Yee says Cal coach's shove was damaging and deserves punishment

|
(41)
Coach Montgomery shoves one of his players during Sunday's emotional game between Cal and USC.

UC Berkeley basketball coach Mike Montgomery’s spur of the moment shove of star Cal player Allen Crabbe during Sunday’s game against USC has garnered quite a bit of attention from the sports media. It also elicited a strong written condemnation from Senator Leland Yee, who is calling for Montgomery’s suspension. Yee, who got a degree in psychology from UC Berkeley, said the following in a press release:

While I have a lot of respect for Coach Montgomery and I appreciate his apology, his actions at last night’s game were completely unacceptable. As a psychologist, I can assure the university and Coach Montgomery that physically pushing a student-athlete does nothing to motivate them. We do not accept such behavior by our professors and administrators, and we should not tolerate it with our coaches.

The game was an emotional one, but representatives of UC – especially adults – need to be able to control their emotions and refrain from physical altercations with students. I urge the university to take swift disciplinary action of at least a one-game suspension and I wish the Cal basketball program the very best as they enter the final games of the season.

It’s unclear whether UC officials are likely to cave to pressure from Yee. So far the matter rests with a reprimand from Pac-12 Commissioner Larry Scott. Lee has made it clear that he thinks such a response is inadequate. He told the media that he would be calling UC officials personally on Tuesday.

Yee’s chief of staff, Adam Keigwin, confirmed that Yee did indeed spend about 30 minutes yesterday talking with Athletic Director Sandy Barbour.

“He expressed why he was concerned with the situation—as an alum, and as a father who has sent his kids to the UC, and as a grandfather who hopes to send his grandkids to the UC,” Keigwin explained. “As a psychologist, he has seen these cases where kids get pushed around, and that just leads to more aggressive behavior and eventually violence.”

Keigwin said that Barbour seemed to agree with Yee, although regarding a harsher punishment she made no promises. Yee would like to see a one-game suspension, or a redaction of his pay for the USC game.

“We’re still waiting to see what she’ll do with that,” said Keigwin. “We’ll give her a day or two to determine what the outcome is going to be.”

The magnitude of Yee’s response might seem odd, but in fact he rarely misses an opportunity to criticize the UC administration. In the past, he has very publicly battled with UC officials over issues of transparency and a controversial nomination to the Board of Regents.

Meanwhile, Montgomery—who initially responded to the incident by saying simply: “Worked, didn’t it?”—has since issued a full apology.

“Trying to get into kids’ faces every now and again just to get them going is kind of what you need to be able to do.” said Montgomery. “[It was] just a bad choice of motivational techniques on my part.”

Comments

Posted by Guest on Feb. 20, 2013 @ 12:34 pm

and the continuing pussification of the American male.

Posted by Orwell's Uterus on Feb. 20, 2013 @ 1:08 pm

give him the right to demand the basketball coach resign? Where is the connection there?

Posted by Lucretia Snapples on Feb. 20, 2013 @ 1:45 pm

He's not demanding his resignation, just his suspension for a season. btw, I have a degree from CAL and I feel I have a right to demand that the coach behave like an adult. He's shaming all of us by pushing kids around, and it's not right.

Posted by Guest on Feb. 24, 2013 @ 11:37 am

How dare that white man push that African American male, does he not realize that slavery has been abolished, god dam honky!!

Posted by Guest on Feb. 20, 2013 @ 2:06 pm

Because, according to federal crime stats, that happens 60 times more often than white-on-black abuse.

Posted by Guest on Feb. 20, 2013 @ 3:02 pm

from the School Board - for his complimentary tanning lotion?

Maybe Yee should stick to what he is best at - collecting money from public employee unions.

Posted by Guest on Feb. 20, 2013 @ 3:01 pm

Last week it was for the "assassination" threat, which just "chilled him to the bone." This week it's the coach who shoves his players (clearly Yee hasn't spent much time on a high school football team). The only Asian better at keeping his name out there is Psy and even now he's sorta fading next to Yee.

Posted by Lucretia Snapples on Feb. 20, 2013 @ 3:17 pm

What do you have against Asians Lucretia?

Posted by Greg on Feb. 20, 2013 @ 9:08 pm

Your loathing of Chinese political power and long lectures on the "yellow peril" were very influential in my development Greg dear.

Posted by Lucretia Snapples on Feb. 20, 2013 @ 9:47 pm

You do know that I supported Leland Yee for mayor, right?

Posted by Greg on Feb. 21, 2013 @ 12:07 am

The silent moderate majority appreciates that.

Posted by Guest on Feb. 21, 2013 @ 10:15 am

I voted for Avalos -at this point I can't even recall which vote went to Avalos and which went to Yee, but in any case, my final vote rested with Avalos.

And what you think of as the "moderate majority" is actually neither.

Posted by Greg on Feb. 24, 2013 @ 11:53 am

over all the other assorted lefties who floundered and dropped out round by round.

Lee was shrewd. The voters said that jobs was their number one issue. Lee pounded away about jobs, while Avalos hardly mentioned them, focusing instead on endlessly tinkering, redistribution and social engineering.

Avalos lost because he appeared not toc are about jobs.

Posted by anon on Feb. 24, 2013 @ 12:49 pm

Pleb, Your savior Lee only got 30% of the vote in the first round. We went over this once before, pleb. Do you have a case of short attention span or no attention span, what is it, pleb?

"Moderate majority" = Orwellian newspeak.

If your messiah Lee were the "End All" you want to believe he is, he would have received the majority of the votes in the first round, pleb.

Now, if you could kindly eject your head out of your savior's lower posterior and digest this perhaps that would help and we wouldn't have to review this again. It's becoming tiresome, pleb.

BTW, how were your services today at Westboro?

International Troll Society Member #12360969212

Posted by International Troll Society Member #12360969212 on Feb. 24, 2013 @ 3:20 pm

clear at every stage of the elimination process, and in fact 30% in the first round with that many candidiates was a very good result.

You will also recall that in the final "runoff", Lee got nearly 50% more votes than Avalos - a crushing margin.

Posted by Guest on Feb. 24, 2013 @ 4:50 pm

Pleb, it doesn't matter how many candidates there were. Damn you're thick. If your lord and savior were "all that" that you want to make him out to be, he would have earned the majority of the votes in the first round, pleb. You're blinded by your right-wing agenda.

But instead, it took your messiah TWELVE rounds to get to just 59%, and that's all he got.

Why are you and that other amateur imposter pleb troll still campaigning for your savior? What's that about? If you were secure with your savior Lee, you wouldn't feel any need to still be campaigning for him. Your insecurity is showing, pleb.

And I didn't vote for Ávalos so why are you bringing him up, pleb? The assumptions that amateur trolls make, ha!

International Troll Society Member #12360969212

Posted by International Troll Society Member #12360969212 on Feb. 24, 2013 @ 5:13 pm

I wish to make an inquiry.

I meant to ask you, and you would know the answer to this as one of the devout Believers in the Church of Lee. I heard from a reliable source that Rose Brown and Willie Pak are acolytes in the Church of Lee. Is that true, pleb? I asked once before but none of the devout faithful had the courtesy to respond to my inquiry. Oh, and do you use incense for your liturgies? Is it High Church, pleb?
Do kindly get back to me before visiting hours are over there in your ward and they think you're goggling your Enhanced Drug Therapy Program but instead you're on here amateur trolling.

International Troll Society Member #12360969212

Posted by International Troll Society Member #12360969212 on Feb. 24, 2013 @ 5:42 pm

Nice one Greg - the ultimate retreat of the closet racist.

Posted by Lucretia Snapples on Feb. 21, 2013 @ 11:39 am
Posted by Guest on Feb. 21, 2013 @ 12:41 pm

rote ravings against him, it's hard on his self esteem.

Only progressives get to use the debate killer of screaming racism.

Posted by matlock on Feb. 24, 2013 @ 1:16 pm

That is part of the problem.

Posted by matlock on Feb. 20, 2013 @ 6:29 pm

I don't always agree with Yee (e.g. banning violent video games), but his background in child psychology provides a unique perspective that few legislators have (most of whom have backgrounds in law or business). And on this issue he's totally right. Violence just breeds more violence, and it's never OK. I find it ironic that the same people who lament male violence one minute, say that it's totally OK to treat men violently the next. "Oh, it's Ok if it's on a high school football team"... um, no, it's not. It's *especially* not OK in a situation where the party committing the violence has power over the other party -as in a coach/student situation.

Hell, it's not even OK if it's in the army. There was one incident where the far right-wing and slightly lunatic general Patton famously slapped a soldier because he thought the boy was faking illness in order to avoid combat. Under threat of dismissal, President Roosevelt made Patton read a public apology to the soldier. President Roosevelt was correct then, and Senator Yee is correct now.

And one other very important point... not only is Yee correct in calling the coach out on this, but he is more or less correct in terms of the appropriate response. NOTE (all you trolls), he's not calling for the coach to be fired. He's calling for a one-game suspension, maybe having his pay docked. I personally think some counseling might be in order, to make sure the coach understands why this is inappropriate.

The key is that the response should be measured. One such incident whouldn't ruin a person's career, but it shouldn't be brushed aside either (because if it's ignored, it can lead to others).

I find it so ironic that the same people who were cheering on Gascon and Lee's crusade to destroy Ross Mirkarimi over one single domestic dispute completely outside his job -to deprive him of his entire career, destroy his family, ruin his life in every way imaginable -these SAME people are attacking Leland Yee for calling for a very reasonable, appropriate, and *measured* response to a coach who acted violently and inappropriately ON the job! But then, it's always the first day of history with all these people.

Posted by Greg on Feb. 20, 2013 @ 9:30 pm

Greg obviously gravitated to the Key Club and the Chess Club back in the day. Sure, there was an occasional slap fight over which Star Wars movie was the best, but certainly no pushing, and every altercation ended with hugs and tears.

Posted by Chromefields on Feb. 21, 2013 @ 8:53 am

is there attempts to ignore millions of years of evolution.

Posted by matlock on Feb. 22, 2013 @ 10:10 pm

The idea that one can advocate stone age values and tell other people they're ignoring evolution in the same breath, and not see the irony in that...

...or that you think Leland Yee is "far left."

Posted by Greg on Feb. 23, 2013 @ 9:53 pm

Pro abortion, for gay rights/marriage, etc... more or less for all the things liberals wanted 30+ years ago when they were still liberal. Before "progressivism" became a racialist operation. I don't know what stone age values you refer to.

Human beings fight, they even have short bursts of violence, in the situation of organized sports those involved move on, or even laugh about it later on. Having worked in factories and night clubs I've seen dudes scream and shove each other then go have beers a few hours later. Thats the way men behave sometimes. Men usually don't expect some greater power(other than progressives and Promise Keepers) to get involved in their antics, they actually resent the involvement.

I never posted much on the Mirkirimi episode expressing outrage over his antics, although if Mirkarimi was a non-progressive you would have been in full studied outrage mode. I more rooted for him to get the boot because he showed himself as a conspiracy addled crank, and I just find the guy to be a complete pussy tool.

That you compare the two considering candy you assed subjectivity.

Posted by matlock on Feb. 23, 2013 @ 10:58 pm
heh

Evolution indeed. In the 21st century violence is not OK. It's not just "antics." It's abuse. But you wouldn't understand that, because your evolution hasn't progressed beyond the 1950s. You probably think it's Ok for principals and teachers to give unruly children a good smack every now and then.

Posted by Greg on Feb. 23, 2013 @ 11:51 pm

In one generation Greg thinks humans have bred out violence. Unless of course that human is Ross Mirkarimi.

It's was not needed to be written down because it's human nature, Rules for Radicals comes to mind here. Saul D. Alinsky didn't need to write these rules down because people resort to these points out of hand. Someone not on the progressive island gets a pass, those not on the progressive island get held to a higher standard.

With Greg Mirkarimi is the center of a massive conspiracy, anyone else not progressive acting out is violent. One wonders if Greg agrees with Tim that rioting in a bank isn't really violence?

RULE 4: “Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules.” If the rule is that every letter gets a reply, send 30,000 letters. You can kill them with this because no one can possibly obey all of their own rules.

Posted by matlock on Feb. 24, 2013 @ 12:27 am

Just because you haven't been 100% successful at improving some social condition, then you should just throw your hands up and give up. The problem with that logic is that if you try, you're going to be a lot more successful than if you do nothing.

A generation or two or three ago, it was perfectly acceptable for teachers and principals to beat children, to beat your own children, to beat your wife, to bully other kids on the schoolyard, etc. Now, many schools are adopting zero tolerance toward bullying, it is no longer acceptable to beat your wife (though you can still beat your husband with more or less impunity, but that'll change too eventually), teachers aren't allowed to beat kids anymore, and some of the more progressive countries (32 last I looked) are starting to make corporal punishment illegal for children, which is where the problem of violence really begins.

The matlocks of the world would say that because these measures haven't completely eradicated all violence in one generation, that means we should just stop trying and let people do whatever they want to each other -it's just ordinary "antics" and "normal human evolution," and the victims of the violence even "resent" when we try to intervene. Gosh, listening to you, one could almost think they like being abused!

The argument is morally bankrupt, because of course these forms of violence have been reduced by intervention. So you do what you always do when your arguments are shown to be morally bankrupt -you fall back on pointing out some alleged progressive hypocrisy. But here too it's clearly disingenuous -to trot out the Mirkarimi thing, you have to simply ignore everything that I've written above, because the whole body of what I just wrote completely contradicts the position you ascribe to me and progressives in general. Neither I nor enyone else ever *condoned* Mirkarimi's arm grab. But because we failed to sign on to a punishment that amounted to the total destruction of a person's whole career and family, then we're somehow hypocrites. No, the position is not hypocritical. It is consistent. Unlike the transparently political witch hunt instigated by Ed Lee and George Gascon, with the goal of nothing less than total destruction of a political opponent's career and life, Leland Yee called for a very measured response. I would've supported a penalty for Mirkarimi on roughly the same level that Yee is proposing for the coach.

Incidentally... or not so incidentally... it should be noted that there's one relevant difference -the coach's actions occured on the job, and in direct relation to his duties. Therefore the penalty should be on the job and in direct relation to his duties.

The stuff about protests against banks, and sending letters, being equivalent to physical violence against other human beings -that doesn't even deserve a response. It's more of the usual false equivalency that you resort to when your arguments are shown to be morally bankrupt.

Posted by Greg on Feb. 24, 2013 @ 9:05 am

there is some reason that in group Mirkarimi's antics are not so bad while another's not on the island is an atrocity.

You can do all the back flips in the world to justify your servile apologia's you want, it still comes down to you just like Mirkarimi's politics so you a make up nonsense reasoning. You can justify it all to yourself endlessly, it's quite obvious though.

I've already clarified that position for you, why are you going over it again?

Posted by matlock on Feb. 24, 2013 @ 10:13 am

I can always tell when the other side is totally out of arguments. When someone resorts to making up positions for me and arguing against those instead of the actual points I've made, or simply engaging in ad hominem, it's a clearly sign that they've lost. The moral bankruptcy of your position is plain and transparent.

Posted by Greg on Feb. 24, 2013 @ 11:47 am

Really. Has he ever had a leg to stand on? He doesn't have arguments, just memes. And the meme he's pushing is that there's no difference between progressives and the far right. Just the same tired absurdities which he keeps repeating over and over and day after day of his pathetic existence. I don't know what it does for him, but perhaps he gets a pittance from his handlers each time he puts that message out there.

The surprising thing to me is that you even bother to respond to him. I say that with respect because I generally look forward to your posts, Greg. Your comments are well reasoned and intelligent. But, as for Matlock, a sophisticated reader is not going to pay him the least attention. Face it, he's a meme pusher, that's all. So I wouldn't give him the time of day. Just personally, I don't even bother to read his comments. He never says anything thoughtful or intelligent or new, and certainly nothing worth reading or responding to. So why waste your time?

Posted by Guest on Feb. 24, 2013 @ 12:29 pm

In fact, they are opposites. Most Americans are in the middle and have little time for either extreme.

Even in SF, the winning mayor is always a centrist, not an extremist.

So you are correct, but perhaps not quite in the way you envisaged.

Posted by anon on Feb. 24, 2013 @ 12:58 pm

They share many of the same traits, disdain for the masses yet attempting to speak for them, attributing to conspiracy what can be explained by natural forces, and holding a secret knowledge that people not in the know are too stupid to get anyways. Just a few examples.

The two fringe sides tend to attack the other fringe and not the middle, they conflate not being with them as being against them, thats why they hold such disdain for the citizens of the city that are moderate. To the progressives moderate means fringe conservative.

Posted by matlock on Feb. 24, 2013 @ 1:13 pm

"Greg, when has Matlock ever made sense? "

You're right. You nailed it with "meme pusher." When nobody says anything about that idiocy, I start to wonder if other people think it makes sense. I should probably realize that it's just as transparent to anyone else as it is to me, but most people just don't want to bother. Debating with matlock is like mud wrestling a pig -even if you win you still get dirty.

Posted by Greg on Feb. 24, 2013 @ 6:47 pm

That a major change in evolution changed in one generation?

Good grief.

Posted by matlock on Feb. 24, 2013 @ 12:44 pm

to screaming racism when a person doesn't agree with his views on immigration. Greg also is a self appointed advocate of the constitution, minus the parts around who is and isn't an immigrant and citizen.

Greg screams bigot when a person doesn't agree with meaningless renaming of airports. Not wanting to name the airport after anyone is bigoted against gays.

Greg is so entertaining, his world view is 100% based on what he thinks others believe. His strange belief that major evolution events happens in one generation is odd. He thinks Mirkarimi is the subject of a conspiracy while others who do the same as Mirkarimi are defined in another way. Thius proving the point that if Mirkarimi wasn't a progressive Greg would be freaking out. When I ignore his stream of conscious ramblings I've been bettered?

interesting.

Posted by matlock on Feb. 24, 2013 @ 4:32 pm

Interesting. Odd. Far right and far left bigoted same. heh. Conspiracy ravings Mirkarimi. Self-referential ramblings, har. Progressive hypocrisy. Anyone who disagrees bigot. heh. Entertaining. Progressives freaking out. Pro-abortion moderate.

interesting.

Posted by Greg on Feb. 25, 2013 @ 9:20 am
Posted by Guest on Feb. 21, 2013 @ 9:20 am

Lee's done some good things in Sacramento.

He criticizes UC and CSU chancellors for their high pay. The chancellors, just like many CEOs, get their salaries bumped up all the time through the dubious "peer review" process.

I wish he would start tackling the public-employee pension time-bomb. But that's wishful thinking. He's not going to bite the pay-to-play hand that feeds him.

Posted by Troll the XIV on Feb. 21, 2013 @ 9:27 am

Also from this author