was doing at the behest of the school admin, who also didn't have the authority given the actual situation at hand with regards to upcoming contest..." BGH--[slamming on table] "He didn't listen to the cop...he broke the law" Very interesting analogy.
|
|
|
Post by BGH on Mar 7, 2019 16:58:23 GMT -6
You remind me of the recent congressional hearing for someone in the Justice Dept. The lady congressman kept telling him to only answer YES or NO. As the guy tried to answer each time she would not listen to him and would then say I will take that as a YES. Finally he answered NO to a question, and once again she was not listening and said I will take that as a YES.
Interesting analogy in that the person testifying was trying to give nuanced and factually correct answers, while the congresswoman (not lady congressman) was trying to push her agenda through an inaccurate and narrow lens. BGH--[slamming on table] "He didn't listen to the cop...he broke the law" Others--"That isn't how the statute is applied, here let us explain" BGH--[slamming on table] "He didn't listen to the cop...he broke the law" Others--"No, you don't seem to understand. The statute you are referring to does not give complete powers to LEO, and clearly in this case the officer in question didn't have the authority to do what he was doing at the behest of the school admin, who also didn't have the authority given the actual situation at hand with regards to upcoming contest..." BGH--[slamming on table] "He didn't listen to the cop...he broke the law" Very interesting analogy.
I really did like that. It is funny, it makes a point, it stays on subject and it doesn't drift off to abstract freedom of speech comparisons. It would be a good retort ............ if only it were factual. First of all, I am the one being interrogated and you are the one not listening.
"No, you don't seem to understand. The statute you are referring to does not give complete powers to LEO, and clearly in this case the officer in question didn't have the authority to do what he was doing at the behest of the school admin, who also didn't have the authority given the actual situation at hand with regards to upcoming contest..." You keep saying this, as well as some others on the board, but none of you can back this statement up. You, or no one else on the board, ever seem to want to answer these questions:
- At what point does the principal's authority end, and the Officials authority begin?
- If, as you say, the Officials were in charge; where were they? Why didn't they take control of the situation?
Unless you can answer those questions, there is no way you can make that blanket statement that the principal and police did not have the authority.
Still [me slamming on the table], none of that matters because the coach broke the law when he refused to follow the instructions of the police officer and set a horrible example to every young person there. (By the way, if I was arguing against me on your side of this I would have already pointed out that the coach was not charged with breaking any laws)
|
|
|
Post by warpig on Mar 11, 2019 7:42:33 GMT -6
At an LHSAA sanctioned event, the LEO’s aren’t initially in control of the proceedings. They are for crowd control & backup to those who ARE in charge- the officials. When they stepped in before the officials to make a decision, they did so without legal recourse. The coach has every right to have his team on the field, because those in charge had not deemed it necessary to ask him to leave. In any instance that we are referring to, though, you have failed to show where the LHSAA openly condones disrespect of LEO or administrators. Rather, they established precedence that the proper protocol must be followed in situations such as that. Changing your initial statement to “in my opinion” only shows that you overstated your original post. LHSAA has never Openly Condoned any such activity At an LHSAA sanctioned event, the LEO’s aren’t initially in control of the proceedings. They are for crowd control & backup to those who ARE in charge- the officials.
First, please tell me when the Officials take "control of the proceedings"?
Now, please tell me when the high school principal's authority ends? If I am not mistaken, the principal is supposed to have the ultimate authority on their campus at all times.
When they [LEOs] stepped in before the officials to make a decision, they did so without legal recourse. The LEOs did not make a decision, the high school principal did.
The coach has every right to have his team on the field, because those in charge had not deemed it necessary to ask him to leave.
I will stipulate to that, but lets first agree on who was actually in charge at that time. I have heard it was the principal, and I have heard it was the officials, so lets figure out which one is true. I honestly don't know, but let me ask you this question. If the officials were in charge why did they not step in and take control? I was told they left the field just like the home team did.
In any instance that we are referring to, though, you have failed to show where the LHSAA openly condones disrespect of LEO or administrators. Rather, they established precedence that the proper protocol must be followed in situations such as that. Changing your initial statement to “in my opinion” only shows that you overstated your original post. LHSAA has never Openly Condoned any such activity You are reading a message board and you JUST NOW figured out that it is just our opinions. But let me make this perfectly clear, I accuse the LHSAA of openly condoning a disrespect for law enforcement officers. The fact that they let a high school coach blatantly refuse to follow the instructions of a law enforcement officer (which is a misdemeanor), with no repercussions, is my proof. As I have tried to explain to retired, it does not matter who was in the right about whether the team is on the field or not, once the coach refused to follow the instructions of the police, HE BROKE THE LAW.
Is this how we want to prepare our children as they take their place in society? Do we want each one of them to decide for themselves whether they follow school rules or not based on whether or not they think they are in the right? Do we want them to ignore the police just because they think they are in the right? This is the basis of anarchy.
We should be teaching our children that there is recourse for unjust enforcement of school rules or unjust enforcement of laws. IN MY OPINION this coach and the LHSAA failed miserably in setting that example.
Let me try to answer your questions in order. 1) Officials take control of the proceedings as soon as they arrive on the field of play. This is easily referenced through the LHSAA. I know that they HAD arrived, because you keep saying that they “did nothing”. Perhaps this is because they recognized that no prior agreement had been made that they were made aware of(and they SHOULD be made aware of any such arrangements). 2)if this were a SCHOOL sanctioned event, perhaps the Principal would have ultimate authority, but this event is an LHSAA sanctioned event. While the principal isn’t powerless, they sure can’t have a coach arrested when he is moving through a normal pregame proceeding. If you can show me where what the coach was doing was any different than what normally happens at most any team’s Friday night rituals(Homecoming or Senior night events ‘may change that), then you might could show a misdemeanor. However, if it’s not a Misdemeanor at any other stadium in the state, then it’s not a misdemeanor there. 3) the officials dropped the ball, so to speak. They mishandled the situation badly. The irony in this is that you can plainly see & state the wrongdoings of the officials, yet you seem to hold the administration & LEO that night without fault. I find that hard to fathom. 4) As far as this being a message board, and it should be understood that everything is opinions...let me use this example: if I state that Zachary is the champion of 5A football this year, that can be read as factual. I didn’t state that “I believe that...”. I stated that they WERE. Now, if I said “In my opinion, Zachary will win the state championship next year”....that would be opinion based. But when something is stated as fact, then ya gotta be able to back that up. Which is why you restated your original statement of fact as an OPINION a few posts later....after someone pointed it out. 5) he did not break the law. He did not comply because he knew the proceedings of an LHSAA event a little better than you did. He knew that the word of a change in the normal pregame routine would have come before that, and not from LEOs. It absolutely DOES matter who was in the right, because the LHSAA’s protocol was not followed. If this was the first of this type hiccup by the school, then one might could view it as oversight. However, that isn’t the case. Punishment was doled out by the sanctioning body that BOTH schools are members of. People lost their jobs. Lawsuits ensued, whether they were settled or not. The coach received no punishment, whether legal, civil, or through the LHSAA. That’s a lot of people who say that he wasn’t in the wrong. Maybe I missed a question or two. Hopefully not. However, I don’t believe you can take this singular example of a mishandling on a school’s side, and turn it into evidence of the “open disregard of LEO & administrators by the LHSAA”. I was hoping that there would be more.
|
|
|
Post by BGH on Mar 11, 2019 13:22:48 GMT -6
At an LHSAA sanctioned event, the LEO’s aren’t initially in control of the proceedings. They are for crowd control & backup to those who ARE in charge- the officials.
First, please tell me when the Officials take "control of the proceedings"?
Now, please tell me when the high school principal's authority ends? If I am not mistaken, the principal is supposed to have the ultimate authority on their campus at all times.
When they [LEOs] stepped in before the officials to make a decision, they did so without legal recourse. The LEOs did not make a decision, the high school principal did.
The coach has every right to have his team on the field, because those in charge had not deemed it necessary to ask him to leave.
I will stipulate to that, but lets first agree on who was actually in charge at that time. I have heard it was the principal, and I have heard it was the officials, so lets figure out which one is true. I honestly don't know, but let me ask you this question. If the officials were in charge why did they not step in and take control? I was told they left the field just like the home team did.
In any instance that we are referring to, though, you have failed to show where the LHSAA openly condones disrespect of LEO or administrators. Rather, they established precedence that the proper protocol must be followed in situations such as that. Changing your initial statement to “in my opinion” only shows that you overstated your original post. LHSAA has never Openly Condoned any such activity You are reading a message board and you JUST NOW figured out that it is just our opinions. But let me make this perfectly clear, I accuse the LHSAA of openly condoning a disrespect for law enforcement officers. The fact that they let a high school coach blatantly refuse to follow the instructions of a law enforcement officer (which is a misdemeanor), with no repercussions, is my proof. As I have tried to explain to retired, it does not matter who was in the right about whether the team is on the field or not, once the coach refused to follow the instructions of the police, HE BROKE THE LAW.
Is this how we want to prepare our children as they take their place in society? Do we want each one of them to decide for themselves whether they follow school rules or not based on whether or not they think they are in the right? Do we want them to ignore the police just because they think they are in the right? This is the basis of anarchy.
We should be teaching our children that there is recourse for unjust enforcement of school rules or unjust enforcement of laws. IN MY OPINION this coach and the LHSAA failed miserably in setting that example.
Let me try to answer your questions in order. 1) Officials take control of the proceedings as soon as they arrive on the field of play. This is easily referenced through the LHSAA. I know that they HAD arrived, because you keep saying that they “did nothing”. Perhaps this is because they recognized that no prior agreement had been made that they were made aware of(and they SHOULD be made aware of any such arrangements). 2)if this were a SCHOOL sanctioned event, perhaps the Principal would have ultimate authority, but this event is an LHSAA sanctioned event. While the principal isn’t powerless, they sure can’t have a coach arrested when he is moving through a normal pregame proceeding. If you can show me where what the coach was doing was any different than what normally happens at most any team’s Friday night rituals(Homecoming or Senior night events ‘may change that), then you might could show a misdemeanor. However, if it’s not a Misdemeanor at any other stadium in the state, then it’s not a misdemeanor there. 3) the officials dropped the ball, so to speak. They mishandled the situation badly. The irony in this is that you can plainly see & state the wrongdoings of the officials, yet you seem to hold the administration & LEO that night without fault. I find that hard to fathom. 4) As far as this being a message board, and it should be understood that everything is opinions...let me use this example: if I state that Zachary is the champion of 5A football this year, that can be read as factual. I didn’t state that “I believe that...”. I stated that they WERE. Now, if I said “In my opinion, Zachary will win the state championship next year”....that would be opinion based. But when something is stated as fact, then ya gotta be able to back that up. Which is why you restated your original statement of fact as an OPINION a few posts later....after someone pointed it out. 5) he did not break the law. He did not comply because he knew the proceedings of an LHSAA event a little better than you did. He knew that the word of a change in the normal pregame routine would have come before that, and not from LEOs. It absolutely DOES matter who was in the right, because the LHSAA’s protocol was not followed. If this was the first of this type hiccup by the school, then one might could view it as oversight. However, that isn’t the case. Punishment was doled out by the sanctioning body that BOTH schools are members of. People lost their jobs. Lawsuits ensued, whether they were settled or not. The coach received no punishment, whether legal, civil, or through the LHSAA. That’s a lot of people who say that he wasn’t in the wrong. Maybe I missed a question or two. Hopefully not. However, I don’t believe you can take this singular example of a mishandling on a school’s side, and turn it into evidence of the “open disregard of LEO & administrators by the LHSAA”. I was hoping that there would be more.
1) Officials take control of the proceedings as soon as they arrive on the field of play. This is easily referenced through the LHSAA. I know that they HAD arrived, because you keep saying that they “did nothing”. Perhaps this is because they recognized that no prior agreement had been made that they were made aware of(and they SHOULD be made aware of any such arrangements).
That makes no sense at all to me. If, as you say, "they recognized that no prior agreement had been made", and as you also say, "the Officials take control of the proceeding as soon as they arrive on the field of play" then why would they not take control and come to the aid of the coach? Could it be that perhaps the Officials recognized the authority of the police?
2)if this were a SCHOOL sanctioned event, perhaps the Principal would have ultimate authority, but this event is an LHSAA sanctioned event. While the principal isn’t powerless, they sure can’t have a coach arrested when he is moving through a normal pregame proceeding. If you can show me where what the coach was doing was any different than what normally happens at most any team’s Friday night rituals(Homecoming or Senior night events ‘may change that), then you might could show a misdemeanor. However, if it’s not a Misdemeanor at any other stadium in the state, then it’s not a misdemeanor there.
I want you to understand that I am not here to take up for either of the schools involved. I think both schools failed the spirit of sportsmanship miserable. Apparently two principals that had a history of discord were letting their feelings get in the way of what was best for the teams, fans, and spirit groups. Those two principals were the root cause of this whole incident, yet even they cannot be blamed for the refusal of this coach to follow the instructions of the LEO.
The misdemeanor was not that the team was going through pregame proceedings, in fact that had nothing to do with. Neither was it a misdemeanor for the visiting team to refuse to leave the field after the PA announcer asked them to leave twice. The misdemeanor occurred when the coach openly refused the instructions of the police. It would be a misdemeanor anywhere from Shreveport to New Orleans and Monroe to Lake Charles, not just that stadium that night.
3) the officials dropped the ball, so to speak. They mishandled the situation badly. The irony in this is that you can plainly see & state the wrongdoings of the officials, yet you seem to hold the administration & LEO that night without fault. I find that hard to fathom.
This has been a long discussion and I am not inclined to go back and read all of it, but I do not think I have said the Official are guilty of any wrong doing. I definitely have not said the Administration or the LEO were without fault. Please feel free to show me where I did either of these things. I do believe that the LHSAA failed miserably, and I believe that the Coach caused all of this to come to a head when he refused to obey the police.
Now I am curious as to why you say "the officials dropped the ball, so to speak. They mishandled the situation badly". Did the LHSAA admonish them in any way.
4) As far as this being a message board, and it should be understood that everything is opinions...let me use this example: if I state that Zachary is the champion of 5A football this year, that can be read as factual. I didn’t state that “I believe that...”. I stated that they WERE. Now, if I said “In my opinion, Zachary will win the state championship next year”....that would be opinion based. But when something is stated as fact, then ya gotta be able to back that up. Which is why you restated your original statement of fact as an OPINION a few posts later....after someone pointed it out.
Whatever. If you were to post "In my opinion, Zachary will win the State Championship next year" or "Zachary will win the State Championship next year", everyone of the message board would know that both are your opinion. On the other hand when you state that something is a fact, as you did when you said "Zachary is the champion of 5A football this year" then you have to be ready for someone to challenge you. Just so you know, there is no longer a champion of 5A football anymore. John Curtis was the best team in 5A this year.
5) he did not break the law. He did not comply because he knew the proceedings of an LHSAA event a little better than you did. He knew that the word of a change in the normal pregame routine would have come before that, and not from LEOs. It absolutely DOES matter who was in the right, because the LHSAA’s protocol was not followed. If this was the first of this type hiccup by the school, then one might could view it as oversight. However, that isn’t the case. Punishment was doled out by the sanctioning body that BOTH schools are members of. People lost their jobs. Lawsuits ensued, whether they were settled or not. The coach received no punishment, whether legal, civil, or through the LHSAA. That’s a lot of people who say that he wasn’t in the wrong.
I find it odd that you say "It absolutely DOES matter who was in the right, because the LHSAA’s protocol was not followed". You seem perfectly OK with disobeying a police officer, yet you have a higher regard for LHSAA protocol. Surely you are not implying LHSAA protocol trumps State Law. Maybe I missed a question or two. Hopefully not. However, I don’t believe you can take this singular example of a mishandling on a school’s side, and turn it into evidence of the “open disregard of LEO & administrators by the LHSAA”. I was hoping that there would be more.
A coach openly defied a LEO in front of thousands of spectators and thousands more of students, and the LHSAA sanctioned his illegal actions by doing nothing. Yet the LHSAA, in their ultimate wisdom, punished the only people that had nothing to do with what happened that night ........ the fans, parents, players, band, and spirit groups, of the home team. I despise the LHSAA.
|
|
|
Post by warpig on Mar 11, 2019 22:56:37 GMT -6
1) Officials take control of the proceedings as soon as they arrive on the field of play. This is easily referenced through the LHSAA. I know that they HAD arrived, because you keep saying that they “did nothing”. Perhaps this is because they recognized that no prior agreement had been made that they were made aware of(and they SHOULD be made aware of any such arrangements).
That makes no sense at all to me. If, as you say, "they recognized that no prior agreement had been made", and as you also say, "the Officials take control of the proceeding as soon as they arrive on the field of play" then why would they not take control and come to the aid of the coach? Could it be that perhaps the Officials recognized the authority of the police?
***I am sorry that it doesn’t make sense, but when officials arrive and hold their pregame conferences with the coaches, this arrangement would have surely been discussed, as it usually is at this time. The officials should have taken up for the coach & told the LEOs that they weren’t needed at the time. It is not the duty of an LEO to handle the on-field proceedings, unless there is a dangerous or life threatening act happening. The officials should have simply told them that they didn’t need them in this instance...but they didn’t***
2)if this were a SCHOOL sanctioned event, perhaps the Principal would have ultimate authority, but this event is an LHSAA sanctioned event. While the principal isn’t powerless, they sure can’t have a coach arrested when he is moving through a normal pregame proceeding. If you can show me where what the coach was doing was any different than what normally happens at most any team’s Friday night rituals(Homecoming or Senior night events ‘may change that), then you might could show a misdemeanor. However, if it’s not a Misdemeanor at any other stadium in the state, then it’s not a misdemeanor there.
I want you to understand that I am not here to take up for either of the schools involved. I think both schools failed the spirit of sportsmanship miserable. Apparently two principals that had a history of discord were letting their feelings get in the way of what was best for the teams, fans, and spirit groups. Those two principals were the root cause of this whole incident, yet even they cannot be blamed for the refusal of this coach to follow the instructions of the LEO.
The misdemeanor was not that the team was going through pregame proceedings, in fact that had nothing to do with. Neither was it a misdemeanor for the visiting team to refuse to leave the field after the PA announcer asked them to leave twice. The misdemeanor occurred when the coach openly refused the instructions of the police. It would be a misdemeanor anywhere from Shreveport to New Orleans and Monroe to Lake Charles, not just that stadium that night.
***What you fail to look at is that the officials had no Probable Cause for arresting the coach. He had done nothing wrong. He has a right to carry on his daily life as a coach of a high school football team when he had done nothing illegal. And no sir; being arrested without probable cause is not breaking the law.***
3) the officials dropped the ball, so to speak. They mishandled the situation badly. The irony in this is that you can plainly see & state the wrongdoings of the officials, yet you seem to hold the administration & LEO that night without fault. I find that hard to fathom.
This has been a long discussion and I am not inclined to go back and read all of it, but I do not think I have said the Official are guilty of any wrong doing. I definitely have not said the Administration or the LEO were without fault. Please feel free to show me where I did either of these things. I do believe that the LHSAA failed miserably, and I believe that the Coach caused all of this to come to a head when he refused to obey the police.
***I can agree with some of what you said, but again...the police must have probable cause for an arrest. What was their probable cause? They are there in a support role; more for crowd control & security than to enter onto a high school playoff pregame warmup to escort/arrest a coach. I know that they were probably only doing what was asked of them by an ill advised principal; but my opinion is that they would have known what their role should & shouldn’t have been in that situation. Additionally, the mention of the PA announcer is not pertinent to anything, as he has about at much authority in the game proceedings as the QB’s mother.***
Now I am curious as to why you say "the officials dropped the ball, so to speak. They mishandled the situation badly". Did the LHSAA admonish them in any way.
***I am unsure as to whether or not they were punished at all, but I would love to know.***
4) As far as this being a message board, and it should be understood that everything is opinions...let me use this example: if I state that Zachary is the champion of 5A football this year, that can be read as factual. I didn’t state that “I believe that...”. I stated that they WERE. Now, if I said “In my opinion, Zachary will win the state championship next year”....that would be opinion based. But when something is stated as fact, then ya gotta be able to back that up. Which is why you restated your original statement of fact as an OPINION a few posts later....after someone pointed it out.
Whatever. If you were to post "In my opinion, Zachary will win the State Championship next year" or "Zachary will win the State Championship next year", everyone of the message board would know that both are your opinion. On the other hand when you state that something is a fact, as you did when you said "Zachary is the champion of 5A football this year" then you have to be ready for someone to challenge you. Just so you know, there is no longer a champion of 5A football anymore. John Curtis was the best team in 5A this year.
***Sir...Zachary IS the champion of 5A football this year. That is not a statement of opinion. It is generally accepted as fact. I don’t feel that I really have to explain this. John Curtis was the best team in Division I this year; true enough. However, since they didn’t play Zachary...you know the rest***
5) he did not break the law. He did not comply because he knew the proceedings of an LHSAA event a little better than you did. He knew that the word of a change in the normal pregame routine would have come before that, and not from LEOs. It absolutely DOES matter who was in the right, because the LHSAA’s protocol was not followed. If this was the first of this type hiccup by the school, then one might could view it as oversight. However, that isn’t the case. Punishment was doled out by the sanctioning body that BOTH schools are members of. People lost their jobs. Lawsuits ensued, whether they were settled or not. The coach received no punishment, whether legal, civil, or through the LHSAA. That’s a lot of people who say that he wasn’t in the wrong.
I find it odd that you say "It absolutely DOES matter who was in the right, because the LHSAA’s protocol was not followed". You seem perfectly OK with disobeying a police officer, yet you have a higher regard for LHSAA protocol. Surely you are not implying LHSAA protocol trumps State Law.
***There is no state law that says an officer can proceed with an arrest without probable cause. That law simply doesn’t exist***
Maybe I missed a question or two. Hopefully not. However, I don’t believe you can take this singular example of a mishandling on a school’s side, and turn it into evidence of the “open disregard of LEO & administrators by the LHSAA”. I was hoping that there would be more.
A coach openly defied a LEO in front of thousands of spectators and thousands more of students, and the LHSAA sanctioned his illegal actions by doing nothing. Yet the LHSAA, in their ultimate wisdom, punished the only people that had nothing to do with what happened that night ........ the fans, parents, players, band, and spirit groups, of the home team. I despise the LHSAA.
***One more time. His actions weren’t illegal. They weren’t at the time, and they weren’t found to be illegal later, when he wasn’t charged. However, I AM curious- let’s just say that you saw this the way that the LHSAA did, and you had to hand out punishment. What solutions do you have that don’t punish the fans, parents, players, band, and spirit groups?? Surely you have an alternate solution to the injustice of the punishment?***
|
|
|
Post by BGH on Mar 12, 2019 7:46:13 GMT -6
1) Officials take control of the proceedings as soon as they arrive on the field of play. This is easily referenced through the LHSAA. I know that they HAD arrived, because you keep saying that they “did nothing”. Perhaps this is because they recognized that no prior agreement had been made that they were made aware of(and they SHOULD be made aware of any such arrangements). That makes no sense at all to me. If, as you say, "they recognized that no prior agreement had been made", and as you also say, "the Officials take control of the proceeding as soon as they arrive on the field of play" then why would they not take control and come to the aid of the coach? Could it be that perhaps the Officials recognized the authority of the police? ***I am sorry that it doesn’t make sense, but when officials arrive and hold their pregame conferences with the coaches, this arrangement would have surely been discussed, as it usually is at this time. The officials should have taken up for the coach & told the LEOs that they weren’t needed at the time. It is not the duty of an LEO to handle the on-field proceedings, unless there is a dangerous or life threatening act happening. The officials should have simply told them that they didn’t need them in this instance...but they didn’t*** 2)if this were a SCHOOL sanctioned event, perhaps the Principal would have ultimate authority, but this event is an LHSAA sanctioned event. While the principal isn’t powerless, they sure can’t have a coach arrested when he is moving through a normal pregame proceeding. If you can show me where what the coach was doing was any different than what normally happens at most any team’s Friday night rituals(Homecoming or Senior night events ‘may change that), then you might could show a misdemeanor. However, if it’s not a Misdemeanor at any other stadium in the state, then it’s not a misdemeanor there. I want you to understand that I am not here to take up for either of the schools involved. I think both schools failed the spirit of sportsmanship miserable. Apparently two principals that had a history of discord were letting their feelings get in the way of what was best for the teams, fans, and spirit groups. Those two principals were the root cause of this whole incident, yet even they cannot be blamed for the refusal of this coach to follow the instructions of the LEO. The misdemeanor was not that the team was going through pregame proceedings, in fact that had nothing to do with. Neither was it a misdemeanor for the visiting team to refuse to leave the field after the PA announcer asked them to leave twice. The misdemeanor occurred when the coach openly refused the instructions of the police. It would be a misdemeanor anywhere from Shreveport to New Orleans and Monroe to Lake Charles, not just that stadium that night. ***What you fail to look at is that the officials had no Probable Cause for arresting the coach. He had done nothing wrong. He has a right to carry on his daily life as a coach of a high school football team when he had done nothing illegal. And no sir; being arrested without probable cause is not breaking the law.*** 3) the officials dropped the ball, so to speak. They mishandled the situation badly. The irony in this is that you can plainly see & state the wrongdoings of the officials, yet you seem to hold the administration & LEO that night without fault. I find that hard to fathom. This has been a long discussion and I am not inclined to go back and read all of it, but I do not think I have said the Official are guilty of any wrong doing. I definitely have not said the Administration or the LEO were without fault. Please feel free to show me where I did either of these things. I do believe that the LHSAA failed miserably, and I believe that the Coach caused all of this to come to a head when he refused to obey the police. ***I can agree with some of what you said, but again...the police must have probable cause for an arrest. What was their probable cause? They are there in a support role; more for crowd control & security than to enter onto a high school playoff pregame warmup to escort/arrest a coach. I know that they were probably only doing what was asked of them by an ill advised principal; but my opinion is that they would have known what their role should & shouldn’t have been in that situation. Additionally, the mention of the PA announcer is not pertinent to anything, as he has about at much authority in the game proceedings as the QB’s mother.*** Now I am curious as to why you say "the officials dropped the ball, so to speak. They mishandled the situation badly". Did the LHSAA admonish them in any way. ***I am unsure as to whether or not they were punished at all, but I would love to know.*** 4) As far as this being a message board, and it should be understood that everything is opinions...let me use this example: if I state that Zachary is the champion of 5A football this year, that can be read as factual. I didn’t state that “I believe that...”. I stated that they WERE. Now, if I said “In my opinion, Zachary will win the state championship next year”....that would be opinion based. But when something is stated as fact, then ya gotta be able to back that up. Which is why you restated your original statement of fact as an OPINION a few posts later....after someone pointed it out. Whatever. If you were to post "In my opinion, Zachary will win the State Championship next year" or "Zachary will win the State Championship next year", everyone of the message board would know that both are your opinion. On the other hand when you state that something is a fact, as you did when you said "Zachary is the champion of 5A football this year" then you have to be ready for someone to challenge you. Just so you know, there is no longer a champion of 5A football anymore. John Curtis was the best team in 5A this year. ***Sir...Zachary IS the champion of 5A football this year. That is not a statement of opinion. It is generally accepted as fact. I don’t feel that I really have to explain this. John Curtis was the best team in Division I this year; true enough. However, since they didn’t play Zachary...you know the rest*** 5) he did not break the law. He did not comply because he knew the proceedings of an LHSAA event a little better than you did. He knew that the word of a change in the normal pregame routine would have come before that, and not from LEOs. It absolutely DOES matter who was in the right, because the LHSAA’s protocol was not followed. If this was the first of this type hiccup by the school, then one might could view it as oversight. However, that isn’t the case. Punishment was doled out by the sanctioning body that BOTH schools are members of. People lost their jobs. Lawsuits ensued, whether they were settled or not. The coach received no punishment, whether legal, civil, or through the LHSAA. That’s a lot of people who say that he wasn’t in the wrong. I find it odd that you say "It absolutely DOES matter who was in the right, because the LHSAA’s protocol was not followed". You seem perfectly OK with disobeying a police officer, yet you have a higher regard for LHSAA protocol. Surely you are not implying LHSAA protocol trumps State Law. ***There is no state law that says an officer can proceed with an arrest without probable cause. That law simply doesn’t exist*** Maybe I missed a question or two. Hopefully not. However, I don’t believe you can take this singular example of a mishandling on a school’s side, and turn it into evidence of the “open disregard of LEO & administrators by the LHSAA”. I was hoping that there would be more. A coach openly defied a LEO in front of thousands of spectators and thousands more of students, and the LHSAA sanctioned his illegal actions by doing nothing. Yet the LHSAA, in their ultimate wisdom, punished the only people that had nothing to do with what happened that night ........ the fans, parents, players, band, and spirit groups, of the home team. I despise the LHSAA. ***One more time. His actions weren’t illegal. They weren’t at the time, and they weren’t found to be illegal later, when he wasn’t charged. However, I AM curious- let’s just say that you saw this the way that the LHSAA did, and you had to hand out punishment. What solutions do you have that don’t punish the fans, parents, players, band, and spirit groups?? Surely you have an alternate solution to the injustice of the punishment?*** ***I am sorry that it doesn’t make sense, but when officials arrive and hold their pregame conferences with the coaches, this arrangement would have surely been discussed, as it usually is at this time. The officials should have taken up for the coach & told the LEOs that they weren’t needed at the time. It is not the duty of an LEO to handle the on-field proceedings, unless there is a dangerous or life threatening act happening. The officials should have simply told them that they didn’t need them in this instance...but they didn’t*** I was told that the officials left the field when the home team did. Could it be because they thought this was the arrangement?
***What you fail to look at is that the officials had no Probable Cause for arresting the coach. He had done nothing wrong. He has a right to carry on his daily life as a coach of a high school football team when he had done nothing illegal. And no sir; being arrested without probable cause is not breaking the law.***
Two things, first the Coach was not arrested. and second he broke the law when he refused to follow instructions of a LEO.
***Sir...Zachary IS the champion of 5A football this year. That is not a statement of opinion. It is generally accepted as fact. I don’t feel that I really have to explain this. John Curtis was the best team in Division I this year; true enough. However, since they didn’t play Zachary...you know the rest*** Both Zachary and Curtis play 5A football. Zachary was the best non-Select 5A school, but that does not give them the right to claim to be 5A champs. You wold be correct in saying they were the Class 5A Playoff Champions for 2018, just like Curtis is the Division I Playoff Champions. In reality, neither team can claim to be the 5A champions. I don't blame you for being confused, it is just another of a long line of LHSAA screw-ups. But claiming it is a fact would be incorrect. My claim that Curtis was the best 5A team this year is also an opinion, but it is based on the fact that Curtis crushed Catholic Baton Rouge, while Zachary lost to Catholic.
***There is no state law that says an officer can proceed with an arrest without probable cause. That law simply doesn’t exist*** Once again, the Coach was not arrested.The LEO did not want to arrest the coach or charge him with anything. They simply instructed him to leave the field.
***One more time. His actions weren’t illegal. They weren’t at the time, and they weren’t found to be illegal later, when he wasn’t charged. If a LEO pulls you over for speeding and then lets you go, does that mean you did not break the law by speeding? Paul Manafort was investigated by the IRS which decided not to prosecute him, did that mean he was not guilty? He found out differently when Mueller came along later and decided to prosecute him for the very same thing the IRS let him go.
I have to ask you a personal question; would you tell your children that it is alright to disregard the instructions of a LEO while they are standing face to face and the officer is politely asking them to move to another area? I am not trying to claim this Coach is a criminal, but I do get tired of people portraying him as some kind of hero. I think he set a poor example of citizenship in front of every student at that game.
However, I AM curious- let’s just say that you saw this the way that the LHSAA did, and you had to hand out punishment. What solutions do you have that don’t punish the fans, parents, players, band, and spirit groups?? Surely you have an alternate solution to the injustice of the punishment?*** That is an interesting question and I gave it some thought, but I realized it would be impossible for me to answer because I do not see it the way the LHSAA did. On the other hand, why did anyone have to be punished? It was a screw-up from beginning to end by all parties involved, yet the only people who suffered had nothing to do with what took place. You don't need to be Solomon to figure that out.
|
|
|
Post by warpig on Mar 13, 2019 11:11:31 GMT -6
1) there has been several years since this issue happened, so I went & read back up on it to make sure. If there was an arrangement where the visiting school wasn’t getting their allotted time, it was not made know during the coaches meeting with the officials...which both coaches would have been at. The visiting band was supposed to play, but gave their time slot to the football team so that they could continue with their normal pregame routine. At no point was the visiting school NOT supposed to be on the field at the stated time; just that it was originally given to the band & not the football team. You have to wonder why that matters?? So no; the officials knew of no arrangement where the field was void of the visiting school.
2) the coach was restrained with handcuffs. We’re you standing there to KNOW that he wasn’t read his Miranda rights?. Secondly, you have to ask yourself if the LEO was working in the capacity as a cop, or an off duty security detail paid by the school? Either way, you have failed to show why they interjected themselves into a situation they clearly had no business in...which is why they were involved in the lawsuit.
3) Curtis didn’t play in the 5A football playoffs. So how can they be the 5A champion? And if you are going to use the “Team A beat Team B, so they would beat Team C” logic....then maybe we ought to steer talks away from athletics. There is a 5A Champion, & a Division I champion...if you want to add words & titles in your world to prop up your arguments, that’s fine. But I’m the real world, there is a 5A champion & a Division I champion...like it or not
4) lol; do you KNOW that the LEOs asked politely to move to another area?? Cuffing someone without probable cause is not polite. In fact, they were sued for it. You do realize that, correct? They were sued. If you believe them to have probable cause, please tell me what it was.
Your example of speeding is also a bad one, because it is based on probable cause(someone was speeding). There was no probable cause here.
5) so you have charges of impropriety on the part of the LHSAA, yet you have no idea of the proper protocol in handling this situation. Sir, THAT is a pretty big problem of society as well. ing without having any alternate solutions.
|
|
|
Post by BGH on Mar 13, 2019 16:53:20 GMT -6
1) there has been several years since this issue happened, so I went & read back up on it to make sure. If there was an arrangement where the visiting school wasn’t getting their allotted time, it was not made know during the coaches meeting with the officials...which both coaches would have been at. The visiting band was supposed to play, but gave their time slot to the football team so that they could continue with their normal pregame routine. At no point was the visiting school NOT supposed to be on the field at the stated time; just that it was originally given to the band & not the football team. You have to wonder why that matters?? So no; the officials knew of no arrangement where the field was void of the visiting school. 2) the coach was restrained with handcuffs. We’re you standing there to KNOW that he wasn’t read his Miranda rights?. Secondly, you have to ask yourself if the LEO was working in the capacity as a cop, or an off duty security detail paid by the school? Either way, you have failed to show why they interjected themselves into a situation they clearly had no business in...which is why they were involved in the lawsuit. 3) Curtis didn’t play in the 5A football playoffs. So how can they be the 5A champion? And if you are going to use the “Team A beat Team B, so they would beat Team C” logic....then maybe we ought to steer talks away from athletics. There is a 5A Champion, & a Division I champion...if you want to add words & titles in your world to prop up your arguments, that’s fine. But I’m the real world, there is a 5A champion & a Division I champion...like it or not 4) lol; do you KNOW that the LEOs asked politely to move to another area?? Cuffing someone without probable cause is not polite. In fact, they were sued for it. You do realize that, correct? They were sued. If you believe them to have probable cause, please tell me what it was. Your example of speeding is also a bad one, because it is based on probable cause(someone was speeding). There was no probable cause here. 5) so you have charges of impropriety on the part of the LHSAA, yet you have no idea of the proper protocol in handling this situation. Sir, THAT is a pretty big problem of society as well. *****ing without having any alternate solutions.
1) there has been several years since this issue happened, so I went & read back up on it to make sure. If there was an arrangement where the visiting school wasn’t getting their allotted time, it was not made know during the coaches meeting with the officials...which both coaches would have been at. The visiting band was supposed to play, but gave their time slot to the football team so that they could continue with their normal pregame routine. At no point was the visiting school NOT supposed to be on the field at the stated time; just that it was originally given to the band & not the football team. You have to wonder why that matters?? So no; the officials knew of no arrangement where the field was void of the visiting school. You are right, it has been a long time ago. The report I read said that the home team sent a schedule to the visiting school and thought all had been arranged. I also read where by LHSAA rules the visiting team must sign off on the schedule which they did not, which is where all the confusion came in. Apparently this all came about because the principals of the two schools did not like each other.
I am actually glad you brought this up because I had forgotten about it. Why would the visiting team be allowed to change the schedule and give up their band time to the players? Doesn't the LHSAA say that both teams have to agree to the schedule? The home team left the field as scheduled while the visitors tried to gain an advantage and get extra warmup time. That was a crafty coach.
Still, none of what you said proves anything. You claim it means the Officials knew, but it they knew why didn't they take control. So nothing to you said in #1 is relevant.
2) the coach was restrained with handcuffs. We’re you standing there to KNOW that he wasn’t read his Miranda rights?. Secondly, you have to ask yourself if the LEO was working in the capacity as a cop, or an off duty security detail paid by the school? Either way, you have failed to show why they interjected themselves into a situation they clearly had no business in...which is why they were involved in the lawsuit. I was not standing there ....... but I do know someone who knows the details. The coach was not arrested, and neither was he charged with anything. Are you claiming the coach was arrested?
A LEO has the same authority whether he is on duty or off duty, and especially when he is in uniform. The LEO did not inject himself, he was instructed by the principal to have the coach leave the field.
3) Curtis didn’t play in the 5A football playoffs. So how can they be the 5A champion? And if you are going to use the “Team A beat Team B, so they would beat Team C” logic....then maybe we ought to steer talks away from athletics. There is a 5A Champion, & a Division I champion...if you want to add words & titles in your world to prop up your arguments, that’s fine. But I’m the real world, there is a 5A champion & a Division I champion...like it or not There has not been a 5A football champ since the split. The playoffs are split between 5A non-Select and 5A Select. Neither one can legitimately claim they are the 5A football champs. If you really lived in "the real world" you would know that, but you live in the public school world that wants to claim something without earning it.
4) lol; do you KNOW that the LEOs asked politely to move to another area?? Cuffing someone without probable cause is not polite. In fact, they were sued for it. You do realize that, correct? They were sued. If you believe them to have probable cause, please tell me what it was. I was told the LEO asked multiple times. I have heard that the coach made a comment that pushed the LEO to cuff him. A LEO can cuff you for his safety or your safety, while he is assessing a situation. You keep using the term probable cause; he was not being arrested or charged so why would he need probable cause?
Anyone can sue someone else and it has nothing to do with right or wrong. Did the coach win his lawsuit? No, it was settled, which happens every day of the week and government entities are more likely to settle than anyone else.It is cheaper to settle that to keep paying lawyers and court costs.
Your example of speeding is also a bad one, because it is based on probable cause(someone was speeding). There was no probable cause here. No, it is a good example of the point I was making because it points out that you can be guilty of breaking the law without being charged.
5) so you have charges of impropriety on the part of the LHSAA, yet you have no idea of the proper protocol in handling this situation. Sir, THAT is a pretty big problem of society as well. *****ing without having any alternate solutions. If I understood that gibberish I might respond to it.
|
|
|
Post by warpig on Mar 14, 2019 8:36:42 GMT -6
1) there has been several years since this issue happened, so I went & read back up on it to make sure. If there was an arrangement where the visiting school wasn’t getting their allotted time, it was not made know during the coaches meeting with the officials...which both coaches would have been at. The visiting band was supposed to play, but gave their time slot to the football team so that they could continue with their normal pregame routine. At no point was the visiting school NOT supposed to be on the field at the stated time; just that it was originally given to the band & not the football team. You have to wonder why that matters?? So no; the officials knew of no arrangement where the field was void of the visiting school. 2) the coach was restrained with handcuffs. We’re you standing there to KNOW that he wasn’t read his Miranda rights?. Secondly, you have to ask yourself if the LEO was working in the capacity as a cop, or an off duty security detail paid by the school? Either way, you have failed to show why they interjected themselves into a situation they clearly had no business in...which is why they were involved in the lawsuit. 3) Curtis didn’t play in the 5A football playoffs. So how can they be the 5A champion? And if you are going to use the “Team A beat Team B, so they would beat Team C” logic....then maybe we ought to steer talks away from athletics. There is a 5A Champion, & a Division I champion...if you want to add words & titles in your world to prop up your arguments, that’s fine. But I’m the real world, there is a 5A champion & a Division I champion...like it or not 4) lol; do you KNOW that the LEOs asked politely to move to another area?? Cuffing someone without probable cause is not polite. In fact, they were sued for it. You do realize that, correct? They were sued. If you believe them to have probable cause, please tell me what it was. Your example of speeding is also a bad one, because it is based on probable cause(someone was speeding). There was no probable cause here. 5) so you have charges of impropriety on the part of the LHSAA, yet you have no idea of the proper protocol in handling this situation. Sir, THAT is a pretty big problem of society as well. *****ing without having any alternate solutions.
1) there has been several years since this issue happened, so I went & read back up on it to make sure. If there was an arrangement where the visiting school wasn’t getting their allotted time, it was not made know during the coaches meeting with the officials...which both coaches would have been at. The visiting band was supposed to play, but gave their time slot to the football team so that they could continue with their normal pregame routine. At no point was the visiting school NOT supposed to be on the field at the stated time; just that it was originally given to the band & not the football team. You have to wonder why that matters?? So no; the officials knew of no arrangement where the field was void of the visiting school. You are right, it has been a long time ago. The report I read said that the home team sent a schedule to the visiting school and thought all had been arranged. I also read where by LHSAA rules the visiting team must sign off on the schedule which they did not, which is where all the confusion came in. Apparently this all came about because the principals of the two schools did not like each other.
I am actually glad you brought this up because I had forgotten about it. Why would the visiting team be allowed to change the schedule and give up their band time to the players? Doesn't the LHSAA say that both teams have to agree to the schedule? The home team left the field as scheduled while the visitors tried to gain an advantage and get extra warmup time. That was a crafty coach.
Still, none of what you said proves anything. You claim it means the Officials knew, but it they knew why didn't they take control. So nothing to you said in #1 is relevant.
2) the coach was restrained with handcuffs. We’re you standing there to KNOW that he wasn’t read his Miranda rights?. Secondly, you have to ask yourself if the LEO was working in the capacity as a cop, or an off duty security detail paid by the school? Either way, you have failed to show why they interjected themselves into a situation they clearly had no business in...which is why they were involved in the lawsuit. I was not standing there ....... but I do know someone who knows the details. The coach was not arrested, and neither was he charged with anything. Are you claiming the coach was arrested?
A LEO has the same authority whether he is on duty or off duty, and especially when he is in uniform. The LEO did not inject himself, he was instructed by the principal to have the coach leave the field.
3) Curtis didn’t play in the 5A football playoffs. So how can they be the 5A champion? And if you are going to use the “Team A beat Team B, so they would beat Team C” logic....then maybe we ought to steer talks away from athletics. There is a 5A Champion, & a Division I champion...if you want to add words & titles in your world to prop up your arguments, that’s fine. But I’m the real world, there is a 5A champion & a Division I champion...like it or not There has not been a 5A football champ since the split. The playoffs are split between 5A non-Select and 5A Select. Neither one can legitimately claim they are the 5A football champs. If you really lived in "the real world" you would know that, but you live in the public school world that wants to claim something without earning it.
4) lol; do you KNOW that the LEOs asked politely to move to another area?? Cuffing someone without probable cause is not polite. In fact, they were sued for it. You do realize that, correct? They were sued. If you believe them to have probable cause, please tell me what it was. I was told the LEO asked multiple times. I have heard that the coach made a comment that pushed the LEO to cuff him. A LEO can cuff you for his safety or your safety, while he is assessing a situation. You keep using the term probable cause; he was not being arrested or charged so why would he need probable cause?
Anyone can sue someone else and it has nothing to do with right or wrong. Did the coach win his lawsuit? No, it was settled, which happens every day of the week and government entities are more likely to settle than anyone else.It is cheaper to settle that to keep paying lawyers and court costs.
Your example of speeding is also a bad one, because it is based on probable cause(someone was speeding). There was no probable cause here. No, it is a good example of the point I was making because it points out that you can be guilty of breaking the law without being charged.
5) so you have charges of impropriety on the part of the LHSAA, yet you have no idea of the proper protocol in handling this situation. Sir, THAT is a pretty big problem of society as well. *****ing without having any alternate solutions. If I understood that gibberish I might respond to it.
1) there seems to be a slant to you favoring the home team’s position on this matter. The truth is, the home team cannot just “send a schedule” to the other school in the playoffs. Both parties must mutually agree on the proceedings. This is the fault of both schools. The fact that it mattered WHICH party of the visiting school was on the field during time allotted to them makes you wonder why it matters? So again, I’ll ask you- why does it matter?? If the time given to the visiting school was being used BY the visiting school, what inconvenience was presented to the home school? 2) if “you know someone” who had knowledge of the interaction between the LEOs & the HC, then they were either a LEO themselves or they received 2nd hand account....which would make your account 3 layers of heresay deep, at best. The HC was detained, at the very least. To detain a person, a LEO still has to have probable cause that a LAW was being broken. What law was being broken?? These are questions that you need to answer. What was their probable cause to walk up to that coach & remove him from the field in handcuffs? Lawfully...what was the probable cause?? 3) lol. You can attempt to skirt around the issue that the HC received a settlement on his suit, but you & I both know that was to lessen the damage to the perception, before they took a bigger hit-to the pocketbook & to their public perception. Also, I know that pennies have to be pinched in all government agencies, especially local/state level. So you’re telling me that they were in the right, but they paid the HC 25K....for what?? Tell you what- you believe you’re right on this issue, but you’ve already alluded to the fact that you’re in a vast minority on this. You wanna just pay me a couple grand for pain & suffering so that I won’t say you’re wrong anymore?? 4) if you can show me, picture or otherwise, the 5A Select trophy. I believe it would be the only one of its kind. It doesn’t exist-but the Division I championship trophy does. And I can also show you pictures of the 5A championship trophy if you need to see it. Your silly similes don’t really deter from the fact that there’s a 5A champion and a Division I champion. I can show you proof; can you show me otherwise?? 5) that’s a cool cop out. You gripe about how an association handles things, but when pressed to offer an alternative to how YOU would have handled it...you have none. Instead of owning up to such, you call the question “gibberish”. That’s cute, but uneffective in covering the fact that you’re all gripe with no solution
|
|
|
Post by BGH on Mar 14, 2019 11:30:02 GMT -6
1) there has been several years since this issue happened, so I went & read back up on it to make sure. If there was an arrangement where the visiting school wasn’t getting their allotted time, it was not made know during the coaches meeting with the officials...which both coaches would have been at. The visiting band was supposed to play, but gave their time slot to the football team so that they could continue with their normal pregame routine. At no point was the visiting school NOT supposed to be on the field at the stated time; just that it was originally given to the band & not the football team. You have to wonder why that matters?? So no; the officials knew of no arrangement where the field was void of the visiting school. You are right, it has been a long time ago. The report I read said that the home team sent a schedule to the visiting school and thought all had been arranged. I also read where by LHSAA rules the visiting team must sign off on the schedule which they did not, which is where all the confusion came in. Apparently this all came about because the principals of the two schools did not like each other.
I am actually glad you brought this up because I had forgotten about it. Why would the visiting team be allowed to change the schedule and give up their band time to the players? Doesn't the LHSAA say that both teams have to agree to the schedule? The home team left the field as scheduled while the visitors tried to gain an advantage and get extra warmup time. That was a crafty coach.
Still, none of what you said proves anything. You claim it means the Officials knew, but it they knew why didn't they take control. So nothing to you said in #1 is relevant.
2) the coach was restrained with handcuffs. We’re you standing there to KNOW that he wasn’t read his Miranda rights?. Secondly, you have to ask yourself if the LEO was working in the capacity as a cop, or an off duty security detail paid by the school? Either way, you have failed to show why they interjected themselves into a situation they clearly had no business in...which is why they were involved in the lawsuit. I was not standing there ....... but I do know someone who knows the details. The coach was not arrested, and neither was he charged with anything. Are you claiming the coach was arrested?
A LEO has the same authority whether he is on duty or off duty, and especially when he is in uniform. The LEO did not inject himself, he was instructed by the principal to have the coach leave the field.
3) Curtis didn’t play in the 5A football playoffs. So how can they be the 5A champion? And if you are going to use the “Team A beat Team B, so they would beat Team C” logic....then maybe we ought to steer talks away from athletics. There is a 5A Champion, & a Division I champion...if you want to add words & titles in your world to prop up your arguments, that’s fine. But I’m the real world, there is a 5A champion & a Division I champion...like it or not There has not been a 5A football champ since the split. The playoffs are split between 5A non-Select and 5A Select. Neither one can legitimately claim they are the 5A football champs. If you really lived in "the real world" you would know that, but you live in the public school world that wants to claim something without earning it.
4) lol; do you KNOW that the LEOs asked politely to move to another area?? Cuffing someone without probable cause is not polite. In fact, they were sued for it. You do realize that, correct? They were sued. If you believe them to have probable cause, please tell me what it was. I was told the LEO asked multiple times. I have heard that the coach made a comment that pushed the LEO to cuff him. A LEO can cuff you for his safety or your safety, while he is assessing a situation. You keep using the term probable cause; he was not being arrested or charged so why would he need probable cause?
Anyone can sue someone else and it has nothing to do with right or wrong. Did the coach win his lawsuit? No, it was settled, which happens every day of the week and government entities are more likely to settle than anyone else.It is cheaper to settle that to keep paying lawyers and court costs.
Your example of speeding is also a bad one, because it is based on probable cause(someone was speeding). There was no probable cause here. No, it is a good example of the point I was making because it points out that you can be guilty of breaking the law without being charged.
5) so you have charges of impropriety on the part of the LHSAA, yet you have no idea of the proper protocol in handling this situation. Sir, THAT is a pretty big problem of society as well. *****ing without having any alternate solutions. If I understood that gibberish I might respond to it.
1) there seems to be a slant to you favoring the home team’s position on this matter. The truth is, the home team cannot just “send a schedule” to the other school in the playoffs. Both parties must mutually agree on the proceedings. This is the fault of both schools. The fact that it mattered WHICH party of the visiting school was on the field during time allotted to them makes you wonder why it matters? So again, I’ll ask you- why does it matter?? If the time given to the visiting school was being used BY the visiting school, what inconvenience was presented to the home school? 2) if “you know someone” who had knowledge of the interaction between the LEOs & the HC, then they were either a LEO themselves or they received 2nd hand account....which would make your account 3 layers of heresay deep, at best. The HC was detained, at the very least. To detain a person, a LEO still has to have probable cause that a LAW was being broken. What law was being broken?? These are questions that you need to answer. What was their probable cause to walk up to that coach & remove him from the field in handcuffs? Lawfully...what was the probable cause?? 3) lol. You can attempt to skirt around the issue that the HC received a settlement on his suit, but you & I both know that was to lessen the damage to the perception, before they took a bigger hit-to the pocketbook & to their public perception. Also, I know that pennies have to be pinched in all government agencies, especially local/state level. So you’re telling me that they were in the right, but they paid the HC 25K....for what?? Tell you what- you believe you’re right on this issue, but you’ve already alluded to the fact that you’re in a vast minority on this. You wanna just pay me a couple grand for pain & suffering so that I won’t say you’re wrong anymore?? 4) if you can show me, picture or otherwise, the 5A Select trophy. I believe it would be the only one of its kind. It doesn’t exist-but the Division I championship trophy does. And I can also show you pictures of the 5A championship trophy if you need to see it. Your silly similes don’t really deter from the fact that there’s a 5A champion and a Division I champion. I can show you proof; can you show me otherwise?? 5) that’s a cool cop out. You gripe about how an association handles things, but when pressed to offer an alternative to how YOU would have handled it...you have none. Instead of owning up to such, you call the question “gibberish”. That’s cute, but uneffective in covering the fact that you’re all gripe with no solution
1) there seems to be a slant to you favoring the home team’s position on this matter. The truth is, the home team cannot just “send a schedule” to the other school in the playoffs. Both parties must mutually agree on the proceedings. This is the fault of both schools. The fact that it mattered WHICH party of the visiting school was on the field during time allotted to them makes you wonder why it matters? So again, I’ll ask you- why does it matter?? If the time given to the visiting school was being used BY the visiting school, what inconvenience was presented to the home school? We are mostly in agreement here, about both schools being at fault. Just so you know I can't stand Parkway (mostly because I never liked their coach, and I have heard their principal was a nut job). On the other hand, YOU can't have it both ways. If you think Parkway was wrong for not following a mutually approved schedule, how can you turn around and say it was OK for Live Oak to change the schedule.
2) if “you know someone” who had knowledge of the interaction between the LEOs & the HC, then they were either a LEO themselves or they received 2nd hand account....which would make your account 3 layers of heresay deep, at best. The HC was detained, at the very least. To detain a person, a LEO still has to have probable cause that a LAW was being broken. What law was being broken?? These are questions that you need to answer. What was their probable cause to walk up to that coach & remove him from the field in handcuffs? Lawfully...what was the probable cause?? Unless we are both getting our info from the coach or the police officer, it is all heresay. and no, the Coach was not detained. You keep using detained and probable cause as if you know what thy mean.
3) lol. You can attempt to skirt around the issue that the HC received a settlement on his suit, but you & I both know that was to lessen the damage to the perception, before they took a bigger hit-to the pocketbook & to their public perception. Also, I know that pennies have to be pinched in all government agencies, especially local/state level. So you’re telling me that they were in the right, but they paid the HC 25K....for what?? Tell you what- you believe you’re right on this issue, but you’ve already alluded to the fact that you’re in a vast minority on this. You wanna just pay me a couple grand for pain & suffering so that I won’t say you’re wrong anymore?? You need to pay more attentions to your police depts, jails, schools, and state, municipal, and parish governments; they are ALWAYS settling lawsuits. If the Coach was so adamant the he was in the right, then why did he accept a settlement?
If it were costing me money to keep this discussion going I would have to decide whether it was worth it. But it costs me nothing to school people on this board. 4) if you can show me, picture or otherwise, the 5A Select trophy. I believe it would be the only one of its kind. It doesn’t exist-but the Division I championship trophy does. And I can also show you pictures of the 5A championship trophy if you need to see it. Your silly similes don’t really deter from the fact that there’s a 5A champion and a Division I champion. I can show you proof; can you show me otherwise?? I predicted years ago that it would not be long before the non-select schools started calling themselves the best. It is easy to do once you get rid of the competition. Calling yourselves the 5A champs or the best team in 5A is strictly incorrect because the Division I Playoff teams are 5A too.
5) that’s a cool cop out. You gripe about how an association handles things, but when pressed to offer an alternative to how YOU would have handled it...you have none. Instead of owning up to such, you call the question “gibberish”. That’s cute, but uneffective in covering the fact that you’re all gripe with no solution Here is what you posted : "so you have charges of impropriety on the part of the LHSAA, yet you have no idea of the proper protocol in handling this situation. Sir, THAT is a pretty big problem of society as well. *****ing without having any alternate solutions". I still think it is gibberish. Is there a question in there? I have no idea what the asterisks are for.
I freely give advice to the LHSAA all the time ..... they never listen to me. I have already pointed out that I saw no need to punish anyone in this incident. They should have set all the parties down and used it as a teaching moment.
|
|
|
Post by warpig on Mar 14, 2019 15:41:04 GMT -6
1) there seems to be a slant to you favoring the home team’s position on this matter. The truth is, the home team cannot just “send a schedule” to the other school in the playoffs. Both parties must mutually agree on the proceedings. This is the fault of both schools. The fact that it mattered WHICH party of the visiting school was on the field during time allotted to them makes you wonder why it matters? So again, I’ll ask you- why does it matter?? If the time given to the visiting school was being used BY the visiting school, what inconvenience was presented to the home school? 2) if “you know someone” who had knowledge of the interaction between the LEOs & the HC, then they were either a LEO themselves or they received 2nd hand account....which would make your account 3 layers of heresay deep, at best. The HC was detained, at the very least. To detain a person, a LEO still has to have probable cause that a LAW was being broken. What law was being broken?? These are questions that you need to answer. What was their probable cause to walk up to that coach & remove him from the field in handcuffs? Lawfully...what was the probable cause?? 3) lol. You can attempt to skirt around the issue that the HC received a settlement on his suit, but you & I both know that was to lessen the damage to the perception, before they took a bigger hit-to the pocketbook & to their public perception. Also, I know that pennies have to be pinched in all government agencies, especially local/state level. So you’re telling me that they were in the right, but they paid the HC 25K....for what?? Tell you what- you believe you’re right on this issue, but you’ve already alluded to the fact that you’re in a vast minority on this. You wanna just pay me a couple grand for pain & suffering so that I won’t say you’re wrong anymore?? 4) if you can show me, picture or otherwise, the 5A Select trophy. I believe it would be the only one of its kind. It doesn’t exist-but the Division I championship trophy does. And I can also show you pictures of the 5A championship trophy if you need to see it. Your silly similes don’t really deter from the fact that there’s a 5A champion and a Division I champion. I can show you proof; can you show me otherwise?? 5) that’s a cool cop out. You gripe about how an association handles things, but when pressed to offer an alternative to how YOU would have handled it...you have none. Instead of owning up to such, you call the question “gibberish”. That’s cute, but uneffective in covering the fact that you’re all gripe with no solution
1) there seems to be a slant to you favoring the home team’s position on this matter. The truth is, the home team cannot just “send a schedule” to the other school in the playoffs. Both parties must mutually agree on the proceedings. This is the fault of both schools. The fact that it mattered WHICH party of the visiting school was on the field during time allotted to them makes you wonder why it matters? So again, I’ll ask you- why does it matter?? If the time given to the visiting school was being used BY the visiting school, what inconvenience was presented to the home school? We are mostly in agreement here, about both schools being at fault. Just so you know I can't stand Parkway (mostly because I never liked their coach, and I have heard their principal was a nut job). On the other hand, YOU can't have it both ways. If you think Parkway was wrong for not following a mutually approved schedule, how can you turn around and say it was OK for Live Oak to change the schedule.
2) if “you know someone” who had knowledge of the interaction between the LEOs & the HC, then they were either a LEO themselves or they received 2nd hand account....which would make your account 3 layers of heresay deep, at best. The HC was detained, at the very least. To detain a person, a LEO still has to have probable cause that a LAW was being broken. What law was being broken?? These are questions that you need to answer. What was their probable cause to walk up to that coach & remove him from the field in handcuffs? Lawfully...what was the probable cause?? Unless we are both getting our info from the coach or the police officer, it is all heresay. and no, the Coach was not detained. You keep using detained and probable cause as if you know what thy mean.
3) lol. You can attempt to skirt around the issue that the HC received a settlement on his suit, but you & I both know that was to lessen the damage to the perception, before they took a bigger hit-to the pocketbook & to their public perception. Also, I know that pennies have to be pinched in all government agencies, especially local/state level. So you’re telling me that they were in the right, but they paid the HC 25K....for what?? Tell you what- you believe you’re right on this issue, but you’ve already alluded to the fact that you’re in a vast minority on this. You wanna just pay me a couple grand for pain & suffering so that I won’t say you’re wrong anymore?? You need to pay more attentions to your police depts, jails, schools, and state, municipal, and parish governments; they are ALWAYS settling lawsuits. If the Coach was so adamant the he was in the right, then why did he accept a settlement?
If it were costing me money to keep this discussion going I would have to decide whether it was worth it. But it costs me nothing to school people on this board. 4) if you can show me, picture or otherwise, the 5A Select trophy. I believe it would be the only one of its kind. It doesn’t exist-but the Division I championship trophy does. And I can also show you pictures of the 5A championship trophy if you need to see it. Your silly similes don’t really deter from the fact that there’s a 5A champion and a Division I champion. I can show you proof; can you show me otherwise?? I predicted years ago that it would not be long before the non-select schools started calling themselves the best. It is easy to do once you get rid of the competition. Calling yourselves the 5A champs or the best team in 5A is strictly incorrect because the Division I Playoff teams are 5A too.
5) that’s a cool cop out. You gripe about how an association handles things, but when pressed to offer an alternative to how YOU would have handled it...you have none. Instead of owning up to such, you call the question “gibberish”. That’s cute, but uneffective in covering the fact that you’re all gripe with no solution Here is what you posted : "so you have charges of impropriety on the part of the LHSAA, yet you have no idea of the proper protocol in handling this situation. Sir, THAT is a pretty big problem of society as well. *****ing without having any alternate solutions". I still think it is gibberish. Is there a question in there? I have no idea what the asterisks are for.
I freely give advice to the LHSAA all the time ..... they never listen to me. I have already pointed out that I saw no need to punish anyone in this incident. They should have set all the parties down and used it as a teaching moment.
Live Oak didn’t change the schedule. Live Oak was on the field when Live Oak had allotted time on the field. It doesn’t matter the group; Live Oak has that time allotted to them. The HC was DETAINED. When you are put in cuffs, you are either detained or arrested. It is one or another. It can’t be anything else when handcuffs are used, as much as you would like it to be. And to detain, there must be probable cause. Know the law before you speak it. So now, what was probable cause?? I never said that a team was the best in 5A. I stated that who was the 5A champs. And I invited you to show me a 5A Select trophy. I assume you cannot. However, I can show you a Division I trophy if you need to see it. Tell me why a school board, police department would settle & give away money that they don’t really have to spare?? If they had it to spare, then why not see it through, if they were in the right?? You have failed again to offer an alternate solution to an example that you referenced. Is that to say that you have no alternate solutions??
|
|
|
Post by BGH on Mar 15, 2019 10:35:27 GMT -6
Live Oak didn’t change the schedule. Live Oak was on the field when Live Oak had allotted time on the field. It doesn’t matter the group; Live Oak has that time allotted to them. The HC was DETAINED. When you are put in cuffs, you are either detained or arrested. It is one or another. It can’t be anything else when handcuffs are used, as much as you would like it to be. And to detain, there must be probable cause. Know the law before you speak it. So now, what was probable cause?? I never said that a team was the best in 5A. I stated that who was the 5A champs. And I invited you to show me a 5A Select trophy. I assume you cannot. However, I can show you a Division I trophy if you need to see it. Tell me why a school board, police department would settle & give away money that they don’t really have to spare?? If they had it to spare, then why not see it through, if they were in the right?? You have failed again to offer an alternate solution to an example that you referenced. Is that to say that you have no alternate solutions??
It is no secret that I will argue a point endlessly, but you just keep saying the same thing over and over. That is not a real discussion and at some point it becomes fruitless, but I will hang in here a while.
Live Oak didn’t change the schedule. Live Oak was on the field when Live Oak had allotted time on the field. It doesn’t matter the group; Live Oak has that time allotted to them. Yes they did change the schedule ..... their band was scheduled to be on the field. The time was allotted to the band, not for warmups. I have heard people on this board say that it was not fair for Live Oak not to have their complete warm-up period. The reality was that they did get their complete warm-up period, plus it appears they were trying to squeeze in some more that Parkway didn't get. Do you suppose LIve Oak told Parkway they could could go ahead and stay on the field and keep warming up too?
The HC was DETAINED. When you are put in cuffs, you are either detained or arrested. It is one or another. It can’t be anything else when handcuffs are used, as much as you would like it to be. And to detain, there must be probable cause. Know the law before you speak it. So now, what was probable cause?? I have already answered this. A LEO can can handcuff a person if they feel it is necessary while they are assessing a situation. The coach was not arrested or detained, he was led off the field. I am not sure whether I am amused or insulted by someone like you telling me "Know the law before you speak it". I think I should feel insulted ......... but I can't quit laughing.
I never said that a team was the best in 5A. I stated that who was the 5A champs. And I invited you to show me a 5A Select trophy. I assume you cannot. However, I can show you a Division I trophy if you need to see it. Here is what was actually said "if I state that Zachary is the champion of 5A football this year, that can be read as factual", and you got your panties in a wad when I pointed out that it was not factual. I have seen both 5A and Division I Championship trophies. The teams that won both trophies were 5A teams so you cannot factually say that one of those teams was "the champion of 5A football this year", and anytime someone does I will call them on it.
Tell me why a school board, police department would settle & give away money that they don’t really have to spare?? If they had it to spare, then why not see it through, if they were in the right?? You seem to be under the misguided impression that the person in the right always wins a lawsuit. No one knows who will win, which is why people settle a lawsuit in order to cut potential costs of legal fee. Of course this coach used the age old ploy that all he wanted was an apology. If he had gotten an apology he would have claimed they admitted guilt and demanded more money.
You have failed again to offer an alternate solution to an example that you referenced. Is that to say that you have no alternate solutions??
Not true, I have offered an alternative.
|
|
|
Post by warpig on Mar 20, 2019 10:01:53 GMT -6
1) the schedule wasn’t changed. live Oak had the field, & their band had deferred to their football team. I’m not sure where it caused an uproar, because it changed NOTHING about the pregame schedule. And before you start the “Parkway didn’t get all their warmup time” talk, please take into account that they had already moved their warmups onto a nearby field; I believe it was the baseball field. So your point holds zero weight.
2) you DID answer that a LEO can handcuff someone without detaining or arresting them. However, that is not the case. When the candcuffs come out, you are either detaining or arresting someone. Arrests come with probable cause, which you have failed to show, so he must have been detained. Either that, or the officer’s handcuffed the HC because they feared that their personal safety warranted it. And again, I ask....what made them reach this decision?? What actions did the coach exhibit that made them fear for their safety?? Did he threaten them?? If none of these occurred, then part of the lawsuit probably dealt with some unlawful restraint, which would require the LEOs to justify their actions of restraint. They apparently couldn’t, and it appears you are having a hard time propping that up as well.
3) yes, it is factual. Zachary is the 5A state champions. That is what the tournament bracket that they competed in was playing for. John Curtis had a great year. I want to take nothing away from their accomplishments; they won the Division I title. That is because the tournament bracket that they competed in was the Division I playoffs. You are letting your own personal opinions cloud facts, and you look silly for it.
4) lol...you’re “going around by Laura’s house” to talk around the obvious; that the Coach had several different people by the cojones & they wanted to lessen their losses. Your misguided impression is that even if a settlement doesn’t include an admission of guilt, that the exchange of a large sum of money forked over by a school, LEA, or individual doesn’t point to wrongdoing.
5) I have asked for your alternate solution several times. You said that you have offered it. I don’t see anywhere that you have given your account as to how to properly handle the proceedings & their aftermath. You deal in trying to muddle conversation with hyperboles & misquoted law to try to prop up your statement. Your refusal to admit or even believe that the LEOs COULD HAVE acted in a way that could be deemed as unconstitutional is amazing to me.
|
|
|
Post by BGH on Mar 20, 2019 16:24:22 GMT -6
1) the schedule wasn’t changed. live Oak had the field, & their band had deferred to their football team. I’m not sure where it caused an uproar, because it changed NOTHING about the pregame schedule. And before you start the “Parkway didn’t get all their warmup time” talk, please take into account that they had already moved their warmups onto a nearby field; I believe it was the baseball field. So your point holds zero weight. 2) you DID answer that a LEO can handcuff someone without detaining or arresting them. However, that is not the case. When the candcuffs come out, you are either detaining or arresting someone. Arrests come with probable cause, which you have failed to show, so he must have been detained. Either that, or the officer’s handcuffed the HC because they feared that their personal safety warranted it. And again, I ask....what made them reach this decision?? What actions did the coach exhibit that made them fear for their safety?? Did he threaten them?? If none of these occurred, then part of the lawsuit probably dealt with some unlawful restraint, which would require the LEOs to justify their actions of restraint. They apparently couldn’t, and it appears you are having a hard time propping that up as well. 3) yes, it is factual. Zachary is the 5A state champions. That is what the tournament bracket that they competed in was playing for. John Curtis had a great year. I want to take nothing away from their accomplishments; they won the Division I title. That is because the tournament bracket that they competed in was the Division I playoffs. You are letting your own personal opinions cloud facts, and you look silly for it. 4) lol...you’re “going around by Laura’s house” to talk around the obvious; that the Coach had several different people by the cojones & they wanted to lessen their losses. Your misguided impression is that even if a settlement doesn’t include an admission of guilt, that the exchange of a large sum of money forked over by a school, LEA, or individual doesn’t point to wrongdoing. 5) I have asked for your alternate solution several times. You said that you have offered it. I don’t see anywhere that you have given your account as to how to properly handle the proceedings & their aftermath. You deal in trying to muddle conversation with hyperboles & misquoted law to try to prop up your statement. Your refusal to admit or even believe that the LEOs COULD HAVE acted in a way that could be deemed as unconstitutional is amazing to me.
Are you really going to just keep saying the same thing over and over?
1) the schedule wasn’t changed. live Oak had the field, & their band had deferred to their football team. I’m not sure where it caused an uproar, because it changed NOTHING about the pregame schedule. And before you start the “Parkway didn’t get all their warmup time” talk, please take into account that they had already moved their warmups onto a nearby field; I believe it was the baseball field. So your point holds zero weight. The Live Oak band was scheduled to be on the field, which is why Parkway left the field. YOU SAID that they gave their time to the LIve Oak football team. No matter what universe you live in ....... THAT IS CHANGING THE SCHEDULE.
2) you DID answer that a LEO can handcuff someone without detaining or arresting them. However, that is not the case. When the candcuffs come out, you are either detaining or arresting someone. Arrests come with probable cause, which you have failed to show, so he must have been detained. Either that, or the officer’s handcuffed the HC because they feared that their personal safety warranted it. And again, I ask....what made them reach this decision?? What actions did the coach exhibit that made them fear for their safety?? Did he threaten them?? If none of these occurred, then part of the lawsuit probably dealt with some unlawful restraint, which would require the LEOs to justify their actions of restraint. They apparently couldn’t, and it appears you are having a hard time propping that up as well. He was not ARRESTED. If he were detained or placed in custody he would have been taken somewhere for further investigation. All they did was escort him off the field and un-cuff him. Most LEOs will tell you that the coach should not have been cuffed unless he became a danger.
3) yes, it is factual. Zachary is the 5A state champions. That is what the tournament bracket that they competed in was playing for. John Curtis had a great year. I want to take nothing away from their accomplishments; they won the Division I title. That is because the tournament bracket that they competed in was the Division I playoffs. You are letting your own personal opinions cloud facts, and you look silly for it. They are the 5A non-Select state playoff champs. I only argue this because it irritates you. Still, how can you claim to be 5A champs if you exclude the best 5A teams.
4) lol...you’re “going around by Laura’s house” to talk around the obvious; that the Coach had several different people by the cojones & they wanted to lessen their losses. Your misguided impression is that even if a settlement doesn’t include an admission of guilt, that the exchange of a large sum of money forked over by a school, LEA, or individual doesn’t point to wrongdoing. The coach claimed that all he wanted was an apology. That would have been an easy thing to do if lawyers weren't involved.
5) I have asked for your alternate solution several times. You said that you have offered it. I don’t see anywhere that you have given your account as to how to properly handle the proceedings & their aftermath. You deal in trying to muddle conversation with hyperboles & misquoted law to try to prop up your statement. Your refusal to admit or even believe that the LEOs COULD HAVE acted in a way that could be deemed as unconstitutional is amazing to me
I have already pointed out a couple of times that I saw no need to punish anyone in this incident. They should have set all the parties down and used it as a teaching moment. The LHSAA doesn't operate that way ...... they ALWAYS point the finger at someone besides themselves.
|
|
|
Post by warpig on Mar 21, 2019 9:27:40 GMT -6
1) the schedule wasn’t changed. live Oak had the field, & their band had deferred to their football team. I’m not sure where it caused an uproar, because it changed NOTHING about the pregame schedule. And before you start the “Parkway didn’t get all their warmup time” talk, please take into account that they had already moved their warmups onto a nearby field; I believe it was the baseball field. So your point holds zero weight. 2) you DID answer that a LEO can handcuff someone without detaining or arresting them. However, that is not the case. When the candcuffs come out, you are either detaining or arresting someone. Arrests come with probable cause, which you have failed to show, so he must have been detained. Either that, or the officer’s handcuffed the HC because they feared that their personal safety warranted it. And again, I ask....what made them reach this decision?? What actions did the coach exhibit that made them fear for their safety?? Did he threaten them?? If none of these occurred, then part of the lawsuit probably dealt with some unlawful restraint, which would require the LEOs to justify their actions of restraint. They apparently couldn’t, and it appears you are having a hard time propping that up as well. 3) yes, it is factual. Zachary is the 5A state champions. That is what the tournament bracket that they competed in was playing for. John Curtis had a great year. I want to take nothing away from their accomplishments; they won the Division I title. That is because the tournament bracket that they competed in was the Division I playoffs. You are letting your own personal opinions cloud facts, and you look silly for it. 4) lol...you’re “going around by Laura’s house” to talk around the obvious; that the Coach had several different people by the cojones & they wanted to lessen their losses. Your misguided impression is that even if a settlement doesn’t include an admission of guilt, that the exchange of a large sum of money forked over by a school, LEA, or individual doesn’t point to wrongdoing. 5) I have asked for your alternate solution several times. You said that you have offered it. I don’t see anywhere that you have given your account as to how to properly handle the proceedings & their aftermath. You deal in trying to muddle conversation with hyperboles & misquoted law to try to prop up your statement. Your refusal to admit or even believe that the LEOs COULD HAVE acted in a way that could be deemed as unconstitutional is amazing to me.
Are you really going to just keep saying the same thing over and over?
1) the schedule wasn’t changed. live Oak had the field, & their band had deferred to their football team. I’m not sure where it caused an uproar, because it changed NOTHING about the pregame schedule. And before you start the “Parkway didn’t get all their warmup time” talk, please take into account that they had already moved their warmups onto a nearby field; I believe it was the baseball field. So your point holds zero weight. The Live Oak band was scheduled to be on the field, which is why Parkway left the field. YOU SAID that they gave their time to the LIve Oak football team. No matter what universe you live in ....... THAT IS CHANGING THE SCHEDULE.
2) you DID answer that a LEO can handcuff someone without detaining or arresting them. However, that is not the case. When the candcuffs come out, you are either detaining or arresting someone. Arrests come with probable cause, which you have failed to show, so he must have been detained. Either that, or the officer’s handcuffed the HC because they feared that their personal safety warranted it. And again, I ask....what made them reach this decision?? What actions did the coach exhibit that made them fear for their safety?? Did he threaten them?? If none of these occurred, then part of the lawsuit probably dealt with some unlawful restraint, which would require the LEOs to justify their actions of restraint. They apparently couldn’t, and it appears you are having a hard time propping that up as well. He was not ARRESTED. If he were detained or placed in custody he would have been taken somewhere for further investigation. All they did was escort him off the field and un-cuff him. Most LEOs will tell you that the coach should not have been cuffed unless he became a danger.
3) yes, it is factual. Zachary is the 5A state champions. That is what the tournament bracket that they competed in was playing for. John Curtis had a great year. I want to take nothing away from their accomplishments; they won the Division I title. That is because the tournament bracket that they competed in was the Division I playoffs. You are letting your own personal opinions cloud facts, and you look silly for it. They are the 5A non-Select state playoff champs. I only argue this because it irritates you. Still, how can you claim to be 5A champs if you exclude the best 5A teams.
4) lol...you’re “going around by Laura’s house” to talk around the obvious; that the Coach had several different people by the cojones & they wanted to lessen their losses. Your misguided impression is that even if a settlement doesn’t include an admission of guilt, that the exchange of a large sum of money forked over by a school, LEA, or individual doesn’t point to wrongdoing. The coach claimed that all he wanted was an apology. That would have been an easy thing to do if lawyers weren't involved.
5) I have asked for your alternate solution several times. You said that you have offered it. I don’t see anywhere that you have given your account as to how to properly handle the proceedings & their aftermath. You deal in trying to muddle conversation with hyperboles & misquoted law to try to prop up your statement. Your refusal to admit or even believe that the LEOs COULD HAVE acted in a way that could be deemed as unconstitutional is amazing to me
I have already pointed out a couple of times that I saw no need to punish anyone in this incident. They should have set all the parties down and used it as a teaching moment. The LHSAA doesn't operate that way ...... they ALWAYS point the finger at someone besides themselves.
1. The SCHEDULE for the pregame events did not change; as the predetermined timeline was being followed. Now the ITENARARY changed...maybe that’s what you were looking to say. Even still, the Parkway team had moved to an alternate site to continue their warm ups(a fact that you hoped I would forget or not bring up, judging by your previous post). There was no major changes that affected anything in the way of the actual game happening. My question...why was this a big deal? 2. To be clear-to detain someone is to restrain them. It doesn’t matter if they take a step or go across town. When they cuffed him, they detained him, apparently wrongfully. It doesn’t matter when they took the cuffs off, or where they took them off at. If they werent arresting him, and they didn’t feel in danger for their personal safety, then he shouldn’t have been cuffed. You alluded to the fact that other LEOs think they shouldn’t have cuffed him. I agree with this assessment. I don’t think there was any cause for restraint. 3) Ignorance doesn’t irritate me; it amuses me. First....there is a 5A champion & a Division I champion. Your childlike nicknames for what you perceive the leagues to be are laughable at best. Your belittling of high school athlete’s accomplishments is pitiful at best. Lastly, your opinion that the best teams in 5A classification are all in the Select bracket is an unfounded opinion, based solely on your disdain for the LHSAA. In short...you can’t prove a single thing you have stated on this particular topic. 4) the principal wasn’t even apologetic when she went before the LHSAA hearing. I don’t think I ever heard of an apology forthcoming after Parkway won the game....when exactly was said apology going to come?? But not to worry....Benjamin Franklin soothed the coach’s aingst in this matter. Ironic thing is- the way this particular matter was resolved taught much more of a lesson than waiting around for an empty apology that wasn’t heartfelt anyway. 5) “teachable moment”?!? Lol...man, somebody was restrained without apparent cause. How should a finger be pointed at the LHSAA?? Did they direct the cops?? Did they not have protocol in place for handling pregame activities?? Were officials not there?? I find it hard to fathom that you can find a way to point the finger back at the LHSAA on this matter, even seeing your obvious dislike for the organization. I now see more clearly just what kind of fan you are. You spoke earlier in your thread of the lesson taught by the coach refusing to leave the field. Tell me, sir....what do you think the lesson is when someone does wrong & is not reprimanded??
|
|
|
Post by BGH on Mar 21, 2019 20:05:11 GMT -6
Are you really going to just keep saying the same thing over and over? 1. The SCHEDULE for the pregame events did not change; as the predetermined timeline was being followed. Now the ITENARARY changed...maybe that’s what you were looking to say. Even still, the Parkway team had moved to an alternate site to continue their warm ups(a fact that you hoped I would forget or not bring up, judging by your previous post). There was no major changes that affected anything in the way of the actual game happening. My question...why was this a big deal? 2. To be clear-to detain someone is to restrain them. It doesn’t matter if they take a step or go across town. When they cuffed him, they detained him, apparently wrongfully. It doesn’t matter when they took the cuffs off, or where they took them off at. If they werent arresting him, and they didn’t feel in danger for their personal safety, then he shouldn’t have been cuffed. You alluded to the fact that other LEOs think they shouldn’t have cuffed him. I agree with this assessment. I don’t think there was any cause for restraint. 3) Ignorance doesn’t irritate me; it amuses me. First....there is a 5A champion & a Division I champion. Your childlike nicknames for what you perceive the leagues to be are laughable at best. Your belittling of high school athlete’s accomplishments is pitiful at best. Lastly, your opinion that the best teams in 5A classification are all in the Select bracket is an unfounded opinion, based solely on your disdain for the LHSAA. In short...you can’t prove a single thing you have stated on this particular topic. 4) the principal wasn’t even apologetic when she went before the LHSAA hearing. I don’t think I ever heard of an apology forthcoming after Parkway won the game....when exactly was said apology going to come?? But not to worry....Benjamin Franklin soothed the coach’s aingst in this matter. Ironic thing is- the way this particular matter was resolved taught much more of a lesson than waiting around for an empty apology that wasn’t heartfelt anyway. 5) “teachable moment”?!? Lol...man, somebody was restrained without apparent cause. How should a finger be pointed at the LHSAA?? Did they direct the cops?? Did they not have protocol in place for handling pregame activities?? Were officials not there?? I find it hard to fathom that you can find a way to point the finger back at the LHSAA on this matter, even seeing your obvious dislike for the organization. I now see more clearly just what kind of fan you are. You spoke earlier in your thread of the lesson taught by the coach refusing to leave the field. Tell me, sir....what do you think the lesson is when someone does wrong & is not reprimanded??
You are as big a glutten for punishment as IAMRAY. Wait a minute ..... don't tell me you are ........
1. The SCHEDULE for the pregame events did not change; as the predetermined timeline was being followed.
Who was supposed to be on the field according to the schedule? Let me answer that for you, it was the visiting Band! Who was actually on the the field at the time the visiting band was SCHEDULED to be on the field? I can answer that one too, it was the visiting Football Team! Let me add all that up for you, it equals SCHEDULE CHANGE!
Now the ITENARARY changed...maybe that’s what you were looking to say.
Why would I be looking for an Itinerary? You are the one tryng to distort words. Anyway, an itinerary is just a more defined schedule, for example the bands itinerary could have been something like this: (1) their first number was going to be "I fought the Law" (2) their second number would be "I shot the Sheriff" (3) their last number was going to be "I fight Authority".
Even still, the Parkway team had moved to an alternate site to continue their warm ups(a fact that you hoped I would forget or not bring up, judging by your previous post).
Why would I hope you forget something that I brought up in the first place?
There was no major changes that affected anything in the way of the actual game happening. My question...why was this a big deal? Do you have fever with those fits? Nothing you say ever makes any sense! If it was no "big deal", then why in the world was the Coach defying the police officer to begin with, and why are you arguing about this?.
2. To be clear-to detain someone is to restrain them. It doesn’t matter if they take a step or go across town. When they cuffed him, they detained him, apparently wrongfully. It doesn’t matter when they took the cuffs off, or where they took them off at. If they werent arresting him, and they didn’t feel in danger for their personal safety, then he shouldn’t have been cuffed. You alluded to the fact that other LEOs think they shouldn’t have cuffed him. I agree with this assessment. I don’t think there was any cause for restraint. For the umpteenth time ...... he was not arrested. How do you know there was no cause for being restrained, were you there? Suppose the coach said the only way you are going to get me off this field is to drag me or cuff me?
3) Ignorance doesn’t irritate me; it amuses me. First....there is a 5A champion & a Division I champion. Your childlike nicknames for what you perceive the leagues to be are laughable at best. Your belittling of high school athlete’s accomplishments is pitiful at best. Lastly, your opinion that the best teams in 5A classification are all in the Select bracket is an unfounded opinion, based solely on your disdain for the LHSAA. In short...you can’t prove a single thing you have stated on this particular topic. You claim I am belittling a high school athlete's accomplishments, yet aren't you doing the same thing to the John Curtis athletes by claiming that Zachary is the 5A football champs without qualifying it by saying non-select. Curtis has just as much right to say they were the best team in 5A. As the season is being played there are no separate standings for 5A and Division I because they are all 5A teams, and neither are there separate rankings by the LSWA or any other sports media.
4) the principal wasn’t even apologetic when she went before the LHSAA hearing. I don’t think I ever heard of an apology forthcoming after Parkway won the game....when exactly was said apology going to come?? But not to worry....Benjamin Franklin soothed the coach’s aingst in this matter. Ironic thing is- the way this particular matter was resolved taught much more of a lesson than waiting around for an empty apology that wasn’t heartfelt anyway. I hope that made you feel good typing that. I can't see where it has anything to do with anything that I have said.
5) You spoke earlier in your thread of the lesson taught by the coach refusing to leave the field. Tell me, sir....what do you think the lesson is when someone does wrong & is not reprimanded??
Apparently the correct answer is that you get rewarded with lots of money. Wouldn't it be ironic if that coach really needs an LEO one day and they tell him they can't get involved because they might get sued.
|
|
|
Post by warpig on Apr 2, 2019 22:10:14 GMT -6
1. The SCHEDULE for the pregame events did not change; as the predetermined timeline was being followed. Now the ITENARARY changed...maybe that’s what you were looking to say. Even still, the Parkway team had moved to an alternate site to continue their warm ups(a fact that you hoped I would forget or not bring up, judging by your previous post). There was no major changes that affected anything in the way of the actual game happening. My question...why was this a big deal? 2. To be clear-to detain someone is to restrain them. It doesn’t matter if they take a step or go across town. When they cuffed him, they detained him, apparently wrongfully. It doesn’t matter when they took the cuffs off, or where they took them off at. If they werent arresting him, and they didn’t feel in danger for their personal safety, then he shouldn’t have been cuffed. You alluded to the fact that other LEOs think they shouldn’t have cuffed him. I agree with this assessment. I don’t think there was any cause for restraint. 3) Ignorance doesn’t irritate me; it amuses me. First....there is a 5A champion & a Division I champion. Your childlike nicknames for what you perceive the leagues to be are laughable at best. Your belittling of high school athlete’s accomplishments is pitiful at best. Lastly, your opinion that the best teams in 5A classification are all in the Select bracket is an unfounded opinion, based solely on your disdain for the LHSAA. In short...you can’t prove a single thing you have stated on this particular topic. 4) the principal wasn’t even apologetic when she went before the LHSAA hearing. I don’t think I ever heard of an apology forthcoming after Parkway won the game....when exactly was said apology going to come?? But not to worry....Benjamin Franklin soothed the coach’s aingst in this matter. Ironic thing is- the way this particular matter was resolved taught much more of a lesson than waiting around for an empty apology that wasn’t heartfelt anyway. 5) “teachable moment”?!? Lol...man, somebody was restrained without apparent cause. How should a finger be pointed at the LHSAA?? Did they direct the cops?? Did they not have protocol in place for handling pregame activities?? Were officials not there?? I find it hard to fathom that you can find a way to point the finger back at the LHSAA on this matter, even seeing your obvious dislike for the organization. I now see more clearly just what kind of fan you are. You spoke earlier in your thread of the lesson taught by the coach refusing to leave the field. Tell me, sir....what do you think the lesson is when someone does wrong & is not reprimanded??
You are as big a glutten for punishment as IAMRAY. Wait a minute ..... don't tell me you are ........
1. The SCHEDULE for the pregame events did not change; as the predetermined timeline was being followed.
Who was supposed to be on the field according to the schedule? Let me answer that for you, it was the visiting Band! Who was actually on the the field at the time the visiting band was SCHEDULED to be on the field? I can answer that one too, it was the visiting Football Team! Let me add all that up for you, it equals SCHEDULE CHANGE!
Now the ITENARARY changed...maybe that’s what you were looking to say.
Why would I be looking for an Itinerary? You are the one tryng to distort words. Anyway, an itinerary is just a more defined schedule, for example the bands itinerary could have been something like this: (1) their first number was going to be "I fought the Law" (2) their second number would be "I shot the Sheriff" (3) their last number was going to be "I fight Authority".
Even still, the Parkway team had moved to an alternate site to continue their warm ups(a fact that you hoped I would forget or not bring up, judging by your previous post).
Why would I hope you forget something that I brought up in the first place?
There was no major changes that affected anything in the way of the actual game happening. My question...why was this a big deal? Do you have fever with those fits? Nothing you say ever makes any sense! If it was no "big deal", then why in the world was the Coach defying the police officer to begin with, and why are you arguing about this?.
2. To be clear-to detain someone is to restrain them. It doesn’t matter if they take a step or go across town. When they cuffed him, they detained him, apparently wrongfully. It doesn’t matter when they took the cuffs off, or where they took them off at. If they werent arresting him, and they didn’t feel in danger for their personal safety, then he shouldn’t have been cuffed. You alluded to the fact that other LEOs think they shouldn’t have cuffed him. I agree with this assessment. I don’t think there was any cause for restraint. For the umpteenth time ...... he was not arrested. How do you know there was no cause for being restrained, were you there? Suppose the coach said the only way you are going to get me off this field is to drag me or cuff me?
3) Ignorance doesn’t irritate me; it amuses me. First....there is a 5A champion & a Division I champion. Your childlike nicknames for what you perceive the leagues to be are laughable at best. Your belittling of high school athlete’s accomplishments is pitiful at best. Lastly, your opinion that the best teams in 5A classification are all in the Select bracket is an unfounded opinion, based solely on your disdain for the LHSAA. In short...you can’t prove a single thing you have stated on this particular topic. You claim I am belittling a high school athlete's accomplishments, yet aren't you doing the same thing to the John Curtis athletes by claiming that Zachary is the 5A football champs without qualifying it by saying non-select. Curtis has just as much right to say they were the best team in 5A. As the season is being played there are no separate standings for 5A and Division I because they are all 5A teams, and neither are there separate rankings by the LSWA or any other sports media.
4) the principal wasn’t even apologetic when she went before the LHSAA hearing. I don’t think I ever heard of an apology forthcoming after Parkway won the game....when exactly was said apology going to come?? But not to worry....Benjamin Franklin soothed the coach’s aingst in this matter. Ironic thing is- the way this particular matter was resolved taught much more of a lesson than waiting around for an empty apology that wasn’t heartfelt anyway. I hope that made you feel good typing that. I can't see where it has anything to do with anything that I have said.
5) You spoke earlier in your thread of the lesson taught by the coach refusing to leave the field. Tell me, sir....what do you think the lesson is when someone does wrong & is not reprimanded??
Apparently the correct answer is that you get rewarded with lots of money. Wouldn't it be ironic if that coach really needs an LEO one day and they tell him they can't get involved because they might get sued.
I don’t really get on here enough to keep up with this stuff much longer, but you amuse me because you, although admittedly older, are resorting to childlike insults to try to carry a feeble point. It is, of course, counter productive...but hey-I’ll entertain one more time. If I have a SCHEDULE of classes, that tells me which classes I have on a set day/week. It does not tell me what topics are being covered in each individual class; just what time the classes are. In the same way, the SCHEDULE leading up to the game referenced in this thread was not altered. No times were changed or overrun. Simply a change in who was on the field. Why did it matter?? Was an alternate location provided for the visiting team to warm up, or was it just assumed that they would get less preparation time than the home team to warm up? If you do not see the inconsistency in this, then I’m sorry. However, it’s apparent to many more than just me that this circumstance was brought about to throw off the pregame preparation of the visiting team. 99% of coaches/officials are going to make sure there’s an alternate place for BOTH teams to warm up if the field is needed for other proceedings. Either that, or they’re BOTH going to finish up their warm up early. That opportunity wasn’t given, & the home team had continued their warm up at another spot Lol, the bands selection of songs would be their set list or play list; not their itenerary. Nice try on the stretch-but you can’t make that work. You didn’t bring up the fact that Parkway had moved their warm up to another location; I did. In fact, you implied that perhaps the other team was trying to gain advantage by continuing their warm up after PARKWAY left the field. Tell me, sir- if you thought Live Oak was in the wrong for staying out after Parkway “went in”(or so you originally stated)....how then is Parkway not in the wrong for attempting to continue their pregame proceedings after they thought Live Oak was in the locker room?? “Suppose the Coach said....”?!? Lol; now we’re going to use hypotheticals to try to make a point?? You keep saying “arrest” like there isn’t a difference in that & detaining someone. However, there was no cause. He did not resist, run, or anything of the sort. He stayed on a field that he had every right to be on as the coach of a high school team in the pregame portion of an LHSAA sanctioned event. Show me precedence that this is how these type things should be handled. Show me how the police should supersede the officials in the chain of command as far as on the field proceedings at an athletic event. Do you ever see a LEO throw a flag for interference?? Blow a whistle for traveling?? No sir, you don’t. They are there for the support of the officials IF NEEDED. Not IN PLACE OF. Tell me; which matters more? “Rankings” or Powerpoints?? Powerpoints alone are used for playoff seeding. Not rankings. So when you say, “rankings aren’t made with select/non-Select”...I have to ask, who cares?? Because the determining factor in playoff position, powerpoints DO separate each class into select & non-select. I’m sorry that you can’t have it your way on this, I truly am. However, the trophy that Zachary hoisted read, “State Champion-5A”, while John Curtis’s read “State Champion- Division I”. Now, I didn’t see anyone from JC looking at their trophy for improper spelling or misclassification. They hoisted it proudly, as well they should have. Equally deserved was the trophy hoisted by Zachary. They won their respective tournament & earned that trophy. And since the trophies are labeled as such, and neither School seemed to mind hoisting them....I figure me calling Them the champions of what it actually says on their trophies is probably more accurate than your wishful thinking explanation. Questions 4 & 5 were a wash for me, as you are obviously stuck on the coach did some wrong by realizing the blunder of the situation around him. And the apology that you referenced before...you couldn’t really tell me when it was going to come. However, one side, and one side only, paid money for this situation not to enter a courtroom. If I’m not mistaken, jobs were lost. It’s sad that all this was over a high school sporting event; no matter playoffs or otherwise.
|
|