Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
gowrestle

Hair Cut

Recommended Posts

45 minutes ago, russelscout said:
1 hour ago, ironmonkey said:

I have seen some questionable social science offered as explanations for certain perceptions of the incident.  With all of the sociology being thrown around, I have been waiting for someone to draw upon psychology to offer additional insight.  I am surprised nobody has mentioned confirmation bias and belief perseverance when seeing rational fact based arguments discarded in favor of possible explanations.

 I pretty much pointed out this error in thinking to jon. Perry has been saying it also. Neither of us said it as clearly as you have and called it by name. 

Thank you for your thoughtful posts in this thread. I've not responded so much because I'm not reading so closely. Feels as if posters talking past one another. Or perhaps posters talking about different things. Or perhaps posters striving to do something impossible - i.e., striving to read the ref's mind.

My opinion: 'Consistent with the rules' explanation ought to prevail in a typical scenario -- but right now we're not talking about a typical scenario! Dreadlocks case involves a goon ref whose past transgressions ought to draw attention to all subsequent conduct. I've not read this thread closely enough to know whether or not the ref followed rules to a tee--I've seen some comments suggesting rules vague and/or ref not in compliance to the fullest extent--but if the ref's fidelity is any less than 100% then I say the "self accountability" diversion applies to ref just as much as others believe it applies to the kid.

Dreadlocks case is not about society. Dreadlocks case not typical/generalizable even in the narrow context of matside haircuts. Dreadlocks case has a goon ref. Half the statements here acknowledge this fact (and so, in my opinion, these statements on topic) and remaining statements in this thread ignore/downplay this fact (why??).

Don't hold the kid to high standards (self accountability) if you won't do the same for the ref. I can't read the ref's mind (and so my 'bias' explanation may well be wrong!) but neither can you.

Do the rules need rewriting? Does a ref who was benched for a year need to be monitored?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, jon said:

Thank you for your thoughtful posts in this thread. I've not responded so much because I'm not reading so closely. Feels as if posters talking past one another. Or perhaps posters talking about different things. Or perhaps posters striving to do something impossible - i.e., striving to read the ref's mind.

My opinion: 'Consistent with the rules' explanation ought to prevail in a typical scenario -- but right now we're not talking about a typical scenario! Dreadlocks case involves a goon ref whose past transgressions ought to draw attention to all subsequent conduct. I've not read this thread closely enough to know whether or not the ref followed rules to a tee--I've seen some comments suggesting rules vague and/or ref not in compliance to the fullest extent--but if the ref's fidelity is any less than 100% then I say the "self accountability" diversion applies to ref just as much as others believe it applies to the kid.

Dreadlocks case is not about society. Dreadlocks case not typical/generalizable even in the narrow context of matside haircuts. Dreadlocks case has a goon ref. Half the statements here acknowledge this fact (and so, in my opinion, these statements on topic) and remaining statements in this thread ignore/downplay this fact (why??).

Don't hold the kid to high standards (self accountability) if you won't do the same for the ref. I can't read the ref's mind (and so my 'bias' explanation may well be wrong!) but neither can you.

Do the rules need rewriting? Does a ref who was benched for a year need to be monitored?

What are we holding the ref accountable to? The implementation of the rule or his past comment? Many on here have said they have seen this happen to other wrestlers in the past. There has never been a discussion like this about those refs in our community ever. We have never felt the need to evaluate those refs history. This is a story that was posted on twitter because a guy was trying to point out the wrestler was a team player, not because it was some sort of injustice. Then the mob filled with people who don't understand our sport took it over as a race issue and the media ran with it. 

The mob assumed this was a race issue because this was a white guy doing something so out of the norm to a black kid. Then you had JB jump in and confirm this for anyone who was on the fence. However, I cannot unsee all the times I have seen a kids forced to cut their hair. I am not holding a kid to any higher standards than any other kid. Why should I hold the ref to a higher standard than I held all those other refs to? Because he said something racist once? Should he be forced treat this black kid different than he would treat a white kid now? I don't think so

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, russelscout said:

Why should I hold the ref to a higher standard than I held all those other refs to? Because he said something racist once?

Kinda. Higher standard? No. But a goon ref ought to be subject to heightened scrutiny.

7 minutes ago, russelscout said:

Should he be forced treat this black kid different than he would treat a white kid now?

No.

Somewhere there's a rule that assumes there's a 'good' ref (lol) not a goon ref. I think I'm talking past everyone else here. I'm focused on ref and, for the sake of interpreting this dreadlocks case, I wish this ref--the goon ref--were not involved.

Edited by jon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, russelscout said:

 However, I cannot unsee all the times I have seen a kids forced to cut their hair. I am not holding a kid to any higher standards than any other kid. Why should I hold the ref to a higher standard than I held all those other refs to? Because he said something racist once? Should he be forced treat this black kid different than he would treat a white kid now? I don't think so

 

How about all the times a white kid who's hair was too long but was given a pass by the referee? Has this ref or quite honestly any ref (because lets me honest, we complain often how refs are inconsistent, yet seem to ignore they're different people) allowed a white kid with hair that was too long wrestle and not have his hair cut?

There's a certain top level light weight recruit who recently announced he will be attending a top level NCAA school known for many championships, who is from a top level NJ high school who has awfully long hair and doesn't seem to wear a hair cover... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are a ton of racial issues and situations that sadden me.  However, this is too much of a stretch for me and the "outrage" is almost laughable.  I had to dry shave with a straight razor, mat side before.  Compared to that, cutting your hair is NOTHING as far as I am concerned.

Whether you think the rules are outdated or not, COMPLY from the get go and there is NOTHING to worry about...............If you don't like the rules then don't participate.

One thing I will say is MAKE the refs fully enforce the rule or change it, but be uniform.  But, we all know how impossible that is------SEE STALLING!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, BigTenFanboy said:

There's a certain top level light weight recruit who recently announced he will be attending a top level NCAA school known for many championships, who is from a top level NJ high school who has awfully long hair and doesn't seem to wear a hair cover... 

With all publicity this topic has gotten,if his hair is too long,I don't think  that will be the case anymore.

Edited by rpbobcat

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, MSU158 said:

There are a ton of racial issues and situations that sadden me.  However, this is too much of a stretch for me and the "outrage" is almost laughable.  I had to dry shave with a straight razor, mat side before.  Compared to that, cutting your hair is NOTHING as far as I am concerned.

Whether you think the rules are outdated or not, COMPLY from the get go and there is NOTHING to worry about...............If you don't like the rules then don't participate.

One thing I will say is MAKE the refs fully enforce the rule or change it, but be uniform.  But, we all know how impossible that is------SEE STALLING!

 

Which is why i wouldn't be surprised if the rule became all wrestlers must wear hear covers REGARDLESS of hair length.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, BigTenFanboy said:

How about all the times a white kid who's hair was too long but was given a pass by the referee? Has this ref or quite honestly any ref (because lets me honest, we complain often how refs are inconsistent, yet seem to ignore they're different people) allowed a white kid with hair that was too long wrestle and not have his hair cut?

There's a certain top level light weight recruit who recently announced he will be attending a top level NCAA school known for many championships, who is from a top level NJ high school who has awfully long hair and doesn't seem to wear a hair cover... 

If his hair length violates the rules, e.g. past his shoulders, below his ears, and/or lower than his eyebrows then yes, he should have to cut his hair. Care to locate a picture of him without his head gear on to show us his egregiously long hair that violates those standards?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, npope said:

If his hair length violates the rules, e.g. past his shoulders, below his ears, and/or lower than his eyebrows then yes, he should have to cut his hair. Care to locate a picture of him without his head gear on to show us his egregiously long hair that violates those standards?

121618BCathXCaliburP.jpg

 

How do you justify to the Johnson's that this person's hair SHOULD have been cut, but wasnt, yet Andrew's was?

Edited by BigTenFanboy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, jon said:

Yes.

No.

Somewhere there's a rule that assumes there's a 'good' ref (lol) not a goon ref. I think I'm talking past everyone else here. I'm focused on ref and, for the sake of interpreting this dreadlocks case, I wish this ref--the goon ref--were not involved.

The fact that you want to completely isolate this incident, ignore every other ref, every other case, and the rule itself because this guy said something racist once is disturbing to me. You are choosing to pick and choose facts to create a narrative that cannot possibly be proven. Not only that, you believe the guy should be punished because you and others can create that narrative with no proof. What precedent does that set?

 

 

2 minutes ago, BigTenFanboy said:

How about all the times a white kid who's hair was too long but was given a pass by the referee? Has this ref or quite honestly any ref (because lets me honest, we complain often how refs are inconsistent, yet seem to ignore they're different people) allowed a white kid with hair that was too long wrestle and not have his hair cut?

There's a certain top level light weight recruit who recently announced he will be attending a top level NCAA school known for many championships, who is from a top level NJ high school who has awfully long hair and doesn't seem to wear a hair cover... 

There is a lot of inconsistency. You said it your self. The fact that this guy followed the rule means he should be burned at the stake? Also you are picking and choosing facts to fit a narrative. Do you believe that all black athletes are being held to this standard strictly, and white kids are allowed to wear their hair as they wish by seeing only two cases? Do you believe no black kid has been given a pass? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Plasmodium said:

These are the results of my recent scientific poll:

1 Hispanic and 1 Black wrestler were forced to cut their hair because their hair was too long and did not have an attached hair cover.

1 very prominent White wrestler from the same state as the Black wrestler mentioned above has hair that is in clear violation of the rules.  He doesn't bother with a hair cover so he is good to go.

Good lord this is a horrible take.   How do you know that kid was Hispanic?  Howard is from a different part of the state as the black wrestler, and the tournament where the pictures in this thread are from was in Delaware.  There was also a very prominent black wrestler in the same tournament who didn’t bother with a  hair cover either and was “good to go.”

2 hours ago, ironmonkey said:

On a more relevant note considering the forum, I assumed based on my personal experience these hair rules were applied more to white wrestlers than other races.   I admit having wrestled in the 90s though, haven't been to a high school match in nearly a decade, and attend duals for two specific colleges which both are located in the same area.   Is the charge that the rule is affecting some races more than others accurate?  

 

In 2018 it might be, but I’m not sure if it was in the 70’s or 00’s for example.  The other “charge” that has caused criticism seems to be that dreadlocks in particular have more of a “cultural significance.”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, russelscout said:

There is a lot of inconsistency. You said it your self. The fact that this guy followed the rule means he should be burned at the stake? Also you are picking and choosing facts to fit a narrative. Do you believe that all black athletes are being held to this standard strictly, and white kids are allowed to wear their hair as they wish by seeing only two cases? Do you believe no black kid has been given a pass? 

I'm not saying he should be burned at the stake. I'm explaining WHY some people reject the notion that rules are rules and why its not a good enough explanation for them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, BigTenFanboy said:

I'm not saying he should be burned at the stake. I'm explaining WHY some people reject the notion that rules are rules and why its not a good enough explanation for them.

OK, well then what I said applied to those people

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, russelscout said:

Do you believe that all black athletes are being held to this standard strictly, and white kids are allowed to wear their hair as they wish by seeing only two cases? Do you believe no black kid has been given a pass? 

 

Me personally?

No, but I do believe some people believe this. I believe the twitterverse absolutely believes this, but will never outwardly admit it. You do realize what you described is a loose definition of white privileged. As well as how cops are often perceived as being racist when they're "just doing their jobs."

Edited by BigTenFanboy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, 1032004 said:

In 2018 it might be, but I’m not sure if it was in the 70’s or 00’s for example.  The other “charge” that has caused criticism seems to be that dreadlocks in particular have more of a “cultural significance.”

I don't know if this wrestler's dread locks were for "cultural significance" ,or just a current fashion trend.

I would think that ,if it was for "cultural significance" ,he would have chosen to forfeit,until  he got a compliant hair cover.

In college I wore my hair below my ears.

During the season I got it cut.

News flash.

It grows back.

Edited by rpbobcat

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, BigTenFanboy said:

I'm not saying he should be burned at the stake.

Ditto. Ref ought not be burned at stake. Save the stake for NJSIAA. Dreadlocks case a nonstory (or at most a shortlived story) if it were to include just about any other ref. Typical ref doesn't have disciplinary history.

 

15 minutes ago, russelscout said:

The fact that you want to completely isolate this incident, ignore every other ref, every other case, and the rule itself because this guy said something racist once is disturbing to me.

Makes sense to isolate this incident because typical scenarios have typical refs. This scenario has a goon ref -- i.e., disciplinary history. Ref should have thought about self-accountability when making that 'joke'.

 

Edited by jon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, jon said:

Thank you for your thoughtful posts in this thread. I've not responded so much because I'm not reading so closely. Feels as if posters talking past one another. Or perhaps posters talking about different things. Or perhaps posters striving to do something impossible - i.e., striving to read the ref's mind.

My opinion: 'Consistent with the rules' explanation ought to prevail in a typical scenario -- but right now we're not talking about a typical scenario! Dreadlocks case involves a goon ref whose past transgressions ought to draw attention to all subsequent conduct. I've not read this thread closely enough to know whether or not the ref followed rules to a tee--I've seen some comments suggesting rules vague and/or ref not in compliance to the fullest extent--but if the ref's fidelity is any less than 100% then I say the "self accountability" diversion applies to ref just as much as others believe it applies to the kid.

Dreadlocks case is not about society. Dreadlocks case not typical/generalizable even in the narrow context of matside haircuts. Dreadlocks case has a goon ref. Half the statements here acknowledge this fact (and so, in my opinion, these statements on topic) and remaining statements in this thread ignore/downplay this fact (why??).

Don't hold the kid to high standards (self accountability) if you won't do the same for the ref. I can't read the ref's mind (and so my 'bias' explanation may well be wrong!) but neither can you.

Do the rules need rewriting? Does a ref who was benched for a year need to be monitored?

The ref reportedly didn’t follow the rules “to a tee” because he did not see the specific  hair cover during the pre-match routine, but he did notify the wrestler that he needed the cover in general (according to the lawyer’s statement).

Some have pointed to that as evidence that he for some reason should have let it go, but there are still very clear rules that state it is a technical violation to report to the scorers table not properly equipped, and the coach is also supposed to verify that his team WILL be properly equipped.

Bottom line, I wouldn’t say the wrestler/coach were being held to a “higher” standard.  IMO the ref was trying to give him the benefit of the doubt during the pre-match routine since he said he would need the hair cover but didn’t require him to show it.  According to the box score on trackwrestling, he also did not award the opponent with the 1 match point for the technical violation, another piece of evidence IMO of him not being racist in this situation.

Meanwhile, both the coach and this specific wrestler were warned at least twice this year that he would need the required hair cover.  And the rule has also been around for a few years at this point.  So, I would say asking someone to follow the rules is not holding them to a higher standard than asking someone else to enforce the rules only at one point in time

Edited by 1032004

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, rpbobcat said:

I don't know if this wrestler's dread locks were for "cultural significance" ,or just a current fashion trend.

I would think that ,if it was for "cultural significance" ,he would have chosen to forfeit,until  he got a compliant hair cover.

Agreed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, BigTenFanboy said:

The argument against that was he was "under duress, and did not have enough time to think about or process what was going on"

If the wrestler's dread locks were cultural,I would think the answer to cutting them would  have been automatic , no.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, rpbobcat said:

If the wrestler's dread locks were cultural,I would think the answer to cutting them would  have been automatic , no.

 

 

I'm not saying you're wrong, however in today's social climate the response to that would be you something along the lines of "You dont know the culture. Unless its your culture you cant make that statement, etc" in addition to, hes just a kid and was being pressured by his peers as well as his coach.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, BigTenFanboy said:

I'm not saying you're wrong, however in today's social climate the response to that would be you something along the lines of "You dont know the culture. Unless its your culture you cant make that statement, etc" in addition to, hes just a kid and was being pressured by his peers as well as his coach.

That may be ,but that doesn't mean the response is correct. 

As a result of this incident  I've done some reading about dreadlocks,but didn't see anything really definitive when it comes to their current "cultural significance".

Does anyone here know what their "cultural significance"  actually is.

 

 

Edited by rpbobcat

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×