Sports violence

The Rocketry Forum

Help Support The Rocketry Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.


Well-Known Member
Jun 27, 2004
Reaction score
WOW! If you have not seen the clip of the Pacers/Pistons game last night, you should find it...turn on the news and I know you will find it, along with another clip...the Clemson/USC game. Wow again! These fights were incredible. The story is just too long to tell if you have not heard of them. The outcome: Indefinate suspension for Ron Artest, Jermaine O'Neal and Stephen Jackson of Indiana and Ben Wallace of Detroit...As for the Clemson/Carolina game (HUGE rivalry!), an investigation is going on for that. These games were both heavily watched by young children and young boys especially, setting a bad example for many. What a way for Lou Holtz to retire...both incidents are under FEDERAL investigation. This is just incredible.
The Clemson/USC game is still under investigation about who started it. The camera was not on whomever started it so they have no tape to go over. Lou Holtz was caught on tape, poor guy, trying to break the fight up, and as you can see when you see it, he really cannot do much when he is 70-something and they are about 3 times his size. The Pistons/Pacers game started over a foul with 45 seconds left. The 2 teams got into it after Ben Wallace was fouled by Ron Artest. Wallace then proceeded to shove Artest. The Pistons initiated the fighting but then it cooled off. And then, get this, someone from the croud pegged Ron Artest with a cup full of beer while he was lying down on the side. He then got up and rushed into the croud beating some guy. Ha, pretty funny at first. Then all %#!! broke loose. The two teams started fighting again as well as the Pacers against the croud. There are some shots of Ron Artest taking shots at some guys face and then some shots of him taking shots at some other guys face...he has a screw loose somewhere. Stephen Jackson helped Artest beat the first guy. They claim they were defending themselves. O'Neal and Wallace were also caught on tape really taking some good hits on some of the croud. As the Pacers walked out, the croud was throwing chairs and cups and everything and anything at them. They ended the game early for the safety of the players. Some are blaming it on security, players, fans, whomever...CRAZY..All of it is under investigation and we wont know until sometime later.
Well, IIRC,
Artest laid down on top of the scorers table, I think after a scuffle or something with another player. Then, some fan threw a cup at him, so he rushed into the stands and started beating down fans. Then two other players got in on it.
Well, IIRC,
Artest laid down on top of the scorers table, I think after a scuffle or something with another player. Then, some fan threw a cup at him, so he rushed into the stands and started beating down fans. Then two other players got in on it.
That is one of the reasons why I do not care for the NBA. They are a bunch of thugs!!! Those idiots in the stands should be prosecuted as well. The thing was just stupid. Fans have the right to express their opinions, but not to incite crap like that. On the other hand, guys making millions of dollars should be able to control their temper. Maybe they should invest in some anger management. The whole thing was disgraceful.
Look at the people involved and their backgrounds. The same goes for many "professional" athletes. Street thugs with some talent and a little luck, and enough money and juice to stay out of jail. Drugs, sex and greed. I rarely watch any college or pro sports. I am uncomfortable participating in a system that glorifies these creeps. I also don't like my kids to see them "succeed."
there have been worse fights... how about spree strangling his coach?

THAT was funny
What about the cases where baseball coaches have been attacked by some spectators.

I don't agree with some of the basketball players who have a huge ego. Disgusting.
Just recently after a very important football(soccer)match between Manchester united and Arsenal ,the Arsenal players through soup and pizza at the Manchester manager.
Originally posted by flying_silverad
I heard a little aboout it...

I have to ask the question...who started it? And...why?:confused:

You mean besides people who choose to allow their tendency and choice towards violence to be more important than choosing self-restraint and personal responsibility for their public behavior?

Many things that would get someone jail time otherwise are excused and so encouraged by calling them "rivalry" and "team spirit".
Originally posted by arthur dent
Just recently after a very important football(soccer)match between Manchester united and Arsenal ,the Arsenal players through soup and pizza at the Manchester manager.

Gotta love the English, they won't throw the beer and waste it.
And the thing is Artest was ready to beat on anyone as is evidenced by the fact that the guy he went after wasn't the guy that threw the beer! He just picked out the smallest guy he could find and started swinging.
wow, detroit went from pretty good to absolutely no chance after those suspensions.
Actually, Indiana will suffer the most from the suspensions. Big Ben will be back after six games.

Anyways, Artest and Jackson both got what they deserved. 25 games is a bit much for Jermaine O'Neal, whom was caught flattening some guy's face who was on the court during the riot. If Artest comes in the stands to pick fights, that's one thing. But when a fan wanders out on the court to get a piece, then you deserve getting your face smashed by Jermaine O'Neal. They can't go into the stands, you can't go out on to the court, pitch or field or what have you. If you do, then you deserve what you get.

I'll still watch college basketball.....especially since the NBA gave me yet another reason not to watch their basketball.
The question is why haven't these people been arrested? A fan on the court deserves getting punched in the face? If the players can't play on the court they need to go to the locker room, where no fans are allowed. Security will deal with out of hand fans. Their is no excuse, reason or justification for any of the behavior that night. What we saw is the influence of the urban "hip hop" culture at its finest. :mad:

They need to stop selling alcohol at these events, and bar entry of inebriated fans. 75% of the problem is at the bottom of a beer. Or, more likely the sixth or seventh beer. Permanent suspension of repeat offender players would take care of 20% more. The other 5% need to be ejected from the arena immediately. Maybe then the NBA would be something a man could let his family watch.
I was at the USC/Clemson game and witnessed the brawl. Quite a site to behold. But now both teams have agreed that due to the incident, neither will accept bowl invitations. Being a Gamecock fan it is a bummer to hear that, but I really do think both teams deserved it, and plus Clemson went all that way to gain eligibility and it was snatched away right after they got it.

It was a terrible way to send Lou Holtz out, though. It would've been his 250th win. Plus, he really is a good guy, a good coach, and he has quite a legacy. He deserved it, but our team really let him down. As if loosing that bad wasn't enough, they had to go out and get in a huge fight. Oh well, nothing we can do. They were rightfully punished, and he has quite a good and successfull career behind him...just a bit of a bittersweet ending.

Now we have Spurrier to look forward to....

You have some good thought in your post, and for the sake of discussion, I thought I'd address it. Legal action, bad players, bad fans, Jermaine punching out a fan, you covered a lot of ground. Good post, and now for a reply.

Originally posted by rbeckey
The question is why haven't these people been arrested?

1. I would attribute it to money. Artest and the fighting bunch have plenty of it. Those guys will settle in civil court with assualtees and will probably never be charged in criminal court. It's absolutely wrong, as I think inciting a public riot is a major problem as well as breaking the law. As far as I'm concerned, the stands are public domain, Artest and Jackson SHOULD be arrested for fighting there, fighting in a public place. Another thought is that the NBA will try to keep the law out of this as much as possible and handle it on their own. My only problem with that is that the NBA will use tape to prosecute the fans attacking Artest, but will want to punish their own players and keep the legal system out of dealing with bad players. I feel that is picking and choosing your fights, and after a player started a riot, the NBA has no right to pick ANY fight. Either drop the charges against the fans, or allow the legal system to prosecute YOUR players along side the battling fans.

A fan on the court deserves getting punched in the face?

2. Absolutely. I believe that the court is NOT public domain. That is NBA domain, and though many will disagree with me, and that's okay, but in my opinion, stepping on the court is almost like going into another country. The charachter who got clobbered by Jermaine O'Neal went to the court looking for a piece of someone, looking for a fight. Well he got it. Unless you are an NBA player, coach, staff, official, securiy or an invited guest, you have no business being on the court. Quite frankly, when you put yourself on the court looking for a fight, you have it coming and whatever punishment is dealt, well, that's on you. As the old saying goes, "If you don't want to fall off a cliff, don't go near the edge." If you don't want to get your face smashed by an NBA player in the middle of a riot, stay off the court. If nothing else, leave the game, and demand your money back on the way out, don't pick a fight with guys two or three times your size. Also, no one paid to have their can kicked by Ron Artest or Stephen Jackson. By the way, as a side topic, how about refunding the money of all the spectators not involved in throwing things at the Pacers or fighting in the stands? They DIDN'T get your money's worth...... but then again, that could be said about ANY NBA game.

If the players can't play on the court they need to go to the locker room, where no fans are allowed. Security will deal with out of hand fans.

3. They COULD play on the floor. But Artest goes into the stands for the guy that threw a beer and beat down the wrong person and riot ensues. I understand that Artest should have pointed the guy out and have security throw him out. Artest has a history of being hot head, *sarcasam* and the latter option unfortunately didn't occur to him. *end sarcasam* To be serious Artest should be kicked out of the league permanately, not just the rest of the season. After the incident, NBA officials called the game, and sent the teams to the locker room. They did make the right call, just that the riot kept it from being a swift decision. There wasn't enough time for the refs to act between the cup being thrown at Artest and when Artest beat down that poor fan with a cup in hand!

There is no excuse, reason or justification for any of the behavior that night.

4. As far as the players go, with the exception of Jermaine O'Neal, I agree whole heartedly. The fans are a little harder to figure on the motive. Some wanted a piece of Artest, while I think others wanted to break up the fight. Kudos to Rasheed Wallace, Rick Carlisile, Larry Brown, Chauncey Billups and Reggie Miller for attempting to break up some of the fights amongst players and/or fans.

What we saw is the influence of the urban "hip hop" culture at its finest. :mad:

5. Yeah, and Amen. The NBA markets to thugs, so they shouldn't be surprised when thug players go into stands and beat up fans. The NBA has created the monster it is today, and has no one to blame but itself for the sad state of affairs.

They need to stop selling alcohol at these events, and bar entry of inebriated fans. 75% of the problem is at the bottom of a beer. Or, more likely the sixth or seventh beer.

6. I agree with stopping the sale of alcohol at games. I don't think it is THE problem with fans though. Some people are just plain jerks, and they will be so whether they are fueled up on alcohol or not. As a little league basketball coach, I've seen my share of completely out-of-control *sober* parents. Alcohol just adds fuel to fire for those fans who are not in control of themself while intoxicated. Again, I'm sure there are people who can enjoy a beer or two at a game, and behave just fine. But because of the few who cannot, then yes, alcohol should be banned from stadiums.

Permanent suspension of repeat offender players would take care of 20% more. The other 5% need to be ejected from the arena immediately. Maybe then the NBA would be something a man could let his family watch.

7. Nah. The NBA needs to trash about 60% of their rosters and completely remake itself for it to be watchable. First, get rid of the thugs fighting fans and then thugs entirely. Then, get to work finding guys who actually PASS the ball to a teammate with a better shot. Then, find some guys who can actually shoot the rock. There are a few still around in the NBA, but it is a fast dying breed. The days of Magic, Bird, Jordan, Dr. J and many other graceful players have been replaced by the "AND 1" Super League. Win, lose, who cares? It's pretty sad to see a 7-foot center scream and yell when he dunks on a 5-11 point guard. Hellooooooooooo, you're SUPPOSED to be able to dunk on a 5-11 point guard. The NBA was once watchable, now it's just painful to watch, which is why I watch so much more college ball these days.

Anyways, enough of my rant, but you raise some good points and it was a pleasure to read your post.
Never much got into NBA ball, never will. In my opinion, the basketball season begins and ends with March Madness. I watch the few weeks leading up to it to see who's not and who's not, then roundball is done for the year after I find out who's #1 in the NCAA.

I would object, though, to the idea of not selling alcohol during the games. We'd all like to think this is supposed to be a family game, but all of professional sports stopped being family games a long time ago, and it's not because of the thugs. It's because of the sponsors and the business practices of the companies that court potential customers by bringing them to games. The money isn't in dad bringing his kid into the game--it's in the CEO of the company bringing 15 guys to the game in a luxury box--and don't think for a second that the NBA is going to tell them they can't have their single malt Scotch and their martinis. Limit to the luxury boxes? You haven't seen a riot yet!!!

The problem isn't with the beer, it's with the moron who can't have that beer and behave himself. Remember how precariously our hobby sits and remember that as soon as it becomes acceptable to blame the substance or the tool for the problem, it's only a matter of degree before it's our turn. Saying that the handful of people who can't handle their beer should dictate the situation for the rest of us is akin to saying that the kid who packs his Alpha with gasoline soaked flour is a good reason for banning rocketry. Punish those who can't handle the privelege responsibly--don't deny the privelege to those who can.
Nick, I pretty much agree with you, except about the fans on the court. Using that logic, any player in the stands is off the reservation and deserves whatever he gets. I don't believe that fans or players get to choose who deserves what. The security guards or cops get to choose. Any other way is lawlessness, and breeds the mentality that started that whole thing that night.

Kermie, respectfully, I disagree. We don't let people drink and drive because it is an irresponsible and deadly abuse. We also hold the people making a profit off of serving morons till they are too drunk to act responsibly (assuming they had that capacity before they were drunk) liable for the acts of their drunken patrons. The NBA has worked hard to attract a certain crowd, and then they provide those persons with alcohol in quantities enough to make them stupid(er). They do this to MAKE MONEY, not to provide a service to their hard working customers.

I know first hand and for certain that drugs and alcohol are the cause, direct or indirect, of at least 85% off all crime. There is a reason there is no booze in prison, and it isn't because the ACLU hasn't gotten around to it yet. When a group of people has shown they can not or will not act responsibly, or that they will tolerate and abet the abusers, then they get what they deserve.

Alcohol in not a simple thing like a rocket, or for that matter, a gun. It is a drug capable of completely altering a personality, albeit for a relatively short time. I know of drunks who have committed murder, and the next day they can't believe what they have done. There are other drugs that are arguably less dangerous with less side effects, that are controlled substances that require a prescription to get, or are banned outright. I don't believe limiting the consumption of alcohol or even eliminating it at certain times and places is asking too much. (i.e. DUI laws) A person is still welcome to do whatever they want in their home. At least if a guy turns into Conan the A**hole in his own living room it doesn't start a riot.
Your drinking and driving analogy is less pertinent than my rocket analogy. We have laws governing the use of alcohol, just as we have a safety code loosely governing the way we launch rockets responsibly. The fact that one is for legal purposes and the other is for insurance purposes is moot. They are both there to keep the activity within what society considers reasonable bounds.

Also, please reference your source for your statistics about the percentage of crime that is a direct result of alcohol consumption. That seems very high to me. You mention drinking and driving as a deadly abuse. You are correct. That is an illegal activity and should not be confused with the consumption of alcohol itself. that reinforces my point--for most of us, drinking, just as rocketry, is a relatively safe and enjoyable experience.

Yes, we do hold those who overserve a patron responsible--that's another issue I have with the way we do things. It's one more way that we shift the responsibility of one person's actions on society or on another entity and not on the person who's behaving the way they are. I go to a local tavern for the Packer games and I do sometimes overimbibe. I have yet, however, to experience any sort of complete personality shift, have yet to get in a fight, and I do not drive home afterwards. I have taken personal responsibility for it and have not relied on anyone else to do so for me.

Again, the beer did not throw itself, nor did the concessioneer who served the beer to the fan. The fact is that alcohol is not capable of "completely altering the personality" of most of us. We drink responsibly (or at least keep the irresponsibility to a level where the effects are limited to increased sales of ibuprofen). Just like the Alpha 3, a beer in most of our hands is not dangerous and we shouldn't be punished for the sins of the small percentage for whom it is dangerous.
see, its easy to say that they did bad things and should be mad, but when your playing in an actual game and something is ticking you off its not that simple... if somone threw a cup of cofee or beer or something at me i dont think i would be very happy... ive near jumped a fence to get at a kids dad who was yellin at me at a game... theres alot of anger, and when idiots get involved its hard to controll yourself from decking them onto the floor
Kerm, you and I agree on more than we disagree . I also believe in personal responsibility. When a tavern or arena owner serves a patron a drug that absolutley alters mood, perception, personality and coordination, he is not doing it as a personal or public service, he is doing just to make a couple more bucks. Now, I am an avowed capitalist and rejoyce in the making of bucks, but why should the tavern owner get to keep those extra dollars when that drunken patron walks out the door to inflict himself on the world? If the guy drives down the road and kills somebody or breaks somebody's face in a fight, the tavern owner who served him until he was drunk, just a to make a couple bucks, deserves nothing? I mean, what did he think was going to happen? Back in the day I used to frequent a certain establishment that served alcohol. I became friends with the bartender, and the reason I stopped going in there and eventually stopped being friends with that person is the she would serve patrons until they were drunk, then look to me for assistance with a rowdy drunk. She did it for tips. She was pretty and drunks tip well. She wasn't at least partially responsible for the situations she found herself in? She knew what the possible outcomes were and took a chance. She had the absolute right to stop serving anybody at any time, but wouldn't do it. She even refused to ban all but the most violent of rowdies, because they came back the next night to give her more money! Isn't that exactly what the NBA is doing?

As far as the crime statistics go, that is from 19 years of personal experience in law enforcement Almost every serious crime is a drug related, even if it doesn't look like it on the news. Burglars and robbers steal for money to buy crack and heroin. Drunks steal because they can't hold down a job, or commit crimes under the influence they probably wouldn't other times. There is a culture of dishonesty and dishonor associated with drug (alcohol is just another drug) abuse that breeds crime. Fraud, forgery, shoplifting, prostitution, most crime, really, is profit driven. Violence is a side effect. Gang bangers kill each other because their rivals activities cut into their profit from various illegal activities. Unlike the movies, these people don't do these things to support their sick kid. They do it to pay the rent on a hovel and buy the drug of choice. Their kids run the streets and eat junk food and sometimes stuff you wouldn't feed your dog. They grow up without any idea how to act and become part of the problem. An indirect consequence of drug and alcohol abuse. Some of those kids apparently grow up to play in the NBA, or go to watch the games.

Surely you must know a person you absolutely don't want to be with when he is drinking. The proverbial "mean drunk." He may be the nicest fellow when sober, but isn't fit for civil company when under the influence. I simply fall asleep when intoxicated. Other people have other, completely harmless reactions to greater or lesser amounts of the drug. Some people turn into beasts, capable of doing anything from beating their spouse half to death to, say, throwing a cup of whatever on a person who ticks them off. There are a few of those kind in every crowd. The question is, how does a server tell which is which? Which one will drink like a fish and spend lots of money, safely navigate home by the grace of God then fall asleep, and which one will start three fights on the way out the door and then wreck his car on the way home? Why should they get to ignore the fact that either one is possible just to make a little more money? Refer back to my bartender friend.
Listen, part of the deal as I see it...

When you get paid almost $10,000,000 a year to play a game., part of that money ($10M) is used to CONTROL YOUR TEMPER!! and pay any drycleaning bills!

So get back into your Cadilac Escalade and drive to your 12,000 square foot mansion and SHUT UP!!

Ya big baby!:mad:

I don't feel the punishment was enough!

This was MUCH worse than what Janet Jackson did!
i think they should be kicked out of the league. they should have to start the farming system again, and work their way up the ranks again. they should mandate that they spend the rest of this season off the court, and the next 3 seasons in the minors. that would be sufficient. i hear it all the time, "pro players are people too", but they are people who make WAY too much money. they have NOTHING to be upset about, short of someone killing their family, that would warrant for them to go into the stands and beat people up. these players are paid to control their temper. if someone throws a beer cup at you, be mature, call the security guard and have him prosecuted...whatever, dont go into the stands after him, thats rediculous. i heard on the radio(one of the DJ's on our local rock station is a former boston bruins player) that pro players shouldnt have to put up with this garbage. but, in-fact, they DO have to, because if they DONT, then they get suspended and lawsuits ensue. this guy was saying some rediculous things, like how hard HE would've pounded the guy if HE was in their position. that just shows how truly imature these athletes are, and it shows the sad state of sports these days. barry bonds taking steroids, jamal lewis doing drugs, william green throwing fists before the game, sammy sosa corking his bat, and basketball, where its just a big rally of thugs. yo yo yo. drop it like its hot homie.
Hmm...I just can't see blaming a bartender because I don't know when to say when. That is something that has grown from groups like madd to spread blame for tragic events to as many people as possible. The intentions are noble but all it really does is provide someone with deeper pockets to sue. How long before we start blaming the breweries and distilleries for producing it? They have the deepest pockets and it worked against the tobacco companies.

As far as the fight in Detroit. Artest and Jackson deserve their suspensions for going into the stands. I still think they are a bit severe given the circumstances but no players belong there. But anything that happened to any fans on the court is much murkier. Fans don't belong there. Had they left through the exits and not gone to the court looking for a fight then they wouldn't have been hit. In my mind entering the court in this situation was the same as throwing a punch. Why else would you be there?

Now does a fan on the court, field, ice etc normally deserve to be punched? No but this wasn't a normal situation where a single drunk things it'll be funny and ends up in jail. It was a mini riot.
I am not expressing myself very well. I guess the wording I should be using instead of "partially responsible" is "additionally responsible." A person is fully responsible for what they do, even when intoxicated. Additional responsibility belongs to the person who dispensed a drug that impared that persons judgement to the point they acted criminally, when it was obvious what was happening.