Pacific Jewish Center | Rabbi » sports

Give This Dad a Medal

rabbifink — Fri, 27 Jan 2012 16:52:24 +0000

Last Sunday, two NFL teams advanced to the Super Bowl. Two other teams lost and were sent home for the winter.

One of the notable things about both games was the lack of heroes for the winning teams. Instead of the winning teams making a great play to win the game, both of the losing teams made mistakes that gave the game away. Instead of heroes we had goats.

In the first game, the Ravens made three consecutive heartbreakingly poor plays. First a dropped touchdown, then a bad pass when the quarterback could have run for a few yards and then a missed field goal from close range. The players who made the biggest mistakes, the receive who dropped the pass and the kicker who missed the kick lost the game for their team. Or at least it appears that way to the observer. Obviously mistakes in the beginning of the game are just as costly as mistakes at the end of the game. Yet, we somehow place greater emphasis on the glaring mistakes at the end of the game.

In our house we are fans of the Ravens. It was shocking and disappointing to see them lose in this fashion. Especially so, for my eight year old son. He was upset as I am sure millions of other Ravens fans across the country.

The second game featured an even worse anti-hero. Kyle Williams fumbled the ball twice in crucial kick return situations. He gave the ball back to the Giants and cost his tea the game. It was heartbreaking for him and for 49ers fans everywhere. It was his fault that the Giants won and people were really mad at him.

Some people sent him death threats.. Others just said horrible things about him. One seven year old boy was also upset after seeing Williams give away the game.

He was crying “but… why… did… he have to fumble?!”

His father replied, “if you are so upset, how do you think he feels?”

To which the boy responded by asking if he could write a letter to Kyle Williams to “make him feel better.”

Here is what the kid wrote:

Dear Mr. Williams:

We just watched the Playoff game. I feel really bad for you but I wanted to tell you that you had a great season. you sould be very proud, so I wanted to say thank you.

I am your #1 FAN!

Owen Shure
Los Angeles, CA

p.s. your awsome

You gotta love this kid. But even more than the kid, I think you gotta love the father!

I’m sure he was upset too. Most people who invest time into sports are somewhat affected by wins and losses. All the more so a heart wrenching loss like the one suffered by the Niners on Sunday. This father used it as a great teaching moment for himself and his son. Athletes are people too. They make mistakes and it hurts them when they make mistakes.

The anger towards athletes when they don’t live up to our lofty expectations can cause people to do stupid things. They write death threats and forget that their sports heroes have feelings too.

No one feels worse than the goats of these big games. Hatred and anger towards them is immature and misguided.

Meanwhile, the rest of country has to deal with another championship that will be decided between teams from New York and Boston. That’s something to get upset about! (Just kidding.)

Click the link to see the letter!

Link: Yahoo

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:

Conservatives Should Support the NBA Players Union

rabbifink — Fri, 18 Nov 2011 17:17:56 +0000

Sports fans know that the NBA is currently undergoing a labor dispute between Ownership and the players represented by their Union. The dispute has led to two drastic measures.

First, the owners “locked out” the players. This means that the owners of the teams told the players that they would not allow them to play or earn paychecks unless they negotiated a new collective bargaining agreement. They tried negotiating. No deal was struck.

Next the players decertified their union. They are now individuals negotiating and no longer a union and they are suing the owners for anti-trust violations.

There are several very interesting things to note about these negotiations that would interest non-sports fans. This post deals with one.

Normally, unions are supported by liberals and ownership is supported by conservatives. I don’t need to explain this is too much detail it is fairly self-evident.

So knee-jerk reactionists, I know one particularly bombastic fellow in particular, will define their allegiances in this dispute based on their social / political beliefs. So knee-jerk conservatives will side with the owners and liberals will side with the players.

This is a mistake.

The NBA is not like any other business for several reasons. What is relevant here is that the owners are not the same as any other group of ownership. In the NBA the owners have already imposed a team wide salary cap and maximum contracts as well as highly regulated contracts over the course of the first five years of every single player’s career.

This means that the best, most valuable players are unable to earn their actual value. Let’s take Kobe Bryant. Kobe is slated to earn $25,244,000 this year. That sounds like a lot of money and it is. But he is actually worth MORE than that. So the owners have regulated the salaries to the point that Kobe CANNOT earn market value for his services. It would be like the banking industry saying that a CFO can only make $5 million dollars a year even if he brings $35 million of revenue each year. This is not something conservatives should support.

Further, at this point in the negotiations, the players are fighting for issues regarding movement of players. Owners want the salary cap to be so draconian that a team would not be able sign players that really want to play for them. The owners want to keep players in the places where they drafter for longer. The players will have little to no say as to where they work. This is not very free market like either. Again, not something that conservatives should support.

Another factor to consider is that small market owners are unhappy that they are not making money. There are many reasons a team might not be making money. But the single biggest expense for most teams is the salaries of their players. Teams with less income cannot afford to overspend on players. Yet, this is exactly what they do. A small market team gave Rashard Lewis, a two time NBA All Star who is a typical second or third best player on a team, $22,152,000 for this coming season. That is the second highest NBA salary. It is a terrible contract. Is it any wonder that the team that made that deal is losing money. Irresponsible spending is a huge factor in the bottom line of NBA teams. Whose fault is it if that team does not make money? The players? No. It is the owner’s. There are many many bad contracts in the NBA. Dumb owners are demanding a bailout and future safety net. Regulating contracts to the degree that it is impossible for an owner to make a mistake is not Capitalism. This is not something a conservative should support.

It turns out that in these negotiations, the union is arguing for conservative economic principles and the owners are arguing for more socialist principles. Conservatives should support the players. As hard as it may be to say the words “I support a union” or “I support labor” in this instance, the union and labor are the side that is more aligned with conservative beliefs.

(I believe that liberals should also support the players but that is not the point of this post.)

Background: The offer that should have been accepted (ESPN Truehoop)

Alan Dershowitz on “Who is a Jew”

rabbifink — Thu, 18 Aug 2011 01:12:34 +0000

(Photo via NY Times) Branca was disconsolate after giving up the home run that won a pennant in 1951.

The NY Times has been busy with a story about Ralph Branca and his heritage.

Who is Ralph Branca? He’s the guy who gave up the “shot heard ’round the word”.

What’s the “shot heard ’round the world”? The home run hit by Bobby Thompson of the New York Giants that was immediately followed by “THE GIANTS WIN THE PENNANT! THE GIANTS WIN THE PENNANT! THE GIANTS WIN THE PENNANT! THE GIANTS WIN THE PENNANT!”

Branca has a largely ignominious place in sports lore because he gave up that epic home run.

During an investigative report on his life by reporter Joshua Prager, it was discovered that Branca’s mother was a Jew who emigrated to the United States in 1901 from what was then Hungary. Branca was as shocked as anyone to learn that his mother was a Jew. Perhaps he was even more shocked to discover that he was a Jew as well. For in Jewish law, if one’s mother is Jewish, one is Jewish!

Branca was raised Catholic.

As a kid, Branca was a “Shabbos goy”, a term I despise for its less than glamorous connotations. He performed certain tasks forbidden for Jews on the Sabbath. (In all likelihood, it was equally impermissible for those Jews to ask young Ralphie to perform those tasks on their behalf, but I digress.) Branca is quoted at the end of the story in the Times as saying that he better remain a Catholic, otherwise he would have been liable for all his “helpfulness”. To save his soul, Branca, now 85, says he must remain Catholic.

His faulty logic notwithstanding, Branca is a Jew.

At least according to Jewish law he is a Jew.

Alan Dershowitz is of a different mind.

“Ralph Branca is not a Jew,” said Alan Dershowitz, a Brooklyn-born Dodgers fan, lawyer and Harvard professor. “Whatever the definition, it doesn’t include someone who willingly accepted a different religion. He didn’t stay home on Yom Kippur like Koufax.”

“Koufax altered strength and guile and knew that you pitch for six days and you rest on the seventh,” he said. “Branca was straight-on; you could see there was nothing Jewish about Ralph Branca.”

It’s unclear if Dershowitz made these comments before the revelation that Branca’s mother was Jewish. If it was before, the big reveal then I am not sure what the Times is using this quote for. It is was after the revelation that Branca’s mother was a Jew I am completely at lost at how someone’s non-choice, Branca was raised Catholic or someone pitching style can be the determining factor as to one’s Jewishness. What in the world is Dershowitz saying?

According to Jewish law Branca is a Jew. Whether he knew it or cared for or not, he is a Jew. In this respect, Judaism is a family. A long lost cousin who did not know he was related to you can’t be excluded from the family because he has a different style than the rest of the family (if that is even a reasonable assertion, which it is not).

I am disappointed in Dershowitz and I welcome Ralph Branca to the tribe. Even if he was always part of it and even if he doesn’t want to be…

Links: NY Times 1 and NY Times 2

Watch the “shot heard round the world”:

HT: BG

Tisha B’Av Thoughts 2011: Necessity is the Best Motivation

rabbifink — Mon, 08 Aug 2011 19:53:46 +0000

Over the weekend, NFL greats, Deion Sanders and Shannon Sharpe were inducted into the National Football League Hall of Fame among others. These two men are famous for their on the field accomplishments as well as their gifts of speech. Both Sanders and Sharpe have had successful careers as commentators and for good reason. These guys can talk.

It is no surprise that their induction speeches were highly anticipated.

The reviews of their speeches are in and they are mixed. I am not going to grade their performances, but I do have something to say about the content of their speeches.

Both spent considerable time talking about their childhood. They both came from poor, disadvantaged homes. Both were slightly embarrassed by their upbringing. More importantly, both credited their difficult youth as motivation to succeed in the NFL. They wanted “out” so badly that were willing to do whatever it took to become the best players they could be. Luckily for them, they made it.

It seemed from their words that despite all their success, the pain and agony of their childhood has not been assuaged by their mammoth success. They still feel the trauma of their early years even though they made it out. And they made it out in a huge way.

It takes a lot to overcome adversity. Overcoming difficult circumstances is also a tremendous motivator. There are few forces that drive a person to success more than necessity. The need to get out is so powerful that it provides super talented people with a glimmer of hope that they can escape their hellish lives.

People born with less adversity are harder to motivate. Why work as hard when life is easy? Why try to change things if things are just dandy? There are far fewer professional athletes from wealthy homes than from tough neighborhoods. It is simple to understand. When you need a ticket out, you’ll do anything you can to punch that ticket.

For Ashkenazik Jews, our current predicament is unfamiliar. For hundreds of years we have been victims. Violence, segregation, ostracization and victimization described our existence. It boiled over during the Holocaust but was horrible many times and for many years before the Holocaust as well.

For all those years we desperately wanted to get out. Tisha B’Av was easy to feel. Our lives were so difficult and our situations were so dire that it motivated us to experience Tisha B’Av with tears and genuine desire for our Temple to be rebuilt. Our daily existence justified an intense desire to “make the new days into the days of old”.

There was a transitional period as Jews made their way to America. My great-grandfather quit his job every Friday because he refused to work on Shabbos. Eventually, his sisters kicked him out of his home. That was America in the early days.

But now we are comfortable. We have come a long way. Jews live middle to upper class lives in America. We have religious freedom. Kosher food is ubiquitous. We can visit all the important places in the Land of Israel. It is easy to study Torah. We have it good. Real good. Maybe too good.

Where is our motivation?

How are we to work up the emotions necessary to feel Tisha B’Av?

It can be tough.

I propose that as hard and as painful as it may be, we should contemplate the social issues that plague Judaism. We need to consider the difficulty of the orthodox and especially non-orthodox communities in maintaining our religious identity in such a free world. We can think about how freedom has given rise to a slew of new, first world problems.

What I am saying, is we should look as critically as we can at contemporary Judaism. Even though the glass is much more than half full and for 353 days a year we need to appreciate our good fortune, on Tisha B’Av we need to look at the glass as almost completely empty.

That is what we are mourning. We don’t have it all. And we want it all.

Once a year we can focus on the negative. We can remind ourselves that although we are much more advantaged than our grandparents were, we are still a desolate nation living at best, a halfway existence.

It can be hard to do. But no one said Tisha B’Av was supposed to be easy.

Oops! Apparently Giovanni Ramirez Didn’t Attack Brian Stow

rabbifink — Fri, 22 Jul 2011 18:32:10 +0000

The LAPD has arrested two new suspects in the Brian Stow beating.

They have also exonerated their first suspect Giovanni Ramirez. Ramirez was never charged in the attack because investigators felt there was not enough evidence to get past the preliminary hearing. Instead, Ramirez is in jail for violating his parole when guns were found in the home where he was living. That got him 10 months in jail.

The case is disturbing on quite a few levels.

What bothers me more than anything about the Ramirez arrest is summed up nicely with this quote from the LA Times:

“The LAPD’s case against Ramirez stalled from the start. Police took him into custody during an early morning raid May 22 after a parole agent raised suspicion that Ramirez might be one of the assailants, and then multiple witnesses identified him from photo lineups.”

(Emphasis mine.)

This means that although there was no forensic evidence, there was plenty of exculpatory evidence, like an alibi, Ramirez was arrested because multiple people identified him in photo lineups.

But if he is being exonerated it is clear that he didn’t commit the crime. So why was he identified by anyone?

Were those identifying witnesses liars?

Eyewitness identification is one of the weakest forms of evidence. Yet is given disproportionate weight by law enforcement and juries. People think they can remember what someone looks like. But, by and large, we are terrible at it. We get even worse when the witness is from another race.

Add that to shady police work, like hinting at the “correct identification” and you have a toxic mix of unreliability and sneakiness.

Eyewitness identifications have put innocent people in jail, even given them the death penalty. Ramirez is just the latest victim. A lucky victim too. If those identification witnesses testified in court that they saw Ramirez, you can bet dollars to donuts he would have been convicted.

I wrote a paper on the science behind bad IDs and how to fix some the problems inherent to IDs in court proceedings. Hopefully it will be published soon.

In Jewish Law, eyewitnesses need to be vetted so carefully that it is literally impossible for them to lie. And if they somehow pass through the vetting process and are caught lying later on, they are punished for their lies. There is no such system in secular law. Just a cross-examination at trial and rarely any punishment for lying.

Nothing can teach the public how flawed eyewitness identification is like real life examples in the news. Perhaps this is the silver lining to the botched Ramirez arrest. At least the LAPD and LADA were honest enough not to try Ramirez. But now is the time to teach the public about eyewitness identification. They mean very little.

Link: LA Times

Andrew Bynum Parks in an Illegal Spot and Teaches Us About Secular Laws vs. Religious Laws

rabbifink — Thu, 21 Jul 2011 22:19:54 +0000

Lakers center Andrew Bynum found himself on the local and national news for the wrong reasons this week. It seems that Bynum makes the news every off-season for some reason or another.

This is the second time he made news in a shopping mall parking lot. Last time it was Kobe Bryant saying to ship him out on video while in a parking lot. This time, Bynum was caught on camera parking his car in a handicapped spot.

In the grand scheme of things, it is not a big deal. People do it all the time. Who could forget the time George Costanza needed a parking spot in a pinch so he pulled into the handicapped spot?

Of course, the Bynum haters have used this to prove how immature Bynum is. It’s hard to take such criticism seriously because Andrew Bynum is only 23 years old. At that age, being immature is normal.

The incident resonated with me for a completely different reason.

Laws in secular countries, like the USA, are man made rules. For every rule there is a reaction, punishment, fine and stigma associated with the breaking of the rule. Commit murder and the punishment may be the death penalty, or life without possibility of parole (ie death in prison). Get caught speeding, you get a fine for a few hundred dollars. Skip out on paying your taxes, risk jailtime and a heavy fine.

The punishments may be deterrents, forms of retribution, attempts to rehabilitate or simply incapacitation. If you are willing to pay the price, there’s nothing really stopping you from breaking the law. It’s a risk / reward analysis.

If someone is able to afford speeding tickets, they can choose to speed and pay the fine is they get caught. For Andrew Bynum the risk of getting a ticket (he didn’t) did not outweigh the reward of parking up close. Is this immature? Sure. Is it a reasonable way of thinking within our system? I think so.

But when contrasted with a system of religious law, like Jewish law, another possibility enters the picture.

In Jewish law, there is a moral imperative to follow the law. This means that even if you want to break the law and take your punches and suffer the eternal punishment, you have acted immorally. In fact, the rabbis teach us that if someone says “I will sin and then repent, even the forgiveness attained on Yom Kippur won’t forgive that sin”. In religious law, the act is wrong. The punishment is incentive to do the right thing. But the law represents the right thing.

Now, I am not advocated a system of religious law in any free country. That would be a terrible idea. How can there be freedom when there is a system of law that only works for some people? (And calls non-believers heretics / infidels etc.?)

But if I had all the money in the world, there would still be an imperative for me not to take that handicap spot. Jewish law requires giving up a seat (or in this case, parking spot) for anyone elderly or infirm. Parking in the spot might be okay, but if someone who needs the spot comes by and is forced to take a different spot, I (may) have violated the law. Religious law superimposed on top of secular law can work very well. In this case, there would be no risk / reward analysis. It would not matter if I was willing to pay the price. If it is wrong, I cannot do it. Driving recklessly would fall under the same category. In Jewish law, one is not permitted to put their life in danger. Driving too fast is dangerous. Even if I am willing to pay the fine, I can’t drive so fast that it would dangerous because it is wrong to do so.

Andrew Bynum acted in a way that is consistent with how secular law works. Having a religious law to superimpose on those laws could go a long way to not rationalizing breaking the law.

How timely are the words of the Chief Rabbi of the UK, Rabbi Jonathan Sacks on this week’s Torah portion:

The Torah sets forth a… way, in which people obey the law because they have voluntarily undertaken to do so. This is a society based not on power or the pursuit of self-interest but on freely embraced moral obligation.

Link: NBA

HT (Rabbi Sacks quote): @howielb

A Magical Moment in USA Women’s Soccer

rabbifink — Mon, 11 Jul 2011 15:58:20 +0000

On Sunday the USA Women’s soccer team played against the Brazil Women’s soccer team in a quarter-final World Cup match.

Soccer is a wonderful sport. My son loves to play, whenever I watch it I enjoy it. I really want to go to a World Cup or English Premier League game someday. Yet, soccer plays 4th or 5th or even 6th fiddle for most sports fans.

To be fair, a lot of the under 30 crowd loves soccer and are avid soccer fans. But by and large, soccer is not an American pastime.

But in my opinion, soccer produces some of the most magical moments in all of sports. Landon Donovan scored a winning goal against Algeria in extra time during the 2010 Mens World Cup. It was a magical moment. But I believe it has been outclassed by a more magical moment during Sunday’s match. The USA Women are a top team and they were playing against a top team. The USA was down one goal in extra time of an extra period. Then this happened:

‘}” alt=”" />

I don’t know why, but sports in general, soccer more than most, especially the USA National Teams has the ability to brings tears to my eyes. Something about soccer tugs at my heartstrings more than other sports or entertainment. I find the sheer joy and bliss of soccer players in a moment like this very inspiring.

I hope you do as well.

Attempted Murder in New Square: An Analysis

rabbifink — Thu, 02 Jun 2011 02:52:24 +0000

For some background, see yesterday’s post: Thoughts on Kiryas Joel: The Poorest City in America

The chasidic town of New Square (an enclave that is very similar to KJ) has found itself in the news for all the wrong reasons. Last week an 18 year old goon attempted to burn down a man’s home along with the people inside the home. The target had been a victim of intimidation and vandalism on previous occasions so he had recently installed a surveillance system of cameras around his home. It was on these cameras that the victim first saw the goon. He went outside and confronted the goon.

A short brawl ensued and the goon lit his Molotov cocktail and fled. Both men caught on fire but the house was spared. The victim suffered severe burns all over his body and has already undergone skin grafts.

The arson and attempted murder were escalations of previous action against the victim. Prior to this incident he had been subject to protests in front of his home, broken windows in his car and his home.

What crime did the victim commit that sparked vandalism and violence?

He prayed at an old age home nearby instead of praying in the community synagogue. The grand rabbi of New Square requires that all residents of New Square attend the same prayer service on Friday nights. The victim did not attend. The goons were enforcing the rabbi’s rule.

No one excuses the behavior of the goon. Social pressure is one thing, by violence is inexcusable. It would be unfair for me or anyone to place specific blame on anyone other than the goon who committed this act. There is no hard evidence that he was instructed to do what he did. There is some circumstantial evidence but for purposes of this article, it will be conceded that this person acted alone.

One response that I have seen on blogs, Twitter posts and Facebook comments is that the victim “had it coming”. (See: Avi Shafran on New Square) The village has a rule. He chose to live there and should expect that he will suffer some indignity for his failure to live by the standard of the village. Further, if he doesn’t like the rules, he should have left the village instead of staying AND breaking the rules.

In my opinion, this completely misses the point.

There was another scandal this week. The Head Football Coach at Ohio State University resigned amid a whirlwind of allegations that he assisted and enabled players to break the rules of NCAA. The players are being disciplined and their Head Coach, Jim Tressel has resigned and is being crucified in the media.

Jason Whitlock wrote a really great column about the scandal (Tressel Product of Flawed System). Whitlock contends, and I agree with him, that while Tressel is culpable for his sins, he is really just the product of a system built on lies. The primary lie being that student athletes are amateur. Whitlock has been saying forever, and I have been agreeing just as long, that the NCAA is the biggest fraud in America. They make billions of dollars off of these athletes but the athletes see none of that money. To maintain amateur status they must adhere to thousands of rules that basically prohibit them from taking any gifts or benefits from anybody.

Tressel was just part of the system. He didn’t create the problem. He didn’t make the problem worse. He was just a cog in a mighty machine. Indeed, he broke the rules. However the system is deeply flawed and everyone is breaking the rules that the real criminal here is not Tressel. It is the NCAA. [The same should be said for USC, Reggie Bush, OJ Mayo and Pete Carrol.]

What happened in New Square is the result of a flawed system.

Any system that demands absolute fealty in every respect of one’s life, stripping one of independence and the opportunity to think and choose is a bad system. Any system that demonizes someone for asserting one smidgen of original thought is a bad system.

The perpetrators of violence and social terrorism are cogs in the machine. The machine is the problem. It isn’t the cogs.

To complete the analogy, the arsonist was a football player, the leadership is Jim Tressel and they are all part of a system like the NCAA.

The system needs to be fixed. The cogs are all responsible for their actions but the most frustrating thing is that their actions are justifiable in the system. That is why the system needs to be scrapped. It permits behavior like this to occur. This incident is only one example of a rotten system. There are more.

Maintaining control over people is not easy. But with per se poverty and social terror it becomes easier to enforce. That is part of the reason why the Kiryas Joel situation is so problematic. (See: Thoughts on Kiryas Joel: The Poorest City in America). It creates a breeding ground for anti-social behavior.

According to Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch the Torah is designed to create a positive social environment for growth and spiritual development. It can’t be that poverty, oppression, terror and anti-social behavior are the darchei noam, pleasant ways of the Torah. It just can’t.

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

The BYU Honor Code and Me

rabbifink — Thu, 03 Mar 2011 02:58:00 +0000

Brigham Young University is operated by the Church of Latter Day Saints. It is a Mormon school run with Mormon principles. The school has an athletics department and has had some very successful teams as well professional athletes. Some of whom have even made the Hall of Fame for their respective sports.

This year, BYU’s basketball team is a national sensation. Their star player Jimmer Fredette is receiving national attention and may be the best player in all of college basketball. He has led the team to a national ranking of 3 in both the major college polls. One of their primary role players is Brandon Davies. Or perhaps I should say, was Brandon Davies.

Davies was cut from the team today.

His infraction? He “violated the BYU Honor Code”.

As a Mormon School, BYU expects their students to live by Mormon rules. This means many things. It means no alcohol or coffee. I know. It’s hard to imagine college without them. It means conservative clothing. It means no foul language. It means no gambling.

It also means no premarital sex. 51% of BYU’s graduates are married.

Brandon Davies was not married and he had sex with his girlfriend. (I love how the university calls it “sexual relations”. How Biblical of them…)

Violating The Honor Code is not grounds for immediate dismissal from the University. But it can be. Davies has not been kicked out of school. But in a serious blow to BYU’s National Championship hopes, he has been dismissed from the team.

There is so much to say about this story from so many angles.

The first thing is that Davies signed The Honor Code so it’s absolutely reasonable for him to be kicked off the team for violated the code. Even if the infraction was something that almost all other college students in almost all other colleges engage in. I have no problem with him being kicked off the team. Plus, it’s nice to see an organization actually live up to their word.

The second thing is the code. I think it’s very admirable that BYU has a code that requires its students to live up to their version of what is right and wrong. I had a similar situation. I did not go to a typical undergraduate university. I went to yeshiva. The rules of Yeshiva make the BYU Honor Code look liberal. Although, coffee was certainly a big part of our day and alcohol was served at Shabbos meals. For the most part yeshiva rules are even stricter than Mormon rules.

I have been asked many times if I felt like I missed out on the “college experience”. I always answer, yes I did miss out on the college experience, thankfully. I am sure the BYU alumni feel the same way.

One more thing worth mentioning is the teammates that Davies leaves behind. I am sure they are disappointed, perhaps even upset. But they should also consider how lucky they are to play for a University that cares more about their morals and principles than making a buck. That is something we all can learn from.

Link: The Salt Lake Tribune

You Can’t Make This Stuff Up: Iran Sees Zion in London 2012 Olympics Logo

rabbifink — Tue, 01 Mar 2011 03:01:57 +0000

The headline says it all.

The 2012 London Olympics have a gosh-awful logo and Iran wants to boycott the Olympics because of the logo. Except they don’t object to its awfulness, they have a much more “reasonable” objection.

It seems that in Iran, if you look at the logo, somehow you see the word Zion. And somehow this is offensive. I know. It sounds insane. But it’s true.

Even sillier is the fact that apparently it takes FOUR years to notice the word zion in the logo. Seeing as the logo was anounced (and criticized for its ridiculous design) FOUR YEARS AGO.

In a statement, a commonly used front for official proclomations in Iran said:

As internet documents have proved, using the word Zion in the logo of the 2012 Olympic Games is a disgracing action and against the Olympics’ valuable mottos.

“There is no doubt that negligence of the issue from your side may affect the presence of some countries in the Games, especially Iran which abides by commitment to the values and principles.”

I always like the Olympics because it gives countries a chance to set aside differences and compete. Part of that competition is trying to best your rival countries. It seems Iran wants no part of it.

Either that, or they are afraid of LOSING!

Link: Guardian UK

Only in Los Angeles

rabbifink — Mon, 21 Feb 2011 21:25:33 +0000

Ya gotta love LA.

While cruising around Hollywood yesterday I saw this car. A Lakers branded Monte Carlo. It is real. It was driving. It was not being driven by an athlete that I could recognize. It just “was”.

Vicious Tree Killer Arrested

rabbifink — Fri, 18 Feb 2011 22:40:40 +0000

Filed under ridiculous:

Auburn University won the BCS Championship Game to become the National College Football Champions. After their victory celebrating supporters of Auburn gathered where they always gather. They reveled Toomer’s Corner, home to 130 year old Oak trees. Part of the celebration includes draping the trees in toilet paper. Charming, I know. (No pun intended) And classy.

Auburn’s chief sports rival is Alabama. A 62 year old Alabama supporter had seen enough celebrating at Toomer’s Corner and decided to put an end to it. He used Spike 80df pesticide to poison the trees and they are almost certainly going to die. Yes, a 62 year old man. Yes, he killed 130 year old oak trees.

As if this wasn’t idiotic enough, a man named Al from Dadeville called a local radio show and boasted that he was the one who poisoned the trees. The police found him and arrested him. Al’s real name is Harvey Almorn Updyke and he is in big trouble. He’s been charged with criminal mischief and is being held on $50,000 bail. The Feds are involved and those charges carry up to a 10 year prison sentence.

Sports are fun. But when it turn you into a crazy person they aren’t fun anymore.

And killing 130 year old trees is just idiotic. They take 130 years to grow back! That’s not a prank. That’s being an idiot.

Enjoy prison, Al from Dadeville…

Link: SB Nation Atlanta

Cricket in Compton Keeps Ex-Cons On The Straight and Narrow

rabbifink — Tue, 15 Feb 2011 05:30:36 +0000

Compton is one of the toughest neighborhoods in Los Angeles. It has been ranked as the 17th most dangerous city in America. Gangs are a part of daily life in Compton. The streets are run by ex-cons, cons and future cons. Drugs and death pervade the very air.

Gang life is usually not a choice for folks growing up in these neighborhoods. It’s like being born into a family. You’re in because you’re born in. It is extremely difficult to break free from the gangs. But it can be done.

I think it is obvious that providing non-violent outlets for youth is an important tool for helping youths avoid the gang lifestyle. The problem is that most “outlets” don’t create the family feel, structure and sense of belonging that a gang provides. The exception to that is sports. Being on a team, especially a good team feeds the same hunger that a gang feeds. Unfortunately, sports teams are also run over with gangs. The teams represent the gangs. The winners assert dominance over the losing gang.

On a deeper level there is another flaw with most sports as an alternative to gang life. Sports don’t really demand etiquette and respect. Trash talking is part of the game. Then there is the violence. Basketball, soccer and football, the most popular “pick up” sports in SoCal are rough and tough games. There is jostling, tackling, fouls and much contact between players. One could say that sports feed into the violent gang culture to a degree.

That is why this BBC report on a Cricket team from Compton is extra remarkable. Cricket has pageantry, etiquette and respect. It is the ultimate gentleman’s game. Somehow, the sport has caught on in Compton. The team has toured across the world drawing rave reviews from more experienced cricket teams in real cricket countries.

The team has been somewhat successful in getting kids off the streets but they have higher goals. They want to build a cricket field in Compton. I wish them the best of luck.

Keep up the good work!

Video off the BBC report:

HT: JM

Link: BBC and http://www.comptoncricketclub.org/

Super Bowl Ad Censorship: A Good Thing

rabbifink — Fri, 04 Feb 2011 00:42:12 +0000

This Sunday, the most celebrated American tradition returns with its yearly dose of football. It’s the Super Bowl (TM). I know, I’m supposed to call it the “Big Game” or something nebulous like that, but I won’t.

For football fans, the Super Bowl is usually one of the most disappointing weeks of football. That’s because a team, OTHER THAN YOURS, wins the darn thing. But for non-football fans, the game is a yearly infusion of football and bits of entertainment spliced into 30 second spots called commercials.

This year, Fox is selling Super Bowl ads for about $2 million dollars a pop. It is the most watched television event every year and the cost of the commercial time creates a huge buzz surrounding the ads. Corporations dedicate millions of dollars to producing their Super Bowl ads and the ads live on far beyond the Super Bowl via YouTube and blogs inviting viewers to cast their votes as to their favorites.

Clearly, the Super Bowl is a huge opportunity for a company to generate buzz and market its products. Last year I wrote about the Pro-Life ad that was unnecessarily controversial (see: Tim Tebow’s Pro-Life Super Bowl Ad is Heartwarming and Reckless and then RETRACTION: Tim Tebow Ad WAS Harmless NOT Reckless).

Sometimes the ads that don’t get aired are even more interesting than the ads that do get aired.

This year several ads have been banned from airing during the Super Bowl. These bans are not from the FCC. They are self-censoring bans by Fox.

One ad is by Ashley Madison. This is a company that helps folks in committed relationships have an affair. Their slogan is “Life is short. Have an affair.” Their CEO is upset that his company’s ad was rejected it by Fox. He called it censorship. Well yes, it is censorship. The question is if it is warranted.

Another censored ad was an ad that could be viewed as residing on the completely opposite spectrum of morality. This ad was advising people to look to John 3:16 for inspiration. Fox rejected this ad because it contained “Religious Doctrine”. This is also censorship. The question is if it is warranted.

I think that both commercials are appropriate for Television. However, they are not appropriate for the Super Bowl.

The Super Bowl is a family television program. It is watched by the same people who watch Saturday morning cartoons and PBS Kids. Ads that assume that the maturity and sophistication of the audience is over 15 years old are plainly inappropriate.

Ashley Madison can advertise on shows and programs that adults are the primary viewers. Children are not the audience that Ashley Madison wants to target and worse, children don’t have the maturity to deal with ads that may cause them to contemplate issues that are not appropriate for their demographic, like infidelity. An ad that tells viewers to look up John 3:16, which by the way, says that with Jesus you will be alright, the inference being that without Jesus you won’t, is not appropriate for children who think they are alright without Jesus because that is how their parents raised them. The Super Bowl is a family event and the ads should reflect that reality.

Personally, I find ads for Viagra and Cialis or other adult only products and services during sporting events offensive. These two ads are even worse. My suggestion for parents watching sporting events with their kids is simply not to watch commercials. First of all, you will spare them the sick consumerism of the West for a little while longer. But more importantly, the advertisers are not considering the effects of their ads of kids and sometimes the ads are just not appropriate for them. Do them and yourself a favor. Skip the ads.

How? Get a DVR. Or turn off the TV for the commercials. Or just have the kids engage in another activity aside from watching the commercials.

I think Fox is in the right for censoring some Super Bowl commercials. I wouldn’t mind seeing even more censorship for family programs like the Super Bowl.

And as a Ravens fan: Go Packers!

Links:

Ashley Madison Super Bowl ad (just kidding. Google that one yourself, if you dare) and John 3:16 ad

Another Snake-Oil Sales Company is Exposed

rabbifink — Thu, 06 Jan 2011 08:11:54 +0000

A few famous athletes wear Power Balance wrist bands on their wrists. Power Balance sells all kinds of products that are supposed to “react to the natural flow of the body” and increase athletic performance. How does this magic work? There is a special hologram that is on the wrist band or necklace which somehow does the magic.

The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission conducted a study and found that the holograms do absolutely nothing. Shocking. Right?

The company has fired back saying that they believe in their product and despite the claims of the scientists at the ACCC, many people believe in their product’s effectiveness.

I heard on the radio that the way they market their product is by pulling you very powerfully by the arm, you fall over, then they put on the bracelet and pull you again, this time much less powerfully, you don’t fall over and you are to conclude that the hologram really makes you stronger. (At least this was how it was described by Petros and Money who were subjected to this test.)

People are always looking for a quick fix. There are no shortcuts in life. If you want results you need to do the work. Holograms don’t make you stronger. Wrist bands and amulets don’t make you stronger either.

The funny thing is that these types of products are reminiscent of amulets and charms of the past. Usually associated with religion, these items were thought to bring luck or even the favor of God. The Torah prohibits these practices. Although tricksters have been fooling Jews and others into buying their miracle items despite the exhortations of the Torah. Now that religious miracles are not as reliable as they were in the past (read: frauds are more easily exposed), the snake oil salesmen have moved to athletes looking to gain an edge.

Reading stuff like this makes me a proud skeptic.

Source: Power Balance

Link: OC Metro

The Sales Pitch

New York Court of Appeal Ruling: Golf at Your Own Risk

rabbifink — Wed, 22 Dec 2010 00:17:46 +0000

I was going to write my Entertainment Law Review article on this issue. (Instead I wrote about Cyberbullying)

A recreational golfer named Azad Anand was struck by an errant golf ball while he was retrieving his ball. He sued his golf partner, Anoop Kapoor for damages. Normally, if you strike someone negligently with a golf ball you are liable for damages. Similarly, if you negligently hit a hockey puck into someone’s face you are liable for damages.

However, when one is engaged in an organized athletic activity there is an assumption of risk. This means that the participants are aware that there is some inherent risk in playing the game and are willing to forfeit any potential damages.

Cases of this nature arose as a result of injuries sustained during boxing matches, football games and swimming competitions. The golf case tested the assumption of risk issue to see if it would be extended to golf. Golf is not really a sport with inherent risks. There are not too many golf injuries and that is because golf is not an inherenrtly dangerous activity. The plaintiff claimed that negligence during an activity that is not inherently dangerous and is not an integral part of the game (ie errant balls) therefore he should be able to recover for neglignce. Apparenltly, the defendant did not yell the customary “fore” prior to hitting the ball. This could amount to negligence and with no assumption of risk the defendant would be on the hook for damages.

The lower court and the higher court agreed that there is an assumption of risk in a recreational game of golf. Thus, even though golf is not a dangerous sport, participants assume the risks of the dangers that are commonly associated with the sport.

It’s not a landmark ruling but it is important to observe the development of this area of law.

Link: ABA Journal

There Is No Such Thing as a Kal V’Chomer (a Fortiori) in the NFL

rabbifink — Wed, 24 Nov 2010 22:44:12 +0000

Everyone who has studied the Talmud is familiar with the logical argument used throughout the Talmud called a “kal v’chomer” or kal vachomer. A kal v’chomer is the Talmud’s version of the a fortiori argument.

That is, if A is more advanced than B, if A can do X, B can certainly do X. Wikipedia uses this example: “If it has been established that a person is deceased, then one can, with equal or greater certainty, argue that the person is not breathing.”

When invoking the kal v’chomer in Talmud study, it is the opportune moment to utilize the familiar Talmudic sing-song as well as a “thumb dip” to emphasize your point. (Speaking of which, the thumb dip needs a wikipedia entry… no?)

Anyway, the kal v’chomer is not considered a perfect argument by the Talmud. No punishments are able to be given as a result of a kal v’chomer.

The weakness of a kal v’chomer is mostly due to the lack of external information that could prove that A is not stronger than B for another reason.

This graphic demonstrates exactly why the kal v’chomer doesn’t always work…

Sports fans love trying to prove their team’s supremacy by using the kal v’chomer. Team A beat Team B and Team B beat Team C so Team A can certainly beat Team C. The problem is, this is a complete fallacy. There are matchup issues, injury issues, effort issues plus the element of luck.

The graphic shows how there are no kal v’chomer’s in the NFL. As you go clockwise, the first team has defeated the second team, thus, imperically demonstrating that anyone can win on “Any Given Sunday”.

Graphic credit: Reddit

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

This Just In: Football is a Violent Sport

rabbifink — Thu, 21 Oct 2010 16:07:35 +0000

The National Football League is cracking down on violent hits. Following a Sunday where several players suffered devastating hits to their heads and a season that has seen a tick up in concussions, the NFL issued several fines of $50,000 or more to players who “led with their head” into another player’s head.

You might think that the helmet protects a player’s head, but it is just as effective as a weapon. Launching one’s helmet into another player’s head could be an effective way of breaking up a play but it also can cause a head injury of a serious magnitude. The NFL is trying to protect its players and “head shots” will be a suspendable offense from here on out.

Football purists aren’t happy. They think that if players are not allowed to use their helmets as weapons on the playing field the game is diluted and weak. Real football is dangerous and pretending otherwise will ruin the game.

Of course this is a pathetically misinformed argument. NFL players are people too. Head trauma does not heal like a torn ACL or turf toe. It can cause health problems for the duration of the person’s life, memory loss, early onset of Alzheimers, a shorter life expectancy. See Malcolm Gladwell’s article in the New Yorker from last Fall: OFFENSIVE PLAY. The dangers are real and scary. Protecting other human beings should override concerns (that are not even valid) that the game will be diluted. It’s a GAME! These are human beings! Incredible.

I love the NFL, but I hate the head shots. Violence makes me cringe and its no different on the Football field. I would love to see less violence in the NFL.

There is a legal issue as well. When someone engages in professional sports there is an “assumption of risk”. Participants waive their right to recover for damages suffered during the game, but only if the harms were caused as a result of behavior that is risky and inherent to the game. It could be argued that “head shots” are not inherent to the game of football. I know that I have played football without head shots…

There is a Jewish angle here too. I went to a Yeshiva High School (Ner Israel Mechina High School) where many of the rules of the school were determined by Torah principles. We played football most Saturday nights and we mostly played tackle football. We used no pads or protection; just our resilient teenage bodies. Fortunately, there were no serious injuries.

We were told that it was not “against the rules” to play tackle football but the Rosh Yeshiva (Rabbinic Leader of the school – a wise, saintly and holy man, R’ Yaakov Weinberg) held that playing tackle football was not permissible. He explained that tackle football is a sport where part of the game requires one person to physically maul another person. In his view it was against Torah principles to participate in a game that requires one to hit and potentially harm another person.

We played anyway, and we really tried not hurt anyone, but the lesson stuck. How can one play a game that makes you hurt another person? Contrast that with this quote from Jerome Harrison (fined $75,000 for 2 devastating hits):

”I don’t want to injure anybody, there’s a big difference between being hurt and being injured. You get hurt, you shake it off and come back the next series or the next game. I try to hurt people.”

Trying to hurt people? The game can be played beautifully without “trying to hurt people”. And perhaps more importantly, trying to hurt people is not the right way to treat fellow human beings.

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”.

Braylon Edwards is a Moron Who Failed to Learn a Sobering Lesson From Donté Stallworth

rabbifink — Tue, 21 Sep 2010 23:33:52 +0000

On the morning of March 14 2009, NFL Wide Receiver Donté Stallworth was driving his Bentley when he struck and killed a pedestrian. Stallworth admitted that he had been drinking the previous night and was allegedly still intoxicated at the time of the accident. The pedestrian was not in a crosswalk and Stallworth was only driving 10 MPH over the speed limit of 40 MPH.

Stallworth was very apologetic and sympathetic to the family. Stallworth wished that the family should avoid having to go to court to relive the trauma of losing their loved one and happily settled out of court in a financial agreement and made a guilty plea to avoid a criminal case.

According to Yahoo! Sports, Stallworth would have likely been found innocent at trial. However, Stallworth wanted to avoid trial for the sake of the family and to do what he thought was morally right and thus accepted the guilty plea. A friend said: “His biggest concern was for the gentleman’s daughter. He wanted [the victim's] family to know he was remorseful.” His lawyers tried to convince him not to move forward with his plea. He did it anyway. He was in jail for 24 days among other punishments.

For his off the field misbehavior, Stallworth was suspended by the NFL for one year without pay. In his time off, Stallworth spent his time pursuing more meaningful outlets, like politics. Stallworth is an avid reader and has a subscription to The Economist, a more highbrow publication than what most jocks are assumed to be reading. To anyone who will listen, Stallworth says: “Any little decision you make will have a subsequent reaction, be cognizant of your decisions.”

It seems that Donté Stallworth has used his experience to improve his life, the life of those who lay in the wake of his error and the lives of anyone “who will listen”.

Stallworth was drinking with a friend that night. He was drinking with NFL Wide Receiver, Braylon Edwards. Edwards has had a spotty NFL career. He has underperformed and been fined several times for various infractions. In March 2009 he was drinking with Stallworth in the incident that led to a death but he was not charged in the incident.

Edwards must have seen how Stallworth reacted to his crime. In true Restorative Justice fashion, Stallworth took ownership of his actions and made it up to the victim’s family as best he could. Stallworth has tried to turn his life into a more positive light for others.

Yet, this morning, Braylon Edwards was picked up by NYS Police with a .16 BAC (twice the legal limit) with two fellow teammates as passengers in his vehicle.

Yes. Braylon Edwards is a moron. He saw his friend kill a man while under the influence of alcohol. Yet, he puts his own life, the lives of his two teammates and the lives of every other driver on the road at 5:15 this morning in danger.

It’s important to learn from our experiences. Experiences are supposed to be better learning tools than book learning.

It seems Braylon Edwards is experience learning disabled…

The NCAA and Following Rules

rabbifink — Tue, 07 Sep 2010 17:08:33 +0000

Masoli in Court

This post has been crossposted to DovBear – The NCAA and Contemporary Orthodox Judaism.

Last year, Jeremiah Masoli was the quarterback for the Oregon Ducks. He got into some trouble with the law and committed second degree burglary and misdemeanor possession of marijuana. The Ducks cut him from the team and Masoli transferred to Ole Miss.

At first he was considered a transfer and would be forced to sit out the year. He appealed and won the appeal and is now eligible to play for Ole Miss. Apparently, the NCAA does not feel that breaking the law warrants a suspension.

For the last five years, the NCAA has been investigating Reggie Bush and benefits his family received from a potential agent. In finding that Bush broke NCAA rules by accepting gifts (like a house for his family) the NCAA sanctioned USC by taking away scholarships, banning them from bowl games and taking away personal awards. Apparently, the NCAA feels that breaking ITS rules warrants severe punishment.

A few weeks ago, Rabbi Weil wrote a wonderful article on how Orthodox Judaism has morphed into caring more about its own rules than the rules of society and the laws of our country. (Link: OU.org) We concentrate so much on the rituals and customs of Orthodox Judaism that set us apart from other religions that sometimes the basics of citizenship get ignored. It is especially egregious because our law has many of those same laws!

It’s almost just the NCAA. It seems like we care more about our own rules than the laws of the land. This is wrong.

As we begin a New Year, I think we need to recommit ourselves to the universal laws of good all the while celebrating those laws that make us different. We can afford to ignore neither.

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…

No White Running Backs Allowed?

rabbifink — Tue, 20 Apr 2010 15:14:36 +0000

One of the best college football running backs in recent memory is Toby Gerhart.

Gerhart put the Stanford Cardinal football team on his shoulders and carried them to prominence for the first time since John Elway led them to prominence 25 years ago.

His college statistics are astounding: 1871 yards and 27 touchdowns last season. His combine numbers are impressive: 4.50 in the 40 yard dash and a 38 inch vertical leap.

Sounds like a sure-fire first round draft pick…

So why are scouts projecting Gerhart will be picked in the second round of the upcoming NFL Draft?

Gerhart thinks it may be due to the fact that he is white.

In the NFL, running backs are black. And Gerhart is white.

In his own words:

“One team I interviewed with asked me about being a white running back,” Gerhart says. “They asked if it made me feel entitled, or like I felt I was a poster child for white running backs. I said, ‘No, I’m just out there playing ball. I don’t think about that.’ I didn’t really know what to say.”

In the words of a scout:

“He’ll be a great second-round pickup for somebody, but I guarantee you if he was the exact same guy – but he was black – he’d go in the first round for sure,” the scout said. “You could make a case that he’s a Steven Jackson-type – doesn’t have blazing speed but he’s strong and powerful and versatile.”

Of course there are some legitimate concerns about Gerhart’s running style and durability and those are factors in his draft placement as well.

Is it racism when a white football player is discriminated against? It can be. When the white person is the minority and the white person is given negative treatment it could be considered racism. And as far as NFL players and specifically NFL running backs go, white is definitely a minority.

I can’t say whether this case is racism or not. Whether it is perception or reality is impossible to know. But either way I am rooting for Gerharts success. The more stereotypes that can be broken down the better our society will be.

Quotes courtesy of Yahoo Sports: Column

Another Reason I Don't Like LeBron James

rabbifink — Sun, 18 Apr 2010 19:50:38 +0000

The NBA Playoffs are here. That means 10 weeks of sporadic games until someone takes home the Larry O’Brien Trophy and gets to spritz champagne all over themselves.

Of course, the Supreme King Master of the Basketball Universe, His Royal Heiness LeBron James is expected to win it all and take his team to the “Promised Land” and we will all fawn all over his super-human ability and charisma . That is until he reminds us that it is all about the money in the off-season, because LeBron is a free agent this summer.

I have had my criticisms of LeBron in the past. In Athletes as Role Models? I reminded everyone that athletes are just athletes. They are not people worth looking up to. And in Teamwork: Important in Sports, More Important in Life I pointed out that for an athlete who is supposed to be such a team player, the video of LeBron with his teammates disappearing is a conflicting (and wrong) message.

The latest gripe I have with LeBron is even more serious. LeBron owns a marketing company call LRMR. In the NBA a marketing company is a conglomorate that tries to woo potential clients from the college ranks to sign with them to represent the athlete’s interest. The agency will market the player as a commodity to teams to negotiate salary as well to corporations to contract endorsement deals.

The business is shady enough as it is. College athletes are not allowed to accept payment or gifts. Marketing agencies will use 3rd parties to win over athletes in the hope that the 3rd party will control which agency the athlete chooses. Is it legal? probably. Nevertheless, it is definitiely shady. But when an athlete, especially an athlete with the influence of LeBron enters the fray, what was shady is now borderline unethical. If an athlete controls other athlete’s decisions by controlling their contract negotionations and endorsement deals, that is a level of control that is, in my view, wrong.

But maybe LeBron is such a sterling character that he would never dream of using his influence to contol athletes?

Sorry, but according to this Yahoo News item, LeBron is already working his magic on the most highyl touted NBA prospect since LeBron, John Wall.

Just another reason I don’t like LeBron…

Sometimes Role Models Are Athletes

rabbifink — Mon, 08 Feb 2010 10:50:11 +0000

Grant Desme: Is he looking heavenward?

The two most popular posts on this blog are variants of one common theme.

Athletes as Role Models.

It makes sense. I enjoy sports, I am passionate about education and I love the moral tension created by appreciating both of those areas of life. It appears that people like reading about it as well.

Learn about what I think by reading these posts (in order of popularity):

Tim Tebow’s Pro-Life Superbowl Ad is Heartwarming and Reckless (Top post on this blog thanks to Deadspin)

Athletes as Role Models? (Second most popular post on this blog thanks to Steve Mason and Kaplan’s Korner)

The Eye Of The Tiger (Fans)

Ron Artest Is Going To The Lakers | What Do I Think?

To summarize: My opinion is that athletes are just athletes. They excel one general area of life, competitive athletic ability, and that is the only thing worth looking up to them for. One can admire work ethic, focus, quick thinking, pure athleticism of their favorite athletes, but to learn about sportsmanship, common courtesy or morality from athletes is asinine. That is not what they are known for, and usually it is for a reason. There are much more appropriate role models for those things and our job is to look to those people as role models and not athletes. When it comes to children, parents must teach their children who their role models should be as opposed to letting athletes teach their kids about morals and ethics.

There is one general exception. When an athlete clearly excels in another area of life and has experience in that area of life then even the athlete can become a role model. Or more precisely, the person is a role model who happens to be an athlete.

Take Tim Tebow for example. Tebow has spent signficant time and effort doing good work and rising above his athletic stardom and become a star of his religion. He clearly has a set of morals that guide his life and is more than just an athlete. He is a missionary and an athlete. Tebow is a worthy role model who happens to be an athlete and being a succesful athlete has given him a greater audience. Tebow’s greater audience gives him more oportunity to be that role model and that is a good thing. Tebow is using his star power to express his opinion on abortion. We can agree or disagree with the message but Tebow is a messenger whose words carry some weight. As a role model, Tebow’s fame as an athlete goes a long way to increasing his influence and impact.

Recently, another athlete who could have been just like Tebow in that respect bowed out of competitive sports. Oakland Athletics prospect Grant Desme left his baseball dreams behind to enter the priesthood. Projected as an above average Major League player, Desme bows out of the game he loves, for the God he loves more. Desme was going to be a good baseball player. But now he hopes to be a great priest. Instead of using his baseball related fame to teach and be that rare athlete worth treating like a role model, Desme leaves sports and is devoting his life to his religion.

Two athletes with higher moral standards and two different approaches.

Who will have a greater impact, Tebow or Desme?

Which is the better path? The athlete who uses his fame to be a super role model to millions of adoring fans? Or the former athlete who gave it all up to pursue a “higher calling”?

Tebows audience will be much bigger. But Desme’s potential is greater because he can devote more time to personal growth.

I find this question very interesting. What do you think?

Johnny Weir Gives Into Bullies and Changes His Fur Costume

rabbifink — Fri, 29 Jan 2010 17:27:05 +0000

Figure skater Johnny Weir set off animal activists with a small fox fur trim on his skating costume.

Most Olympic skaters wear pretty outrageous costumes for their routines during the Olympics and Weir is known for his “over-the-top” designs. His outfit was supposed to have a small trim of fox fur on the left shoulder. After pressure from PETA, Friends of Animals and hate mail as well as threats from less professional activists, Weir has acquiesced and is wearing a faux-fox fur in the place of the original, real fur trim.

What was interesting to me was the way Weir handled the fur wearing issue.

Weir responded that wearing fur is a personal choice and he understands the point of view of the activists, he just doesn’t agree. He feels that there are more important causes to be concerned with like homelessness and Haiti relief.

He closed his statement with a great line:

“I hope these activists can understand that my decision to change my costume is in no way a victory for them, but a draw,” Weir said in his statement. “I am not changing in order to appease them, but to protect my integrity and the integrity of the Olympic Games as well as my fellow competitors.

Two things struck me after reading his statement.

1) There are more important causes than animal rights. They involve people! How much money has been spent by PETA or other activists? Is it a good use of resources? I don’t have a definitive answer, but I am leaning in a certain direction.

2) Isn’t Weir saying that he is “giving in” to a bully? He doesn’t agree but he wants the activists off his back. Children deal with bullies all the time and the instructions for dealing with bullies varies. Some say that children should “stand up” to the bully and others say “give in” to the bully. Weir is “giving in”. Obviously, he doesn’t want to take a stand. But now, activists are emboldened to bully more people.

It reminds me of something I wrote about last year in a post called Political Discrimination. Prop 8 opponents were using Google Maps and public record to find people who supported Prop 8 and they demonstrated a their homes and places of work, oftentimes distrutpting business and causing damage.

Too many bullies make for a less peaceful world. Let’s try and use other means of communication and activism and avoid bullying to get our message out.

Tim Tebow's Pro-Life Superbowl Ad is Heartwarming and Reckless

rabbifink — Thu, 28 Jan 2010 17:03:53 +0000

This post has been crossposted to DovBear.

UPDATE: RETRACTION AND APOLOGY HERE

The most well-known athlete in America might be Tim Tebow.

Tebow is possibly the most celebrated, successful college football player of all time. He was a 2 time national champion with the Florida Gators and a Heisman Trophy winner. His success, as well as his good looks and supernatural physique has made him a household name across the United States. Oh, there is one more thing, Tebow is the son of missionaries who is very religious and (at this point) celibate.

Tebow has used his star power to advocate for Christianity. He spent a couple of summers working with missionaries in the Far East and has always been vocal about his religiousness. Tim Tebow is an athlete who is using his star power to make a difference in the world. We may not agree with his message, but he is certainly a better role model than felon Gilbert Arenas or even LeBron James.

During the upcoming Super Bowl, Tebow will be featured in a $2.6 Million ad for a strong Pro-Life Organization called Focus on the Family. This has set off a firestorm of reactions from groups that oppose Focus in the Famliy, like the National Organization for Women (don’t you love these names?) who do not approve the message of the ad. Additionally, advocate groups like PETA are up in arms because they have been denied Superbowl air time for their causes.

Honestly, the reason CBS approved this ad are probably related to the economy. IF you’re willing to pay $2.6 Million for an ad in the economy – they’ll take your money.

What is interesting to me about all this are the circumstances of Tim Tebow’s birth. In the ad Tim is expected to tell the story of his mother’s pregnancy. Mrs. Tebow became very ill during a mission to the Philippines and was advised to terminate the pregnancy to save her life. She ignored the doctor, Tim was born and Mrs. Tebow survived.

First, Jewish Law does not share the same views as Christian Law on abortion. In a situation where the mother’s life is in danger, many traditional authorities hold that the mother MUST abort the pregnancy. There is an assumption that fundamentalist Christians and Orthodox Jews agree on abortion. That is just not true.

Second, even those that hold that abortion is immoral and should never be allowed, is this a wholesome message? To ignore a doctor’s strong recommendation? Isn’t reckless? Don’t we look at Scientology with disdain when a life is lost because of their refusal to see a doctor? What if Mrs. Tebow lost her life in the pregnancy and Tim dies before birth?

It seems that advocating for the sanctity of life is a fair cause to support, but advocating in a manner that breeds recklessness… That seems irresponsible.

The Zen Master Speaks on Curses, Karma and Mitzvahs

rabbifink — Mon, 18 Jan 2010 22:27:06 +0000

Photo: Getty Images

A very interesting news item came my way today.

Last Friday night, The Zen Master, Phil Jackson, Head Coach of the Los Angeles Lakers Head Coach, was asked about the Los Angeles Clippers. It seems that the Clippers are cursed.

A near perpetual resident of the cellar in the NBA standings, the Clippers have been blessed with plenty of very high draft choices. In the NBA high draft choices are the best way to build a team. The problem for the Clippers has been their draft selections have been huge busts. Some were plagued by injury, some ended up as NBA role players and others were just terrible choices.

Last week the latest Clippers draft pick, selected first overall, Blake Griffin underwent season ending surgery after sitting out the first half of the season hoping to get into playing shape.

So, the media asked Phil Jackson: Do you believe in curses?.

Phil’s response?

As reported by J. A. Adande on the Truehoop blog:

“I don’t,” Jackson said before the Lakers played the Clippers Friday night. “I’m of that generation that believes in karma. I do think there is karma in effect, ultimately. But I can’t proclaim anybody else’s karma. That’s their own making. If you do a good mitzvah [a Jewish term for an act of kindness], maybe you can eliminate some of those things. You think Sterling’s done enough mitzvahs?”

Another reporter replied that Sterling is a major humanitarian (at least if you believe the ads Sterling has placed in the Los Angeles Times over the years).

“Yeah, but how about all those other incidents?” Jackson said.

Sterling has had his share of lawsuits brought against him, most notably a civil suit that in November resulted in him having to pay a record $2.725 million to settle a suit that claimed he discriminated against African-Americans, Hispanics and families with children in the apartment buildings he owns.

So Phil doesn’t believe in curses but his does believe in Karma and the power of a mitzvah to change Karma. I think I agree. Doing good in our world creates good energy in our world. The more good energy that is created, the better things may turn out.

I don’t think it is determinative, but I do think it makes a difference. Whether that is the answer to the Clippers woes I would not claim to know.

But what of Mr. Sterling?

I have two issues with Mr. Sterling.

1) Ads in the LA Times tooting your horn? You need to tell people how much charity you give? It may be a mitzvah to give charity, but it is no mitzvah to publicize it. In fact the highest level of charity is “matan b’seyser”, giving in secret, without anyone knowing. Mr. Sterling, you could do better than to take out expensive ads telling us how great you are. Just be great and we will figure it out on our own.

2) On this Martin Luther King Day, I think it is time to call out Mr. Sterling for his discrimination against minorities. Bigots like him, prevent Dr. King’s dream from becoming a reality. A dream that I share with him. So Mr. Sterling, change your ways or risk the effect of more bad karma…

I know that love is ultimately the only answer to mankind’s problems. And I’m going to talk about it everywhere I go. – Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.

Can't We All Just Get Along?

rabbifink — Fri, 27 Nov 2009 01:12:31 +0000

Photo: Flickr/cortniedee.

A few days ago a photo was posted on Twitter by the NBA. Somehow, this photo has been on my mind since I saw it.

In sports, two teams oppose each other under the pretense that they are enemies. Their fans may even dislike one another, (see Celtics / Lakers, Yankees / Red Sox, UNC / Duke, etc,) but in the end, athletes are mostly friendly with each other. Even when athletes get upset or physical with one another, they can remain friends (see Kobe Bryant and Ron Artest).

In the real world, people have a harder time getting along. People divide along political lines, religious lines and country lines.

The natural state of people is almost to be at odds with one another. Peace is not just the lack of war. Peace is the active interrelation of two entities in harmonious activity. The opposite of peace is not war, it is merely lack of working together. It is pretty easy for two entities to ignore each other, but that is not peace. Peace is working together. Yet, peace remains so elusive on a grand scale and an individual scale.

This is something that is really hard for me. I honestly (perhaps naively) believe that almost all friction and disagreement is a result of misunderstanding and miscommunication. At our core, we know how to get along but the reality of society and our environment confuses us into discord. Maybe I am wrong, but this what I believe.

That is why seeing this photo was so stirring. It was a photo that showed that when the context changes, when our environment is different, peace is so easy. Sports provides the context for enemies to befriend one another.

Are there two greater enemies in the world today than Israel and Iran?

And yet, below you will see a photo of the best Israeli basketball player, who is now playing for the Sacramento Kings, Omri Casspi and the best Iranian basketball player, playing for the Memphis Grizzlies, Hamed Haddadi. They look like the best of friends. Yet, in their home countries people are dying for their causes in defiance of the opposing cause…

Photo: Getty Images

It is my fervent wish and prayer that we can find peace. Not just peace between nations with differences, but personal peace within ourselves and within our relationships and communities.

Just think of this photo the next time you are about to pass judgment or prolong a disagreement. We can all get along, we can all be a part of peace, we can all unite under the banner of the human race and be tolerant of whoever we encounter.

Tolerance. Love. Peace.

Please.

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.

Matisyahu, NBC and The Olympic Winter Games Make A Great Team

rabbifink — Wed, 04 Nov 2009 23:25:57 +0000

I first heard of Matisyahu while working as a Campus Rabbi at USC. The Jewish students on campus were really into his music (this was ~5 years ago) and some of my students invited me to join them at a Matisyahu concert.

He was performing at the Knitting Factory in Hollywood which was right near my home. I went and it was really cool. The music was great, the message was equally wholesome and the connection that I got to build with my students was profound.

I liked it enough that I took my wife to a Matisyahu show at the American Jewish University a few weeks later. It was a bad venue for a concert. It was more like a movie theater than the right venue for a reggae concert. Still, we enjoyed the music.

I knew that Matisyahu had made it, when I was listening to my then favorite sports radio show, “The Loose Canons” on AM 570 in Los Angeles (oh how I miss those guys…) and they played Chop ‘em Down as their bumper music. That was an epiphany for me. At that point, Matisyahu has “made it” in my books.

If that wasn’t sufficient proof that Matisyahu had “made it”, I received another clue a few weeks ago. I was playing the NBA 2K10 video game and the background music was… Matisyahu!

I found a video of the NBA 2K10 playlist so you can see for yourself.

I thought that was pretty cool.

But today around the blogosphere and on Twitter the latest Matisyahu news is regarding the new NBC advertisement for the 2010 Vancouver Winter Olympics.

This is, by far, the best exposure that Matisyahu has seen in the public eye. The commercial is perfect. The content, the timing of the cuts, the slow – motion, the music and the message are woven together to create a really perfect ad. The emotion that the 30 second spot exudes are exactly what NBC wants you to feel.

I like NBC as a network and I hope that they can mount a comeback and become relevant again. This ad is a great start.

I am sure Matisyahu is proud to be part of such a great ad. I am proud to share it with you.