Sports, like anything in life, is infiltrated with by politics
By Ari Kaufman (02/21/06)
The next time a sports fan tells you he is apolitical, call him or her a liar. Like anything in life, from music and movies to sports and economics, politics controls the world. Various instances display this, but especially in sports, politics so often rears its ugly head, that even the most casual and ambivalent sports fan cannot avoid encountering it. The socio-political theme, naturally, is most notably displayed in the media's coverage of race relations in sports.
Various, yet distinct stories and ancillary incidents have recently engulfed forefront of the sports world where race is concerned, and I am not even including the ongoing Terrell Owens-Donovan McNabb-Black-on-Black-Crime-NAACP saga.
This past Tuesday, as the sports world now knows, legendary college basketball coach, Bobby Knight, was a guest on ESPN's morning show, "Cold Pizza."
Facts are facts: Knight is an irreverent fellow who has "offended" many media members over the years with his over-the-top honesty and hi! s lack of concern for tip-toeing the PC line. In 1985, he threw a chair when an official made a porous call, Knight has ripped the media for their lack of professionalism and has chastised many of his players for their lack of hustle and intensity among others instances. Most collegiate coaches do much of the same (or should) but Knight has always, unfairly in my view, been under more intense scrutiny and kept on a shorter leash over the years, especially over the past decade.
Renowned sports novelist, John Feinstein, has written tell-all books about him, and ESPN has even made one into a movie, and debuts a reality show about "The General" Sunday evening.
The other fact worth noting (conveniently and naturally ignored by the immortal media) is that Coach Knight graduates all his players, and no other college basketball coach, not Mike Krzyzewski at Duke nor coaches at academic bastions like Stanford nor Northwestern, for example, do that anymore. Knight also looks out for his players after they graduate. He is a good man, a noble man, and in a perfect world, he would be lionized rather the demonized.
So when ESPN's Dana Jacobsen treated him with precious little respect last week, Knight was understan! dably incensed. Firstly, Jacobsen asked Knight not once, not twice, but three times in various and direct ways how much longer he would continue coaching basketball. Knight first declined to answer. Then, he amicably noted how wonderful the life of a collegiate coach is, with six or seven months per year off to hunt, fish, play golf and watch baseball; and that he could, considering this, coach much longer. After the persistent Jacobsen ignored his words, and pestered him for an exacting response, Knight politely asked her the analogous question of how long she would continue cooking breakfast. Perhaps this was the wrong question to ask a female sports reporter, but his point was obvious. The PC radio, TV and print media then typically attacked the coach for the "gender insensitive" remark. Most were looking for a story and a sound byte, and did not care what the content leading up to the statement was; they just thought he was being a sexist.
Finally, Jacobsen broached the topic of Indiana basketball. Knight coached there for nearly 30 years before, in my view and many others', being totally disrespected for reprimanding a student who was showing him (Knight) disrespect in the middle of campus during the fall of 2000. He was forced to resign.
Since that incident, Knight has repeatedly told any reporters who will listen that he wants nothing to do with discussions about Indiana University basketball and that he will not comment. When Jacobsen then ignorantly asked him about the Hoosiers, Knight ended the interview.
No one is going to accuse Bob Knight of being a modest, acquiescing fellow; however, he is still a West Point graduate, three time national title winner as a coach, a role model to anyone who has played for him, a husband, father and a genuinely good human being. Ask any of his friends or former players.
Last week, when current IU coach, Mike Davis, was asked about his dubious future at IU, Davis, an African-American responded, "I don't know. Maybe they should hire one of their own." Then, in Thursday’s press conference, Davis continually hammered how the team, fans, community and school would be "more united" with him gone, and that this is actually a good day for Indiana basketball.
Thus, we see Knight gets fired for castigating an immature student, and blackballed for comments that contained the smallest hint of gender insensitivity, yet Davis, hired to succeed the legendary Knight with zero head coaching experience in Division One basketball, makes a completely inane remark, with a strong hint of regionalism and racism, ! few care, and many naturally see HIM as the victim.
Am I the only one who sees what is going on here, and not surprised in the least?
Maybe the fact that Mike essentially had just one good year out of six with the Hoosiers, has missed the postseason the past two seasons (going on three), and that he has turned Knight's clean cut program into a team of long short-donning playground ballers plays a factor in the disgruntled fan base in Bloomington. It surely has noth! ing to do with race or IU alumni, but lack of cohesion and, most importantly, limited success, especially recently.
Veteran Kansas City Star Sports Columnist, Jason Whitlock, capped off his Thursday article on the Davis debacle on ESPN.com perfectly when he noted, "Are there some IU fans who don't like Davis simply because of! the color of his skin? Yes. But that element in no way cost Davis his job. Mike Davis cost himself one of the best jobs in America by wallowing in pity. Pity provides comfort, but it sure don't pay the bills."
Precisely.
Indiana's Athletic Director, Rick Greenspan, would have undoubtedly proceeded accordingly and fired Davis at season's end, but since Davis resigned, the mainstream media will thankfully not be given the opportunity to go bananas and rush to Davis's defense.
It is interesting to note the double standards that exist in sports as they pertain to race because they run along such similar lines to that of politics.
Rush Limbaugh, the late Jimmy "the Greek" Snyder and the late Al Campanis were fired for making very tepid racial remarks, yet Charles Barkley can state conjectures like "Oklahoma is no place for a black man" (the state is 8% black and growing; and that 8% constitutes the second highest racial per! centage in the state) among his weekly racial forays on "Inside the NBA."
Bryant Gumbel, a liberal elite apologist to the hardest core, recently compared the Winter Olympics to a GOP convention (mostly white athletes involved) and noted that these Olympians could not be considered the "the greatest athletes" since no blacks were involved. This was not the first time Gumbel had insulted Conservatives.
Gumble's hypocrisy shines in full fashion when you consider that two days later, a bla! ck figure skater won gold for the USA, Bryant belongs to many exclusive golf clubs, some of which do not allow black members, and that he is married to a white woman. When he arrogantly stated how he was waiting for March Madness (college basketball) where the "real" athletes are, he must have forgotten that the two best college hoopsters of the 2006 season are both white guys. Bryant still has his job, naturally.
The Washington Post echoed most of his sentiments, characterizing the Turino games as a place where "the rich and elite meet to compete." That was the headline. You have to wonder if the writer, Paul Farhi, has ever been to the Sundance or Telluride Film Festivals. That is truly where the rich and elite meet, and there are no Conservatives for miles.
This all makes Mike Davis's words seem innocu! ous. But still, how Davis, a coach with zero head coaching experience as of 2000, who was hired at one of the most prestigious basketball programs in history to succeed one of, if not the most famous coach in college hoops at the time, can accuse that school of racist or nefarious intentions is absurd.
It all comes full circle. Even the NCAA has now succumbed to the pressures of the Black Coaches Association (is there a White Coaches Association or a Hispanic or Asian version of this?) to require all collegiate football programs to interview at least one candidate of "minority persuasion." I don't know what constitutes a "minority" in their balkanizing eyes, but as a Jew (a truer minority than a black), I doubt I would satisfy their quota.
Thus, it is official. Affirmative Action has infiltrated sports and political correctness has run amuck, especially at the collegiate level. Bob Knight, likely a Conservative, is vilified for being moral, judicious and honest, while others can pontificate as they please, many times due to their skin color. It makes you wonder if Jesse Jackson and friends overarching aims are to hijack any decency from the sports world, much as they have done to the political landscape.
There are many political and social issues that can be debated for eternity and no side will prove the other wrong. However, to deny that double standards in freedom of speech exist, and that so-called "minorities" do not have greater freedom to incorporate race into any conversation would be factually incorrect. Those who believe that must be the same people who do not recognize the NAACP as an inherently racist organization.
(Printer friendly version) Email: Ari Kaufman
