Pacific Jewish Center | Rabbi » espn

[UPDATED] Beren Academy Forfeits Tournament Game Because of Shabbos and the World Reacts

rabbifink — Tue, 28 Feb 2012 16:11:44 +0000

[UPDATE 3/1/12]: A restraining order was issued by a court that compels TAPPS (the organizing body for the tournament) to reschedule the game. I would love to see the court’s reasoning on this one. A grumpy sounding retort from the chairman of TAPPS was that “unlike many people, TAPPS follows the law”. So they will comply and Beren can play!

Link: Houston Chronicle

———–

Beren Academy of Houston is a modern orthodox day school. I know several of their alumni and respect the school greatly.

By now you’ve probably heard the news that the Beren Academy has a superb high school basketball team and that they made it to the semi-finals of their league. The next game is scheduled for Friday night. The team refuses to play on Shabbos and asked for a special dispensation to enable them to play before Shabbos. The request was denied and the team has forfeited the game thus ending their season.

This story has been reported everywhere from the NY Times to ESPN.

The reactions have been mixed. Everyone who is Shabbos observant sees this sacrifice as a kiddush Hashem. Many of us are able to be Shabbos observant without sacrificing anything other than NCAA football, golfing with corporate bigwigs, or other less than vital activities. Compared to my great grandfather who lost his job every Saturday and was kicked out of his home by his sisters for keeping Shabbos, we have it easy. These Beren students are throwbacks to a an era where Shabbos observance was more difficult than it is today. Their commitment to Shabbos and Judaism is inspiring.

Those who are not Shabbos observant see this as an impressive commitment to something they do not fully appreciate. But it reminds them that there is more to life and sports than winning.

What gets interesting is the reaction to the denied request for rescheduling. Some people are calling this anti-Semitism. I disagree. Sort of.

The school knew in advance that the tournament was scheduled over Shabbos. They were told in advance that the tournament would not be changed to accommodate them. There is no reason to expect that the tournament would adjust when Beren knew going in that the tournament was not going to be adjusted. To make the claim that the tournament stuck to its original proposal that Beren agreed to, rises to anti-Semitism is absurd.

On the other hand, it could be argued that the original agreement was biased by a soft anti-Semitism. Beren did agree that they would be forced to forfeit in the event a game occurred on Shabbos. But why did it have to be this way? Wouldn’t it be appropriate to accommodate the Jewish team that abides by their religious beliefs and will not play on Shabbos? I think it would have been prudent for the tournament organizers to agree beforehand to accommodate. Once the agreement not to accommodate was established it is disingenuous to expect that they would change it simply to avoid the appearance of anti-Semitism. It would have been preferable if the agreement was to allow them to change the game but that was simply not the case.

Making matters worse is the fact that this league refuses to play on Sunday due to the very religious beliefs of the other schools. It seems incongruous to insist that the Jewish team be forced to concede on their Sabbath and the Christian teams are banned from playing on their Sabbath. One would hope that members of other religions could appreciate the religion of the other. But sometimes religious people are nearsighted and only see their religion as religious. It could that is what happened here. I wouldn’t classify myopia as anti-Semitism.

It is also wrong to say “if this were a Muslim school of Seventh Day Adventist school the tournament would have accommodated.” This is complete conjecture and I venture to say that with a prior agreement in hand, the result would have been the same. Not everything is anti-Semitism. In fact, most things are not.

Or maybe it speaks to a different anti-Semitic bias. Who could have predicted that the Jewish school would have such good athletes…? The prior agreement was never expected to make a difference!

In any event, the story is heartwarming. It reminds us of our commitment to Shabbos. It reminds us that sometimes being a Shabbos observer means giving something up. Hopefully the lesson will be a positive one for the kids at Beren. Hopefully it will not lead to resentment over missing the opportunity to win a championship and will instead reinforce their strength of conviction to Shabbos.

The fact that this story has struck a chord and is being reported in the biggest new outlets speaks to the novelty of this story. The articles I have seen have all been respectful and admiring. Especially when contrasted with the horrible news out of the high school in Ohio, these kids look like heroes. At the very least, Shabbos is making positive headlines. We can be thankful for that.

It’s possible that with all the press, the tournament will acquiesce. I would be happy for the team if this happens. But I don’t love the idea of whiny Jews getting their way. Hopefully, if the tournament relents, that will not be the narrative. Instead the narrative will be religious tolerance, conviction of belief, good basketball.

Link: NY Times, Culture Map Austin

Tim Tebow’s Relationship With His God

rabbifink — Wed, 23 Nov 2011 19:55:15 +0000

There is nothing quite like Tim Tebow.

He is one of the most decorated NCAA Football players of all time. He worked for years as a Missionary spreading the Gospel in Southeast Asia. He is arguably the worst passing quarterback in the NFL. He is by far the most talked about sports personality.

Quite a combination. Much of the talk of Tim Tebow relates to his very obvious religious beliefs. I say they are obvious because Tebow kneels in prayer during the game. He points to the sky all the time. He invokes the name of his God every time he has a chance to do so. Tebow’s antics inspired an entire internet meme called #Tebowing. People would kneel as if in prayer at the most awkward times and places and snap a picture. This is aside from the very clever #occupytebow movement which is not relevant to this blog post.

The point is that Tebow takes his religion very seriously. Whenever athletes thank God and praise God for their accomplishments it can be irksome to everyone. Religious people of the same religion, religious people of other religions and atheists can all find ways to be offended.

Does God really want the Home team to beat the Away team? Does God really give special powers to some teams and not to other teams? Does a player’s religious conviction really have an impact on a game?

I think the answer to all those questions is no. See: Whose Fault is a Dropped Game-Wininng Touchdown? for my feelings on this one.

In fact, please read that post because you’ll see that I actually agree with Tim Tebow on this issue.

Tebow was asked about invoking God as part of his athletic accomplishments and he didn’t take the bait. He answered that he doesn’t give God the credit or the blame. He is merely using his platform as a way of teaching people about his religion. He emphatically denied that his religion gives him an edge or that he can play better because of God. He focused on the opportunity to use his fame and success to glorify the name of his God.

He also mentions that football does not define him. He is defined by his morality and good acts. He is defined by his character. So his religion is not a cause. It is merely a basis for his life. It is not part of his game on the field.

I think that is a great answer. Great job by Tebow.

What is interesting to me is that Tebow invokes the name of his God, Jesus, and that is somewhat acceptable within society. Imagine a Muslim player praising Allah or a Jewish person praising God (not Jesus). I don’t think they would be as accepted.

Christian displays of religious fervor are far more tolerated than that of any other religion. It can make the rest of us feel uncomfortable. Tebow is doing it in a way that minimizes the discomfort for others but even his way has rankled many people. It would be wise for people to limit religion to religious activities and not pepper it throughout their public lives.

Watch Tebow’s interview. The religious stuff is near the end:

Personalizing 9|11

rabbifink — Fri, 09 Sep 2011 23:28:38 +0000

There are seemingly infinite ways to commemorate 9|11.

I plan several posts over the weekend to express my feelings, memories and hope for this important day in American history.

The first of these posts illustrates to me that 9|11 really has two components. The national component and the personal. On a national level we were thrust into mourning and war. It is a war that does not seem likely to end anytime soon. Every day without a terrorist attack is a day that we have won that war. But that war also carries a very significant price tag. Lives, dollars, foreign relations and other corners of life have suffered. In the end, we can only hope the sacrifices are worthwhile.

The more compelling component, that is less widely discussed is the personal component. By personal, I mean the effects of the tragedy on individuals and their subsequent stories of survival, rebuilding and healing.

The nexus of the national and personal stories is found in the media. The media is in a position to nationalize the personal stories. I find the various ways of expressing these stories absolutely fascinating.

I have chosen 4 different media outlets to illustrate this.

ESPN

On ESPN, the 9|11 narrative is told from the perspective of a sports fan. Great moments in sports led up to September 11, 2001. Agassi v. Sampras, Bonds hitting #61, 62 and 63 (of 73), Michael Jordon unretired. These seemed like important moments at the time. Nothing compared to 9|11.

Sports also played a prominent role in our healing. Getting back to business and playing those games told us and our enemies that they cannot destroy America and our vibrant culture. Sports offered an escape when we needed it most.

ESPN’s article is a must read for any sports fan.

People Magazine

I am NOT a reader of People. I noticed their cover story at CVS and I found it very interesting. The magazine chronicles the lives of children born to a parent who died on 9|11.

What a powerful lens through which to see the tragedy of it all. This is as personal as it gets. Yet, we can relate to it all through these almost 10 year old children. It also reminds us that we have a lot to live for. The next generation of America needed us to snap out of our funk.

I have not read the article, though I did see a video on the article and here is the short synopsis on People.com.

Slate

In its inimitable way, Slate takes us back to when we had the Twin Towers. We see the Twin Towers through the camera lens and we are shown pictures where the Towers look small. They loom in the distance. The slideshow is called Tiny Towers.

To me, these photos are powerful and personal. They remind us that the Towers were part of the tapestry of New York life. Always there. Always tall.

But seeing them looking so small also reminds me that everything is a matter of perspective. Sometimes things can look so large. Larger than life. But when we pull back, the same towering ideas can become much smaller.

Our national mourning was so intimidating. But as we pulled back, we gained the perspective needed to heal.

Check out the photos here: Slate

CNN

At the gym I saw a documentary being promoted on CNN. The idea of the documentary is to take all the details, all the footnotes of history and have them tell the stories. We hear from the ticketing agent who sold Mohammed Atta his ticket. We hear about all the minutia of the day and events that led up to the day. We hear from everyday people. It’s personal.

These details of everyday life give the event a more personal nature. They humanize it into a seemingly random selection of moments. But we know how profound those moments became.

This perspective reminds all of us that our acts and thoughts matter. Each moment can and does make a tremendous difference. Sometimes we can see it right away and other times we cannot. But it is there.

See it here: The Footnotes of September 11

——————

In the end, the collective message is that in America we celebrate diversity. We celebrate different points of view. We challenge ourselves to have a voice and to hear the voice of others. Seeing just four of the myriad ways to remember on this 9|11 affirms the splendor and beauty of America.

On a national scale we may never completely win this war.

On a personal level we won a long time ago. We won on September 12, 2001 – the very next day. By continuing to do and believe in what make America great, each of us, as individuals has defeated each and all of the terrorists who changed it all 10 years ago.

No related posts.

Less Football Does Not Equal More Crime, or Does It?

rabbifink — Fri, 17 Jun 2011 17:34:32 +0000

A few weeks ago Ray Lewis made headlines with a controversial statement. The NFL is currently undergoing a labor dispute. The owners want more money, the players want more money and the result is that the owners have locked the players out and until the dispute is resolved there will be no football.

In an interview Ray Lewis made the claim that if there is no football crime will increase. (See: ESPN)

Using reason, logic, common sense etc. his statement may be a little bit offensive but I think it rings true. NFL games keep people busy on Sunday. If there is no football people might be bored, or even angry that there are no games to watch. Boredom and anger can contribute to an increase in crime. At the time, most people thought was Lewis said was crazy, offensive or just wrong. I wasn’t so sure.

But now there is data.

The data shows that Lewis is wrong. Maybe. On bye weeks, when there is no local football game, crime has not been shown to increase in the local market. I am not so sure how valuable that statistic is because there is still football and football fans like to watch other games besides for their home team. Another statistic shows that crime is not higher or lower before or after the season. This seems to show Lewis is incorrect as well. However it does not consider the anger factor mentioned above. Another statistic showed that the week before the Super Bowl, when no football is played, also did not result in increased criminal activity. Again, this is not a useful statistic in my opinion because football fans have plenty to watch on TV as the experts dissect the game and give their analysis in the week leading up to the Super Bowl. Plus no anger.

The only possibly meaningful statistic I saw was the relatively modest bump in homicides during the 1982 NFL players strike. Aside from the slight increase in homicides there was no increased criminal activity. However, a 30 year old statistic is also difficult to rely on as the popularity of the NFL is at unprecedented levels. More people care and rely on the weekly games for entertainment than ever before. So it is entirely possible that the 1982 statistic means nothing in 2011 as well.

In short, Ray Lewis might be right and he might be wrong. The statistics being cited are not conclusive in my opinion. Until the season is supposed to start we can argue about it in theory. But if the lockout continues and the season does not start, there will be no need to prognosticate. We can just observe the crime levels week by week.

Here’s hoping there is a season and we don’t need to prove Lewis right or wrong.

Link: The Shutdown Corner

Scottie Pippen Pulls An Obama

rabbifink — Fri, 27 May 2011 17:40:42 +0000

Last week the outrage over President Obama’s mideast speech was built around a partial quote of his words.

Critics quoted Obama’s statement that the future borders of Israel should be based on the 1967 borders. They neglected to quote the end of the statement which qualified that statement with the important caveat “with mutually agreed upon land swaps”. For some reason, the outrage that ensued only mentioned the 1967 borders. No one that was outraged included the context of the statement which made the 1967 borders statement much weaker.

(Now, even after Obama clarified his remarks some people were still outraged over other issues. I am not talking about those people.)

Today, one of the greatets NBA players of all time, Scottie Pippen, was asked about whether LeBron could be better than Michael Jordan, the greatest NBA player of all time. Pippen said, “…he may be…”.

There is outrage. See Jordan is more than a bit of a deity in NBA circles. He is the best ever. And I don’t think anyone will ever be as dominant as Jordan was in his time. LeBron is great, but he is no Jordan. Not in numbers or in accomplishments and certainly not in dedication to winning. So if Pippen had said that LeBron was better than Jordan the outrage would be warranted.

But Pippen did not say that. His words are being taken out of context. He said, “he may be”, which means that one day, perhaps LeBron will surpass Jordan.

How can anyone outrage over that? Heck, any player MAY surpass Jordan.

But of course, when it comes to politics, sports [and religion], people are irrational. Irrationality causes people to miss context and explode before they can analyze the issues.

Last week it was Obama, this week it was Pippen. Who will be next week’s victim?

Link: ESPN

Did This High School Football Coach Cheat? Or Was He Just Unethical?

rabbifink — Wed, 10 Nov 2010 17:23:47 +0000

Manchester High School Indians

This post has been crossposted to DovBear – more discussion there: DovBear

Sports-talk radio is abuzz over an incident that occurred a few weeks ago at a High-School football game in Connecticut.

Southington vs Manchester was tied at 14 at halftime. Some time during the first half, a Manchester player dropped his armband with the entire Manchester playbook and the codewords for each of those plays. A Southington player picked it up. The player gave the armband to his coach.

The coach used the information on the armband to stymie the Manchester offense and eventually won the game 28-14.

It seems to me that High-School sports are competitive as well as educational. This was a failed opportunity to educate on fairness, sportsmanship and winning the “right way”. But what of the competition aspect? Is this ethical? Is this cheating? Is there a space between cheating and unethical behavior? All good questions.

The biggest question for me is, how do we treat sports? Meaning, sports have their own rules, do the rules of the real world apply during the game? Or are the real world rules suspended during the game and as long as you follow the rules of the game you are doing the right thing?

So, what would do you think? What would you do?

(The Coach was suspended for a game)

(And his brother plays for the Patriots, home of the cheating coaches)

Link: ESPN.com

Michael Vick, Bill Simmons, Forgiveness and Restorative Justice

rabbifink — Wed, 06 Oct 2010 19:04:33 +0000

Bill Simmons (aka The Sports Guy) wrote a recent column about Micheal Vick and his comeback. (Rooting for Michael Vick)

Quick background: Mike Vick was the most tantalizing NFL football player I have ever seen. (Some recent highlights: here) He was a quarterback who threw laser beam passes that look like they were traveling at the speed of light on a rope. He ran faster than anyone else on the field. He could put on the brakes instantly and change direction before a defender realized what happened. In short, Mike Vick highlights are like Michael Jordan highlights. Incredible.

Then it all came crashing down. Vick was convicted on Federal Dog Fighting charges. Vick and his friends raised fighting dogs and fought them. They tortured dogs. They killed dogs. For his crimes he sat in prison for a couple years. He was suspended by the NFL. He was bankrupt. Many thought his career was over.

After being released from jail and then a halfway house, Vick has become an ambassador for animal rights and an (almost) model citizen since his release. Vick played a little football last year but was a third string quarterback on a good team. This year he began as a backup, but following an injury to the starting quarterback, Vick became the starter.

Vick played better than ever. His athleticism has not deteriorated and his maturity as a player make him a better player than he was before. People began to talk about a “Hollywood Ending” to the Vick saga. Vick had the support of many of his previous detractors.

Simmons writes that Vick emerged as the “feel good story” of the NFL. But his wife disagrees. The Sports Gal cannot forgive Vick. The Sports Gal says that if you love dogs, you cannot possibly forgive Vick. Sport Guy retorts that Vick did everything humanly possibly to pay for his crimes, apologize and rehabilitate his life. He lost EVERYTHING. He said he was genuinely sorry. He is fixing what he broke. Vick is a real Restorative Justice story. And Bill Simmons forgives him. Mrs. Simmons loves dogs too much to forgive Vick.

The article is a great read and I recommend reading it.

It got me thinking about a discussion in our Restorative Justice Seminar about forgiveness, apologies and their role in Restorative Justice.

Restorative Justice seeks to fix what was broken when a crime is committed. It calls for all who have a stake in the crime to do their best to restore those who were harmed by the crime. Usually it is the victims, the community and the perpetrator.

Do criminals need to apologize for their crimes to be restored? Do victims need to forgive for the criminals to be restored?

Some people think it is vital that the criminal apologize. How can the victim forgive without an apology? Others say that victims should never and will never forgive their attackers, so why apologize? Others say that apologies that are required are not real. Yet others say that even if the victim does not forgive their attacker, the community should forgive.

Some participants in the discussion mentioned crimes that were perpetrated against them. Some of those people said they would never forgive their attacker. Others said they forgave their attacker and it made them feel better.

During the discussion an idea crystallized in my head. It seems to me that people can be divided into two disparate categories. There are forgivers and non-forgivers.

The Forgivers are willing to forgive anyone. They give everyone second chances. And third and fourth chances too. The Forgivers hate retribution and vengeance. The Forgivers will only punish to protect others but not because the criminal needs to be punished to pay for his crime. Forgivers do not need an apology to forgive. They have already forgiven.

The Non-Forgivers do not forgive. No amount of apology makes an impact. The apology cannot fix anything. Words are cheap. I’m sorry doesn’t change the past. Non-Forgivers want criminals to pay for their crimes. Non-Forgivers “move on” without forgiveness.

I don’t think there is anything “wrong” with Non-Forgivers. Nor do I think Forgivers are “better”. Both have advantages and disadvantages.

Of course there are exceptions, but I think these categories cover almost everyone.

When it comes to Vick, those who are Non-Forgivers AND Dog Lovers can’t forgive him. If you’re a Non-Forgiver who doesn’t love dogs then you don’t need to forgive Vick.

So it turns out that it would impossible and almost idiotic to require an apology for Restorative Justice seeing as it plays little role in the healing process. Forgivers don’t need it and Non-Forgivers don’t care for it.

One final note: In Judaism an apology is not for the victim. Victims are expected to forgive. In order for God to pardon a sin using the Teshuva process (Essay: What is Teshuva (repentance) and How Does It Work in Judaism?) the one who suffered the harm must forgive. Orthodox Jews make a proclamation every year just before Yom Kippur that they forgive anyone and everyone that may have hurt them¹. Forgiveness is basically a given. However, an apology is valued by what it accomplished for the perpetrator. Saying “I’m sorry” is good for the person who did something wrong because it is an acknowledgment of wrongdoing which is necessary for his personal change. Even if the apology is required, it can make all the difference in the world for the one who expresses the apology is rehabilitating their life.

For a truly heartwarming story of forgiveness see this video:

Incredibly, even if the forgiver does not “mean it”, the perpetrator is still “forgiven” by God under the halachic precept of “things of the heart have no probative value when they contradict one’s words”.

There's No Crying In Baseball (nor is there teshuva)

rabbifink — Thu, 03 Jun 2010 20:52:11 +0000

One of the most famous lines in any movie is uttered by the inimitable Jimmy Dugan, played by Tom Hanks in a League of Their Own. Dugan says to a player of his who is crying (and happens to be a woman) that “There’s no crying in baseball”.

I’ve made a censored version of the video and embedded it below if you have no idea what I am talking about.

I’ve never quite understood why there is no crying in baseball, nor why this line is so famous. It doesn’t even make any sense to me. And yet, here we are. Everyone knows there’s no crying in baseball and no one knows why.

Try telling Jim Joyce and Armando Galarraga that there is no crying in baseball.

Yesterday, Galarraga was one out away from Baseball Lore. He had pitched to 26 batters and sent each one of those batters back to the dugout. He was one out from the 21st (recorded) Perfect Game in Major League Baseball History. Then this happened:

Click here to see the debacle unless you’ve already seen the play. (I would embed the video but ESPN has disabled embedding for that clip and MLB does not allow embedding of their videos and they take all youtube.com videos down, you know, God forbid, people would share baseball videos and expand their fandom…)

To explain: The 27th batter was out. The umpire called him safe. He apologized. But he was tearful. WHAT? THERE’S NO CRYING IN BASEBALL!

Anyway, I am not here to talk about crying. I am here to talk about fixing mistakes.

Major League Baseball reviewed the play and agreed that it was an erroneous call.

So they should just fix it right? Call the 27th batter out and give Galarraga his perfect game.

Sorry. No can do. If a human error decides a game or denies someone their place in history it is too late. There is nothing that can be done.

Art imitates life. So does sport. When we make a mistake in life there is nothing we can do to undo the mistake. There is no crtl-z (cmd-z for us mac people), there is no instant replay and reversals. We live with our decisions.

One would expect that to be the same way a Divine Being would treat mankind. If you act, you suffer the consequences. Perhaps there may some mercy or amnesty, but your actions are still done. They cannot be undone.

In Judaism there is a concept called Teshuva. This is often mistranslated as “repentance”. That is not teshuva. Teshuva is return. Going through the process of teshuva one can return to the exact spot they were at before the act. It is a true return. The physical act is done and cannot be undone. But the spiritual effects of the action can be undone with teshuva.

Unfortunately, there is no crying in baseball and there is no teshuva in baseball either.

Tom Hanks as Jimmy Dugan in “A League of Their Own”.

Sports, Politics, Phil Jackson and The Arizona Immigration Law et al

rabbifink — Mon, 17 May 2010 23:36:26 +0000

The Zen Master has spoken. (Again. Remember? The Zen Master Speaks on Curses, Karma and Mitzvahs)

When asked about the Arizona Immigration Law – state Senate Bill 1070, by ESPN.com columnist J.A. Adande, Jackson raised a few eyebrow. In fact he raised enough eyebrows that a protest is planned for tonight’s game at Staples Center in Downtown LA.

The LA Times has a full report here: Activists protest Lakers Coach Phil Jackson’s comments on Arizona’s new immigration law

What did Jackson say that set off the protesters?

During their Playoffs Series against the San Antonio Spurs, the Suns wore Jerseys that paid tribute to the Latino community by tweaking the name of the team from Suns to Los Suns. That this is somehow a strong political statement is a stretch in my mind. Some people (including the players) felt that by wearing Los Suns on their jersey it was somehow a protest against the law. I don’t see it that way.

Nevertheless, Adande asked Jackson what he thought about the Suns political statement.

First Jackson, who has showed lefty leanings in the past, indicated he had no problem with the controversial state Senate Bill 1070.

“Am I crazy, or am I the only one that heard [the legislature] say ‘we just took the United States immigration law and adapted it to our state,’” Jackson said.

I told him they usurped the federal law.

“It’s not usurping, it’s just copying it is what they said they did, and then they gave it some teeth to be able to enforce it,” Jackson said.

Sometimes I feel exactly like Jackson. Am I crazy?

When the bill was passed the NY Times had this to say:

Arizona is the first state to demand that immigrants meet federal requirements to carry identity documents legitimizing their presence on American soil. (Full article here.) (emphasis added)

The law just enforces a Federal Requirement. Uncle Righteous (that’s Coach Jackson’s other nickname) is just standing up for Uncle Sam.

So Jackson is right. Yet the law has set off a firestorm. Why? I can think of a lot of reasons. But it seems misguided to take out your anger on Phil Jackson, or even the state of Arizona! This a Federal Regulation!

Anyway, I digress. There are two things I want to mention.

First, Adande makes a foolish assumption. He assumes that if a man is a Democrat or a liberal then he falls in line and supports every single policy of fellow Democrats. The money quote:

That was surprising to hear coming from a man who not only supported Bill Bradley for the Democratic presidential nomination, he wore a Bradley campaign pin on his suit during games.

Why is it surprising? Each issue has its merits and demerits. Why must we be pigeonholed once we hold one way in one issue that now in every other issue our opinion is pre-determined!? This bothers me a lot. Jackson has every right to feel one way on one issue and side with “liberals” and on other issues side with “conservatives”. If not, we cease to think and become party line robots.

Finally, sports and politics don’t mix. To me that means that an athlete or sportswriter or coach can have an opinion but it is not nearly as valuable as their relative expertise on sports. Is Jackson influential in political spheres? Absolutely not. So why protest his statements? Let the guy coach basketball and ignore everything else that he says.

That’s what I do…

Reverse Discrimination and Oversensitivity

rabbifink — Wed, 10 Mar 2010 23:13:52 +0000

Yesterday I wrote about a great film in Simple Justice | The Story of Brown v. Board of Education: The End of Separate But Equal in Schools. Civil Rights made tremendous strides in the wake of Brown. It was a tumultuous time and Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. led the way to racial equality.

Today, we have a president that represents the progress on behalf of all minorities. What was unthinkable a generation ago, is the reality of our world. Imagine a 70 year old black man from the deep south who remembers attending a segregated school and looks in the newspaper in 2010 and sees someone who would have been institutionally discriminated against as the leader of the free world. What a feeling that must be…

But along with the good, comes some bad. In the last few weeks I have seen some examples of Reverse Discrimination as well as oversensitivity.

This article on ESPN.com caught my eye a couple weeks back: Winners Hurt by Corporate Bad Judgment. In a Step-Off dance competition an all-white team initially took the crown. But after a mystical “scoring discrepancy” was discovered the judges awarded a co-title to a black team as well. Step-Offs are traditionally won by black groups and most of the participants are black teams.

Everyone assumed that the mystical “scoring discrepancy” was non-existent and the judges were not exactly forthcoming with details to support their decision. Had this been a reverse situation, where the white team lost in a traditionally white sport or competition, like alpine skiing, and a black athlete won and the judges later awarded a white athlete after finding a mystical “scoring discrepancy” the outrage would be powerful, unrelenting and deserved. But it was the reverse and aside from a few sports columnists and bloggers, it went unnoticed. This is not what Brown taught us.

I also saw this news item: Black Barbie Sold for Less Than White Barbie at Walmart Store. Apparantly, demand for an identical white Barbie was higher than for a black Barbie and the price reflected the lower demand. So on one shelf two identical Barbie’s were only distinguished by their price and their skin tone. There is nothing inherently wrong with that. But people took offense to it. There are those who said that it was racist and discriminatory.

It must have been real tough for a black consumer to see that, but it was not intended to hurt, nor is it inherently hurtful. I can understand the sensitivity to seeing that, but there is nothing actually wrong with it. Today, there is nearly no institutionalized racism. Racism today exists in the hearts and minds of those who act as racists and equally so, in the hearts and minds of those who perceive racism in what they see.

We have come a long way in 50 years and of course there is a ways to go still. But I believe that the best thing to do would be to stop classifying people along racial lines and shades of skin color. Both of the examples above rely heavily of skin tone and race. The dance competition took action when a non-black team won a traditionally black competition. The outraged shoppers of Walmart saw a lower price for a doll that was a darker skin color and reacted as well. Just as the majority cannot discriminate against the minority, the minority should not be oversensitive to perceive bias in the majority.

It is my true belief that the “melting pot” of America will continue to help each and every one of us to judge a person by the content of their character and beliefs and not the color of their skin. It is really a completely illogical, irrational way of thinking to use skin tone as a difference between people. There is nothing innate about skin color that can have any relevance to a discussion about the merits of a human being. Most people realize this by now and I think we are getting there…

Unfortunately for some, the effects of decades of discrimination live on. Just watch this ABC News video that employs the same testing done for Brown v. Board of Education with modern day black youth:

NFL Football: Game of Wimps and Crybabies

rabbifink — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 18:26:10 +0000

Every casual sports fan in the universe has heard about the big 4th down play that cost the Patriots a victory in their epic matchup with the Colts this past Sunday

Facing 4 and 2 yards to go on their own 28 yard line, Belichik elected to go for the first down and not punt the ball away. The stakes were very high as a failed attempt would give the Colts an almost certain victory and a punt would make their task more difficult but far from impossible. So Belichik rolled the dice. The play actually worked, but they did not get the yardage needed for the 1st down.

The Colts took over on downs and patiently scored the winning touchdown with mere seconds left on the clock.

Below is a video of the play.

Everyone and their grandmother has an opinion about this play. The strongest initial reaction came from a couple of former Patriots defensive players turned analysts. Rodney Harrison and Tedy Bruschi felt this was a huge slight to the Patriots defense. Belichik sent a message to them that he could not trust them to stop the Colts offense and he felt he had a better shot at victory by gambling on 4th down.

Right when it happened I found myself thinking about my favorite ESPN.com columnist, Gregg Easterbrook. He writes the Tuesday Morning Quarterback (TMQ) column and has been saying for years that punting is a worse play than going for the first down on 4th down. There is even a high school team that (almost) NEVER punts – and they win! NFL Head Coaches punt because they won’t be blamed for their defense allowing a score but the Coach is blamed if the 4th down conversion fails. It is all about shifting the blame according to TMQ. Here are some numbers and analysis to back up his claim. In short TMQ claims, punting is for wimps. Read his predictable take on the play here.

The next wave of opinions on the Patriots failed 4th down conversion is in. The Wall Street Journal backs up Belichik’s decision with TMQ-esque numbers. There was a 70% chance of victory with a punt and a 79% chance of victory if they went for the 1st down.

Plus, they have an opinion. Belichik is an abberation. In their own words:

Above all, though, the essence of Mr. Belichick’s “crime” may be something simpler than all this: His decision went against the natural instincts of all human beings when they’re forced to make high-stakes decisions. In a recent study, researchers from Duke and UCLA found that when faced with a decision involving risk, people have an overwhelming tendency to make the supposedly safe choice—to err on the side of caution—even though doing so may lead to worse results.

Passive mistakes can cost more than aggressive mistakes.

It is foolish to be aggressive when the aggressive move carries more risk than the passive move.

It is cowardice to make the passive choice when the aggressive choice carries less risk, and you are just too big a wimp to make the right choice.

And if the defense is going to be upset they are big crybabies. You are on a team. You’re collective job is to win. If you are not willing to do what it takes to win, you don’t belong in a competitive game like NFL Football. The Head Coach is paid to win the games, the players are paid to execute the game plan and we are the suckers who spend our time and energy watching a bunch of wimps and crybabies.

Teamwork: Important in Sports, More Important in Life

rabbifink — Mon, 21 Sep 2009 21:05:21 +0000

Rosh Hashana at Pacific Jewish Center was wonderful. The services were inspiring, the attendance was excellent and the mood properly reflected the importance of the days.

I spoke from the pulpit several times over the holiday.

There was certainly an over-arching theme to my sermons. Each had its own individual message but overall they reflected an idea that I feel is central to Rosh Hashana, judgment, repentance, Judaism and Humanity.

It is too easy to get caught up in ourselves. We hope for a good verdict, we try to be the best people we can be as individuals.

For me, the greater challenge is fitting in the group. Every time I spoke over the Holiday, the underlying theme was Unity.Each person really has three identities.

One is our own personal accomplishments. Everything that one does in their life goes into this category and those things have value on their own. We look at the person in a vacuum and assess their achievements as an individual. Everyone has unique talents and abilities that make then who they are.

The second identity is the person’s group. Everyone is part of various groups. Whether by religion, race, political party, trade or family we all belong to groups. Those groups form a part of our identity. But each group member’s individual role is not relevant. The group has an identity and by association with that group, that identity becomes the identity of everyone in the group.

The third identity is the most important. It is the combination of number 1 and number 2. It is how we interact with the group using our individual talents and abilities. This identity is the meeting point of the indidual and the group. If the individual is selfish and uses their talents and abilities for their own personal gain and ignores the group, the person has failed in this identity. But if the person is able to part if the group and use their individualism to elevate the group, then in turn, they elevate themselves.

No where is this third identity clearer to the observer than in competitive team sports. The individual performer has his or her own talents and abilities. What separates the great ones from the rest, is their ability to use those skills and elevate the team.

It is no different in real life. We all have skills and we are all part of groups. We need to use those skills to elevate our groups, not just ourselves.

It was particularly appropriate to find a short post on the NBA Truehoop Blog about this issue today.

LeBron James has a new movie. It is supposed to be about teamwork, but as Truehoop so eloquently puts it, the preview completely fails in this regard.

The bummer about it, however, is that the movie is all about teamwork, but the undeniable message of the preview’s format (James, shooting alone in a gym) is that celebrity trumps all.

Watch the preview below and you will see just what they mean.

Good imagery for the wrong message. We need to be team players in sports and more importantly in life.

Manny Being Manny | Some 'Gladwellian' Insight

rabbifink — Sun, 12 Jul 2009 21:35:49 +0000

This is Manny. Manny Ramirez.

Believe it or not, Manny is one of the greatest right handed hitters in Baseball history. He is also a 2 time World Series Champion and 1 time World Series MVP. Manny was also recently suspended from baseball for 50 games for violating the league’s Substance Abuse Policy when he tested positive for a substance used to hide performance enhancing drug use.

In other words, he cheated. And yet, he is adored and loved, cheered and ballyhooed. Why?

You don’t need to be a baseball fan to continue reading.

The public’s reaction is more confusing when juxtaposed with the public reaction to other substance abusers.

Barry Bonds (nothing has ever been proved), Roger Clemens, Mark McGuire, Rafael Palmeiro, Sammy Sosa are other big names in baseball who are hated and booed wherever they go for their cheating. What gives?

Why are we so nice to Manny and so mean to everyone else who cheated?

One of my favorite authors is Malcolm Gladwell. Previously, I have had quite a few Gladwell posts (check those out) on this blog. This is another.

In “Blink: The Power of Thinking Without Thinking” (which I highly recommend and you can purchase here) Gladwell compares Doctors who get sued for malpractice and Doctors who do not get sued for malpractice for the same exact types of misdiagnosis or poor treatment. Gladwell found that doctors who do not get sued have one common thread.

They are liked.

Gladwell found that patients who could sue for malpractice would not sue if they liked the doctor. They would say “He is such a nice man, I could never sue him”. In fact my wife’s grandmother has a cause of action against a doctor of hers and she says (insert Holocaust survivor European accent) “Oh, I could never sue him, he a wonderful doctor”. I asked her if he is so wonderful how did he screw up so bad? She says “oh, it was a mistake, he tried his best”. You could still sue you know… “Oh, I could never…”.

And so it is in life. People who are liked sometimes get a pass. People who are disliked are criticized at every turn. Barry Bonds is ornery and cantankerous, Roger Clemens is conceited and condescending, Sammy Sosa is disingenuous and a fraud and Manny Ramirez is a self deprecating, fun loving, caricature of himself.

When Manny makes a mistake, we can forgive him because he is such a great guy. Manny jokes about himself. Manny apologizes. Manny is lovable and that’s why we can forgive him.

Gladwell hits another home run.

The message for us is simple and easy to see. Being nice and friendly to others can go a long way. When people act positively toward one another their flaws are hidden. We don’t notice or care about the other person’s deficiencies as much when they are nice.

We all want to be liked. We all want to be appreciated. A smile, a hello, a friendly guesture or act of kindness goes a very long way to helping others see the best in us.

There is something we can learn from Manny. (No, it is not okay to cheat). We can learn that a good disposition can make a big difference in how people look at us. Let’s try and make the world a friendlier place. Let’s try and help others see the best in us.

In this respect – let’s be a little more like Manny.

Athletes as Role Models?

rabbifink — Tue, 02 Jun 2009 23:55:35 +0000

A few months back I hinted at a future post about athletes and their role in our society as role models.

This past weekend I was reminded about my feelings on the subject. What I feel is what I believe to be the Torah approach but is of consequence and significance to anyone and everyone.

Over the weekend the NBA Conference Finals were settled. Something that happened after one team was eliminated has caused a media frenzy.

First, the Los Angeles Lakers advanced to the NBA finals for the 30th time in 61 years. (yay!) That is serious excellence right there. For the non-fans this means that during the games you will be able to drive the speed limit on the 405 because everyone else will be inside watching the game.

Then on Saturday night the impossible happened. LeBron James and the Cleveland Cavaliers were eliminated by the Orlando Magic. Why is this the impossible? LeBron is a “godlike” figure and was expected to “redeem” his team and city by bringing them to the “promised land”. I am not kidding. Sportscenter on ESPN had a segment where a Minister from Cleveland said that Clevelanders were beginning to worship “The King”. LeBron is the most celebrated human being on the planet and is idolized around the world.

Anyway, the poor guy loses in 6 games to the Magic.

Ironically, this gives ABC Broadcasting which is owned by Disney a Walt Disney World (Orlando) vs. Disneyland (LA) Championship. Talk about jackpot!

The custom in all sports is for the losing team to shake the hands of the winning team and congratulate them upon winning. In fact according to Websters, this is the very definition of “Sportsmanship”:

conduct (as fairness, respect for one’s opponent, and graciousness in winning or losing) becoming to one participating in a sport.

The word has been around since 1745 and is preached universally to all athletes and competitors.

LeBron was so upset about losing to the Magic that he left the court in a hurry and did not congratulate the winning team. This is a big no-no.

In fact, he was so upset by the loss he also skipped out on the mandatory press conference.

That is bad sportsmanship. No question about it.

Do I care?

Absolutely not.

I don’t expect better from an athlete. His excellence in Basketball has no bearing on his excellence in social skills, personal growth, intelligence, happiness or even sportsmanship. The only thing that he does that commands respect is his ball playing prowess. That is the only thing I look up to in this person.

Is he sending a bad message?

Yes.

But I don’t turn to LeBron for messages on Sportsmanship. Nor do I turn to any athlete or celebrity for anything other than waht makes them unique or special.

As a parent it is my job to provide good role models for my children. I may need to be that role model at times. At other times it will teachers, Rabbis, family members or other people who command respect for their area of specialty. Athletes are not role models. Allowing an athlete to be the role model for your child is a failure in your parenting.

Athletes may by chance turn out to be wonderful people whom we may respect for their abilities beyond sports, and that is great but it is not the norm. I myself have commented on some athletes ability to prepare for their games and we can learn about preparation from them. However, expecting athletes to be role models is a terrible idea.

I think parents get lazy and expect their children to learn good values without taking the time or effort to teach those values. When the child gets nothing from his parents, athletes may fill that void. Ultimately they will all disappoint us.

Be a role model and don’t rely on superhuman athletes to do it for you.

Another Gladwell Gem | How David Beats Goliath

rabbifink — Wed, 20 May 2009 16:09:18 +0000

I cannot get enough Malcolm Gladwell.

Every time I read his work I walk away impressed, enriched and thirsting for more.

Previously I blogged about his book Outliers, which was super. Today I am writing about a recent Gladwell column in the New Yorker. I don’t subscribe to the New Yorker but periodically I check it our online. This week I had the pleasure of enjoying yet another Gladwell gem.

This time Gladwell is talking about sports and for me it is a lesson about life.

When a basketball team has inferior talent to their opponent, Gladwell has discovered that there is a great equalizer. It is called the “Full Court Press”. For a full treatment on the matter read this. (Sport Fans: Bill Simmons agrees with this and you can check out his mock debate with Gladwell here). The basic principal is for the weaker team to play defense for the entire length of the court. Normally, the defense begins attacking when the ball is 60%-70% down the court.

Gladwell has “proved” that by playing defense for 100% of the the court the more conditioned team physically will prevail over the more talented squad.

This is comparable to the biblical narrative of David thwarting Goliath. The underdog, without real world experience turning the rules of the game on their heels to gain an advantage. David used a slingshot. When an underdog recognizes their weakness and thinks unconventionally, they have a chance.

This is really useful information for war strategists and basketball coaches. What about us?

Last Shabbos we celebrated a Bar Mitzva at the Pacific Jewish Center. Yona Kosman entered the ranks of adulthood. What is the essence of the Bar Mitzva celebration?

Jewish tradition teaches that as a child we instinctively think selfishly, for the moment without understanding the consequences of our actions. As we enter adulthood, and beginning with our Bar Mitzva we begin to understand the ramifications of our actions. Slowly, we develop the skills to outmaneuver our natural instinct for instant gratification and we can begin to make good choices.

But our instinct has more than a decade head start. We begin the game at Bar Mitzva as tremendous underdogs. Certainly, many do not even participate in the battle. Many leave the fray and do not work on themselves to make conscious moral choices.

Those who do wish to wage this war and gain control of their sensual instincts and make choices instead of just reacting have a severe disadvantage.

We are the underdogs to our animal instinct.

The principals Gladwell has pointed out are really the same principals Ramchal teaches us in Messilas Yesharim.

Ramchal and Gladwell give us the trick we need to prevail. A preemptive attack. We can’t sit and wait for the moment of choice to happen upon us and then begin to attempt to win that battle. Our advantage will only come with preparation and a “full court press” against our inclinations.

The point is that all the work to win our moral battles takes place before the opportunity presents itself. We are supposed to be constantly honing our skills as “choosers” and then when we need those skills we can emerge victorious.

Ramchal advises us to engage in Torah study and to examine our daily choices each day. This two pronged approach will enable us to be ready when the choice between “what is good and what is easy” (Albus Dumbledore, Goblet of Fire) presents itself.

Disturbing Poll of the Day

rabbifink — Fri, 24 Apr 2009 20:09:52 +0000

Look, I enjoy sports. (Go Lakers). But this is getting ridiculous!

Nearly 48 thousand people have voted (as of this posting) on the current poll in ESPN.com that asks the following query:

Who do you know more about?

- Potential First Round Picks in the NFL Draft

- People in your office/class

I am surprised by the results.

So there you have it!

49% of People know more about compete strangers than the people that they are around on a daily basis.

This is just wrong.

This week we celebrated Earth Day. A prevailing message of the Day was sensitivity to our environment.

Maybe we should have “People Day” – a day to work on our sensitivity to each other! Everyone could use a smile, a hey, what up? or a friendly how you doing?

But it can’t stop there, we need to talk to each other and more importantly listen to each other. Maybe we should try this People Day more than once a year… Maybe we should always act with sensitivity to on another…

Who is with me?

People Day is every day.

Shame on Gizmodo | Shame on Us Too

Youthfulness vs. Maturity

rabbifink — Wed, 11 Mar 2009 18:38:37 +0000

A few days ago I read a really great article on espn.com (- not kidding).

The article is about three of the biggest prima donnas in sports. Even if you don’t follow / like sports this article is a worthwhile read.

The social commentary in the article speaks volumes about American culture. We live in a world that values youth over all else. Everyone wants to look younger, act younger, date younger – be younger! In politics this means that we elect the more youthful presidential candidate. In sports this means that when a professional athlete plays “like a kid” (especially Brett Favre) we love it. When a man being paid millions doesn’t take himself seriously and looks like an 8 year old just having a good time we love it. We value youth.

Then an athlete acts like a kid and needs to be liked so he takes steroids, or he doesn’t want to go to practice, or he wants to get paid then we say that the athlete is acting like a child. We don’t love that.

Youthfulness has its value, but its a two edged sword. If we want our athletes, celebrities, politicians to be younger then they are probably going to act younger as well…

This just reinforces the idea that we cannot allow athletes and celebrities to be our role models or to be our childrens’ role models. More on this in an upcoming post.

We have learned in Messilas Yesharim that we are born as children. Our job throughout our lives is to learn the importance of our choices and their consequences. It is a life’s work. If you care. If you don’t you’ll just be another child in a 55 year old body. Just like everybody else.

Maturity means understanding the consequences of your actions. I think it fair to say that maturity is a rare characteristic in our world. People just think about now. This explains affairs, ridiculous leveraging for risky securities and idiotic bonuses for CEOs of failing corporations. All youthfulness. No maturity.

The article concludes with this exact point. If we value youthfulness to the point that we don;t need to consider the consequences of our actions we get the economic environment in which we find ourselves right now. Walking away from million dollar debts, using government funds for million dollar bonuses – these are the acts of children in suits with fancy degrees. But they have not grown up and they might never grow up. No Maturity.

Our job is to grow up, once we do the world can have the change and hope that we are looking for. Otherwise we are just the kid caught with his hands in the cookie jar asking for a cookie.

Shortcuts

rabbifink — Thu, 29 Jan 2009 20:38:57 +0000

On the home page for ESPN.com I noticed a new article by Paul Lukas of Uni Watch fame. Lukas writes about the nuances and idiosyncrasies of sports uniforms.He notices everything from commemorative patches to new piping along the sides of a jersey. Nothing gets past the ever watchful eye of Uni Watch.

The article that caught my eye was about a religious Pentecostal high school basketball team. Turns out these guys don’t wear shorts. Ever. Including basketball games. Immediately I was reminded of my elementary school days.

I went to a religious Jewish elementary school (in a previous incarnation of the school, my father was the Dean). We had a basketball team and we did wear shorts but one teammate of ours was a little more spiritual than the rest of us and he did not wear shorts. There is an element of modesty involved in not wearing shorts and this fellow was very sensitive to maintaining that level of modesty. Eventually this guy has gone on to be a very big Torah scholar and is now teaching in a Yeshiva. (It’s not because he did not wear shorts, he was on that path regardless.)

Gate City Christian teaches the traditional Bible concept that it is more respectful to dress in a more respectful way and this includes on the basketball court. Morals shouldn’t disappear (or even hide) when we get on the field or court. The Talmud says that a person can be judged by three things. B’kisso (his money), B’kaaso (his temper) and B’koso (his cup – meaning when he / if he drinks). I had a teacher who once added – B’Kaduro (with his ball playing). The message these kids are being taught is the same. The school teaches them to act modestly in their lives and the ball field or court is no different. I think that is a great lesson.

The article then proceeds to discuss other modifications of traditional basketball attire for religious purposes. A religious Jewish girls high school basketball team is featured because they only wear skirts. In fact the team name is the “Skirts”. They are actually pretty good according to the article. Observant Jewish women traditionally wear skirts below the knee and make sure that they are covered from the neck down to the knee. As the article mentions this is to help the person focus on their inner self and help others recognize them for who they are not how they are dressed.

The idea of modesty in Judaism is to help promote focusing on the true person by removing additional distractions from finding that true person. In a materialistic and hedonistic world we are easily distracted by superficial outer beauty so we promote the inner beauty by minimizing those distractions. More profoundly is the idea that the greater something is – the more concealed it is. We discussed this at length in a Connections about beauty. I recommend checking that out!

What is great is that the article presented the concept in a very refreshing way. I think people that read the article will come away with an appreciation for the Torah concept of modesty (listen to the class for an understanding of what that is all about) and I think that is just great!