Major Harris Posted September 23, 2008 Author Share Posted September 23, 2008 $20 says this article gets passed right over. Why let the facts get in the way of a good race thread? it already got passed over once, on page one. it just doesn't have the glamour of a race fight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Major Harris Posted September 23, 2008 Author Share Posted September 23, 2008 Let's stick with facts and not asssumptions H_H do we have any "facts" to stick to? we have a he-said / everybody else said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ccsl2 Posted September 23, 2008 Share Posted September 23, 2008 I'm pretty sure I remember Navy Dave saying that he is black Hence the Uncle Ruckus from The Boondocks reference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ccsl2 Posted September 23, 2008 Share Posted September 23, 2008 do we have any "facts" to stick to?we have a he-said / everybody else said. That news paper article is fact according to some on the board so it must be true. I just don't know. I think the truth lies somewhere in between both sides views on the incident. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#98QBKiller Posted September 23, 2008 Share Posted September 23, 2008 Hence the Uncle Ruckus from The Boondocks reference. My bad. I'm not familiar with it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Major Harris Posted September 23, 2008 Author Share Posted September 23, 2008 That news paper article is fact according to some on the board so it must be true. I just don't know. I think the truth lies somewhere in between both sides views on the incident. me, too. i don't dismiss the possibility that there were racial taunts. but i truly believe this coach thought the fix was in from the get go, let his kids know that (speculating here: also let the kids know that these guys were racists in "these parts" and would surely try to screw them over), and lost his cool. his team may have been a reflection of that. either way, quitting was about the worst lesson he could have "taught" these kids. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teller Posted September 23, 2008 Share Posted September 23, 2008 That news paper article is fact according to some on the board so it must be true. I just don't know. I think the truth lies somewhere in between both sides views on the incident. That newspaper article that says every investigation has cleared the Fort Hill players? (Of course, I have a pro-Fort Hill agenda, because I went to Allegany. -- Which if you're unaware is kinda like Skins-Boys on steroids. A mixed marriage in Cumberland, is one that crosses between the two high schools; and married couples LITERALLY sit on opposite sides of the stadium during the homecoming game. You can see why I'd be quick to come to their aid.) Also, the writer of that article was MY sports editor for seven years. I think I can speak to his credibility too. Again, present just one piece of supporting evidence for the other side of the story, and I'll gladly step aside. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DirtyBird Posted September 23, 2008 Share Posted September 23, 2008 I'll reiterate for those that did not read the article. Atleast one black player from Fort Hill stated he heard no racial slurs. “The head coach from Dunbar told me the Fort Hill players were using the ‘N-word’ toward his players,” game referee Robert M. Broadwater of the Potomac Valley Officials Board wrote in his report of the game. “I told him we did not hear anything. Going back to the Fort Hill huddle, I told players that if there was any talking going on to knock it off. A player from Fort Hill (tight end Jordan Helmick, who is African-American) replied, ‘No sir, just playing football.’ ” Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Capt. Kaos Posted September 23, 2008 Share Posted September 23, 2008 Ok, I'm all for a good debate (or whatever you call this) but I need to know the rules. Seems I can spout allegations with no proof and thats ok but everyone that opposes my view on the situation must use facts to argue my allegations. We continue this way until my opposers don't use facts then I can tell them that only facts are to be used in this discussion. Do I have this right?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheHumanHitstick#21 Posted September 23, 2008 Share Posted September 23, 2008 I bet Fort Hill wouldn't dare say anything two years ago when Arrelious Benn, Nathan Bussey, and Vontae Davis were tearing it up at Dundar Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DirtyBird Posted September 23, 2008 Share Posted September 23, 2008 I bet Fort Hill wouldn't dare say anything two years ago when Arrelious Benn, Nathan Bussey, and Vontae Davis were tearing it up at Dundar You're implying they said something this time, which there is absolutely no evidence of. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Capt. Kaos Posted September 23, 2008 Share Posted September 23, 2008 And those of you that are in the "I bet they wouldnt have said that........ in Dunbar, to me, when Such -n- Such was there" camp do realize that you sound just as ignorant as these players are being accused of being. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheHumanHitstick#21 Posted September 23, 2008 Share Posted September 23, 2008 So I'm sure Dunbar just wanted to leave a game in which they had the lead Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Capt. Kaos Posted September 23, 2008 Share Posted September 23, 2008 So I'm sure Dunbar just wanted to leave a game in which they had the lead So, let me guess... you read every other post in this thread, didnt read the article, didnt watch the video AND you know what was said on the field...... Am I close? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheHumanHitstick#21 Posted September 23, 2008 Share Posted September 23, 2008 But the difference is we weren't accused of calling someone the N-word Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DirtyBird Posted September 23, 2008 Share Posted September 23, 2008 So I'm sure Dunbar just wanted to leave a game in which they had the lead The true reason is only speculation but the false reason has no evidence at all to support it. Including all the players from Fort Hill, some of who are Black, the Fort Hill coaching staff, the officials on the field, the crowd and the Cumberland Police who escorted the team off the field. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Capt. Kaos Posted September 23, 2008 Share Posted September 23, 2008 But the difference is we weren't accused of calling someone the N-word Huh?!? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teller Posted September 23, 2008 Share Posted September 23, 2008 But the difference is we weren't accused of calling someone the N-word Accused???? Are you even listening to yourself??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corcaigh Posted September 23, 2008 Share Posted September 23, 2008 A drive with two random penalties. I'll give you the first 15 yarder for the helmet (if it landed in the field of play), but the second and third were questionable. I disagree. A lineman jumped on a player that was already down. He didn't hit a player who was upright, he jumped on him. It's certainly not a call that merits a coach to go onto the field and swear at the refs, which the coach admitted to doing. All of the USC penalties shown in the video were reasonable. The reaction of the coach reflects the mindset that he thought he was going to get cheated, were at risk of going behind in a game that he thought he should win, and decided to cry and go home. It looks like the Dunbar coach went there looking for an incident and from the evidence shown so far, he tried to manufacture one. Given that the authorities are involved now investigating if there was racial side to this, I'd like to see players and coaches on both sides make sworn statements. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DirtyBird Posted September 23, 2008 Share Posted September 23, 2008 But the difference is we weren't accused of calling someone the N-word No, the Dunbar Coach accused the Fort Hill team of using racial slurs with no evidence. That's just as bad if not worse then using a racial slur. Much like false accusation of rape. Once someone is labelled as a racist or rapist their life is ruined. These accusations are not to be taken lightly and if proven to be false should be dealt with severly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teller Posted September 23, 2008 Share Posted September 23, 2008 Given that the authorities are involved now investigating if there was racial side to this, I'd like to see players and coaches on both sides make sworn statements. I would too. Course, you can't prove a negative, so even if it's not true, and there REMAINS no evidence that it is, Mr. Jeffries would be getting away with a whole slew of slanderous statements. It's a lose-lose for Fort Hill, but I hope they get this right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corcaigh Posted September 23, 2008 Share Posted September 23, 2008 There's only one problem with the "unsubstantiated" part of the accusations. I doubt the refs or cameras would be able to pick up comments made between guys close together on the line or immediately after a tackle for example. Are you suggesting that the Fort Hill white players are making racist comments to the Dunbar black players on the field, but the Fort Hill black players AND the referees are unable to hear any of it? I don't buy it. Having played contact sport if someone on the other team said something that bad to me, the next play they'll pay for it, even if it means an ejection. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DirtyBird Posted September 23, 2008 Share Posted September 23, 2008 Are you suggesting that the Fort Hill white players are making racist comments to the Dunbar black players on the field, but the Fort Hill black players AND the referees are unable to hear any of it?I don't buy it. Having played contact sport if someone on the other team said something that bad to me, the next play they'll pay for it, even if it means an ejection. I already asked him this question. Not sure if he read it but he never answered. Much like nobody is acknowledging that at least one black Fort Hill player said he heard no racial slurs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DjTj Posted September 23, 2008 Share Posted September 23, 2008 I already asked him this question. Not sure if he read it but he never answered. Much like nobody is acknowledging that at least one black Fort Hill player said he heard no racial slurs.We actually don't even have a Dunbar player saying that he heard a racial slur. All we have is a coach saying that his players said that they heard racial slurs. We really don't know anything right now, and everyone is just guessing at what happened.We need to at least get the point where we have Dunbar's #57 saying that it was Fort Hill's #43 who used a racial slur. At least then we can have a "he said/she said" situation. Right now, all we have is hearsay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sisko Posted September 23, 2008 Share Posted September 23, 2008 Are you suggesting that the Fort Hill white players are making racist comments to the Dunbar black players on the field, but the Fort Hill black players AND the referees are unable to hear any of it? It's certainly possible. Do you actually think the TE in question could have heard something said down the field if he was kept in to block? What about at the opposite end of the OL? For the record, I'll say again that in the abscence of evidence one can only chalk it up to "he said/she said" assume innocence on the part of the Fort Hill players and move on. Nobody will ever know for sure exactly what happened except the players on the field. I suspect though that there was probably dirt dished out on both sides and the Dunbar kids, having been already primed to expect unfair treatment, simply had a meltdown. Had they not allowed the Fort Hill kids to get in their heads, they might well have held on to win. I don't buy it. Having played contact sport if someone on the other team said something that bad to me, the next play they'll pay for it, even if it means an ejection. Uhh, correct me if I'm wrong but isn't that pretty much what happened? That is, the Dunbar players MAY have been trying to retaliate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.