Quote:
Originally Posted by DaFace
In a general sense, I agree - we shouldn't start cheering for injuries in football games - that's not the point. But I do agree with jwhit that we shouldn't be DISGUSTED when people do cheer in those situations - there are plenty of examples in entertainment where injuries are just fine, and violence is clearly a part of football.
|
Hmmm ... that's really close to the way I interpreted his point.
I don't think the issue is violence, per se. This is about a double-standard in which ESPN and their ilk don't shy away from violence in sport. Just the opposite, they celebrate it. (Do they still air the "Jacked Up" segment?)
In this case, the level of hypocrisy seems to be Mr. jwhit's argument (as I see it, anyhow). On one hand, sports media showcases NASCAR crashes, bone-jarring football plays, and knock-outs. On the other hand, they whine with shock and indignation when they learn that some fans cheered when Cassel had to leave the game. Ironically, their only defense is absolute ignorance and negligence in that most of them didn't research the story in order to discover it wasn't 70,000 fans ... it was closer to 7.
The salt in the wound is the other point he makes; namely that Cassel shouldn't be a starting quarterback in this league anyway and the only reason he has a job has to do with Pioli's ego and Clark Hunt's unwillingness to get involved.
As the ancient aliens say, "Facts is facts." And the main fact in this case is that, for 40 years, Chiefs fans have been loyal, patient, generous, and faithful in their support of this organization. In return, they've gotten one of the worst franchises in sport and, more recently, a litany of insults.
FAX