Reflections of a Weak Society?

 

Monday night, with a little over five minutes remaining in the 1st Quarter of the Bills-Bengals game, Buffalo safety Damar Hamlin suffered cardiac arrest. He was attended by both teams’ trainers and EMTs and was transported to the University of Cincinnati Medical Center where he remains in critical condition.

The overwhelming opinion of the media and everyone connected with the game is that it could not continue and the the NFL suspended play.

Is it a sign of respect or sign of weakness?

On March 22, 1989, Steve Tuttle of the St. Louis Blues and Uwe Krupp of the Buffalo Sabres crashed into the nets and, in a freak accident, one of Tuttle’s skates cut open the neck of Sabres’ goal tender Clint Malarchuk, severing his carotid artery and partially cutting his jugular vein. Malarchuck lost a liter and half of blood. The Blues resurfaced the ice and the game was finished.

In 1940, Cincinnati Reds backup catcher Willard Herschberger committed suicide in the team’s hotel in Boston. (I wrote about his story here.) After a team meeting the Reds played the next day and completed the road trip to Brooklyn to take on the Dodgers.

The only player to die on the field during a National Football League game was Chuck Hughes of the Detroit Lions. With 1:02 left in an October 1971 game at Tiger Stadium vs the Chicago Bears, the 28-year-old wide receiver collapsed on his way back to the huddle. He was pronounced dead at Henry Ford Hospital.

Were we tougher back then or were we just terrible people?

Published in General
This post was promoted to the Main Feed by a Ricochet Editor at the recommendation of Ricochet members. Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 135 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Ed G. Member
    Ed G.
    @EdG

    Hoyacon (View Comment):

    BDB (View Comment):

    Well, I care so little about sports that I’m not going to debate whether they matter — they certainly don’t to me, and certainly not any particular match.

    Even so, peoples’ right to enjoy sports or reading a book or going to church is certainly worth fighting for.

    I’ve even been known to read a book in church while watching a game on my phone. I will definitely fight for that.

    And that’s why Catholics have Confession. 

    • #121
  2. BDB Inactive
    BDB
    @BDB

    Charles Mark (View Comment):

    BDB (View Comment):

    Charles Mark (View Comment):
    I know my American friends love to diss soccer…

    Swedish, ja?

    Hair too dark, legs too short.

    Ah.

    • #122
  3. Miffed White Male Member
    Miffed White Male
    @MiffedWhiteMale

    Ed G. (View Comment):

    BDB (View Comment):
    And if a guy flat-out dies on the field, I cannot imagine playing on. If it was done before, that does not change my opinion. “Game of this magnitude” be damned — it’s a game.

    It’s a business. If this thinking applies, then we’re falling victim to in-front-of-our-noses-ism. (Believe it or not that is not an official term and I’m pretty sure this is the coining). Wouldn’t the same thinking apply to off-field or before-game incidents? What about family members of players? After all it’s just a game and life is real. Well, if this were some pickup game on the street then it makes zero difference to anyone if the game gets completed, but this game is different. It does matter financially and emotionally to many people; it has broader impact, no matter what we think of professional sporting and its role in our culture. Does that preclude a player’s injury from mattering too? No.

    I’d say that that if it’s not one or the other, then the game should go on, but if somehow it’s mutually exclusive then obviously the player’s life should come first. No one is expecting Damar Hamlin to get back in the game, but once he’s received the possible treatment then there should still be a game.

    Should the NFL have played the weekend of JFK’s assassination?

    Should they have played the Sunday after 9/11?

     

    • #123
  4. BDB Inactive
    BDB
    @BDB

    Miffed White Male (View Comment):

    Ed G. (View Comment):

    BDB (View Comment):
    And if a guy flat-out dies on the field, I cannot imagine playing on. If it was done before, that does not change my opinion. “Game of this magnitude” be damned — it’s a game.

    It’s a business. If this thinking applies, then we’re falling victim to in-front-of-our-noses-ism. (Believe it or not that is not an official term and I’m pretty sure this is the coining). Wouldn’t the same thinking apply to off-field or before-game incidents? What about family members of players? After all it’s just a game and life is real. Well, if this were some pickup game on the street then it makes zero difference to anyone if the game gets completed, but this game is different. It does matter financially and emotionally to many people; it has broader impact, no matter what we think of professional sporting and its role in our culture. Does that preclude a player’s injury from mattering too? No.

    I’d say that that if it’s not one or the other, then the game should go on, but if somehow it’s mutually exclusive then obviously the player’s life should come first. No one is expecting Damar Hamlin to get back in the game, but once he’s received the possible treatment then there should still be a game.

    Should the NFL have played the weekend of JFK’s assassination?

    Should they have played the Sunday after 9/11?

     

    It depends.  And probably yes.

    • #124
  5. Miffed White Male Member
    Miffed White Male
    @MiffedWhiteMale

    BDB (View Comment):

    Miffed White Male (View Comment):

    Ed G. (View Comment):

    BDB (View Comment):
    And if a guy flat-out dies on the field, I cannot imagine playing on. If it was done before, that does not change my opinion. “Game of this magnitude” be damned — it’s a game.

    It’s a business. If this thinking applies, then we’re falling victim to in-front-of-our-noses-ism. (Believe it or not that is not an official term and I’m pretty sure this is the coining). Wouldn’t the same thinking apply to off-field or before-game incidents? What about family members of players? After all it’s just a game and life is real. Well, if this were some pickup game on the street then it makes zero difference to anyone if the game gets completed, but this game is different. It does matter financially and emotionally to many people; it has broader impact, no matter what we think of professional sporting and its role in our culture. Does that preclude a player’s injury from mattering too? No.

    I’d say that that if it’s not one or the other, then the game should go on, but if somehow it’s mutually exclusive then obviously the player’s life should come first. No one is expecting Damar Hamlin to get back in the game, but once he’s received the possible treatment then there should still be a game.

    Should the NFL have played the weekend of JFK’s assassination?

    Should they have played the Sunday after 9/11?

     

    It depends. And probably yes.

    Depends on what?  

    Seriously, I have two concrete examples.  You know all the facts in both cases.  Should they have played?

     

    • #125
  6. DaveSchmidt Coolidge
    DaveSchmidt
    @DaveSchmidt

    BDB (View Comment):

    Well, I care so little about sports that I’m not going to debate whether they matter — they certainly don’t to me, and certainly not any particular match.

    Even so, peoples’ right to enjoy sports or reading a book or going to church is certainly worth fighting for.

    And freely speak their opinions. 

    • #126
  7. CarolJoy, Not So Easy To Kill Coolidge
    CarolJoy, Not So Easy To Kill
    @CarolJoy

    OldPhil (View Comment):

    Manny (View Comment):

    Don’t know if this changes any opinions. It changed mine after my initial reaction which I described as mixed with my first comment (#13). From what I understand the NFL had planned to continue playing but it was the players themselves that said no, players from both teams.

    Look, they’re playing a game and a teammate and fellow athlete for all intents and purposes dies in front of their eyes. They watch a fury of events to resuscitate him, and you expect them to continue afterwards as if nothing happened? No way. It’s a game.

    This is the appropriate response. It’s a game that has to be played at the highest level, and these guys need to be at the peak of their mental and physical abilities to perform properly and avoid mistakes and additional injuries. They’re not just going back to their desks to update some spreadsheets or call customers.

    Also several people on my other social media stated that it took a full hour for the NFL people to decide to cancel the game. But that the players and coaches of both teams had requested that  the game be done another time.

    • #127
  8. CarolJoy, Not So Easy To Kill Coolidge
    CarolJoy, Not So Easy To Kill
    @CarolJoy

    BDB (View Comment):

    Miffed White Male (View Comment):

    Ed G. (View Comment):

    BDB (View Comment):
    And if a guy flat-out dies on the field, I cannot imagine playing on. If it was done before, that does not change my opinion. “Game of this magnitude” be damned — it’s a game.

    It’s a business. If this thinking applies, then we’re falling victim to in-front-of-our-noses-ism. (Believe it or not that is not an official term and I’m pretty sure this is the coining). Wouldn’t the same thinking apply to off-field or before-game incidents? What about family members of players? After all it’s just a game and life is real. Well, if this were some pickup game on the street then it makes zero difference to anyone if the game gets completed, but this game is different. It does matter financially and emotionally to many people; it has broader impact, no matter what we think of professional sporting and its role in our culture. Does that preclude a player’s injury from mattering too? No.

    I’d say that that if it’s not one or the other, then the game should go on, but if somehow it’s mutually exclusive then obviously the player’s life should come first. No one is expecting Damar Hamlin to get back in the game, but once he’s received the possible treatment then there should still be a game.

    Should the NFL have played the weekend of JFK’s assassination?

    Should they have played the Sunday after 9/11?

     

    It depends. And probably yes.

    Wasn’t baseball cancelled? Until finally baseball mgrs got together and said “This sport of ours keeps us all united and provides an outlet for something other than fear and grief.”

    Of course, maybe that is not exactly how it was. But I do think baseball games were cancelled.

    • #128
  9. Charles Mark Member
    Charles Mark
    @CharlesMark

    BDB (View Comment):

    Charles Mark (View Comment):

    BDB (View Comment):

    Charles Mark (View Comment):
    I know my American friends love to diss soccer…

    Swedish, ja?

    Hair too dark, legs too short.

    Ah.

    Begorrah. 

    • #129
  10. DaveSchmidt Coolidge
    DaveSchmidt
    @DaveSchmidt

    CarolJoy, Not So Easy To Kill (View Comment):

    BDB (View Comment):

    Miffed White Male (View Comment):

    Ed G. (View Comment):

    BDB (View Comment):
    And if a guy flat-out dies on the field, I cannot imagine playing on. If it was done before, that does not change my opinion. “Game of this magnitude” be damned — it’s a game.

    It’s a business. If this thinking applies, then we’re falling victim to in-front-of-our-noses-ism. (Believe it or not that is not an official term and I’m pretty sure this is the coining). Wouldn’t the same thinking apply to off-field or before-game incidents? What about family members of players? After all it’s just a game and life is real. Well, if this were some pickup game on the street then it makes zero difference to anyone if the game gets completed, but this game is different. It does matter financially and emotionally to many people; it has broader impact, no matter what we think of professional sporting and its role in our culture. Does that preclude a player’s injury from mattering too? No.

    I’d say that that if it’s not one or the other, then the game should go on, but if somehow it’s mutually exclusive then obviously the player’s life should come first. No one is expecting Damar Hamlin to get back in the game, but once he’s received the possible treatment then there should still be a game.

    Should the NFL have played the weekend of JFK’s assassination?

    Should they have played the Sunday after 9/11?

     

    It depends. And probably yes.

    Wasn’t baseball cancelled? Until finally baseball mgrs got together and said “This sport of ours keeps us all united and provides an outlet for something other than fear and grief.”

    Of course, maybe that is not exactly how it was. But I do think baseball games were cancelled.

    And didn’t W throw the ceremonial first pitch? 

    • #130
  11. BDB Inactive
    BDB
    @BDB

    Miffed White Male (View Comment):

    BDB (View Comment):

    Miffed White Male (View Comment):

    Ed G. (View Comment):

    BDB (View Comment):
    And if a guy flat-out dies on the field, I cannot imagine playing on. If it was done before, that does not change my opinion. “Game of this magnitude” be damned — it’s a game.

    It’s a business. If this thinking applies, then we’re falling victim to in-front-of-our-noses-ism. (Believe it or not that is not an official term and I’m pretty sure this is the coining). Wouldn’t the same thinking apply to off-field or before-game incidents? What about family members of players? After all it’s just a game and life is real. Well, if this were some pickup game on the street then it makes zero difference to anyone if the game gets completed, but this game is different. It does matter financially and emotionally to many people; it has broader impact, no matter what we think of professional sporting and its role in our culture. Does that preclude a player’s injury from mattering too? No.

    I’d say that that if it’s not one or the other, then the game should go on, but if somehow it’s mutually exclusive then obviously the player’s life should come first. No one is expecting Damar Hamlin to get back in the game, but once he’s received the possible treatment then there should still be a game.

    Should the NFL have played the weekend of JFK’s assassination?

    Should they have played the Sunday after 9/11?

     

    It depends. And probably yes.

    Depends on what?

    Seriously, I have two concrete examples. You know all the facts in both cases. Should they have played?

     

    I do *not* know all the facts about the teams playing.  Was there great hue and cry about them playing?  Were any of the players friends with Kennedy, or Connally?  Children of those killed in the 9/11 attacks?  Were those players told to play ball or hit the bricks?  And so forth.  I don’t suppose so, but I do not *know* of course. 

    I support it if it was a post-calamity stiff-upper lip sort of thing.  To the extent that I give a damn.

    These examples of yours are a different animal, though.  Those were world/national events.  This current one is an NFL event that happened to go out on broadcast.  Different thing.

    I don’t much care, and I’m certainly done debating it.  I do not care enough to have a crisp opinion, so yes, you’ll find me squishy on it.  I don’t care.

    • #131
  12. Ed G. Member
    Ed G.
    @EdG

    Miffed White Male (View Comment):

    BDB (View Comment):

    Miffed White Male (View Comment):

    Ed G. (View Comment):

    BDB (View Comment):
    And if a guy flat-out dies on the field, I cannot imagine playing on. If it was done before, that does not change my opinion. “Game of this magnitude” be damned — it’s a game.

    It’s a business. If this thinking applies, then we’re falling victim to in-front-of-our-noses-ism. (Believe it or not that is not an official term and I’m pretty sure this is the coining). Wouldn’t the same thinking apply to off-field or before-game incidents? What about family members of players? After all it’s just a game and life is real. Well, if this were some pickup game on the street then it makes zero difference to anyone if the game gets completed, but this game is different. It does matter financially and emotionally to many people; it has broader impact, no matter what we think of professional sporting and its role in our culture. Does that preclude a player’s injury from mattering too? No.

    I’d say that that if it’s not one or the other, then the game should go on, but if somehow it’s mutually exclusive then obviously the player’s life should come first. No one is expecting Damar Hamlin to get back in the game, but once he’s received the possible treatment then there should still be a game.

    Should the NFL have played the weekend of JFK’s assassination?

    Should they have played the Sunday after 9/11?

    It depends. And probably yes.

    Depends on what?

    Seriously, I have two concrete examples. You know all the facts in both cases. Should they have played?

    For 9/11, baseball resumed on 9/17. However, I agree that it’s a different animal. I seem to recall some general public anguish about any large public gathering. I also recall being in favor of continuing on. Should games have continued on 9/11 itself? No, because of the very real threat of additional attacks.

    Several months ago I posted regarding the Ukraine commemorative stamps. I was shocked that there were hours long lines in order to get the gag stamp. Not to enlist, but to acquire an anti Russia stamp. Anyway, I was further shocked by the consensus meh reaction of the Ricochete. After all, life goes on even during war time, people still go bowling and to the movies and restaurants. Even with actual invaders ~250 miles away. Anyway.

    For the JFK assassination on 11/22/1963, it appears that there was a full football schedule just two days later on 11/24/1963. If the assassination had happened on a Sunday, I would have favored the games going on.

    • #132
  13. Ed G. Member
    Ed G.
    @EdG

    BDB (View Comment):

    Miffed White Male (View Comment):

    BDB (View Comment):

    Miffed White Male (View Comment):

    Should the NFL have. played the weekend of JFK’s assassination?

    Should they have played the Sunday after 9/11?

     

    It depends. And probably yes.

    Depends on what?

    Seriously, I have two concrete examples. You know all the facts in both cases. Should they have played?

     

    I do *not* know all the facts about the teams playing. Was there great hue and cry about them playing? Were any of the players friends with Kennedy, or Connally? Children of those killed in the 9/11 attacks? Were those players told to play ball or hit the bricks? And so forth. I don’t suppose so, but I do not *know* of course.

    I support it if it was a post-calamity stiff-upper lip sort of thing. To the extent that I give a damn.

    These examples of yours are a different animal, though. Those were world/national events. This current one is an NFL event that happened to go out on broadcast. Different thing.

    I don’t much care, and I’m certainly done debating it. I do not care enough to have a crisp opinion, so yes, you’ll find me squishy on it. I don’t care.

    I know it doesn’t seem like much, but these kinds of conversations are my favorite around here. It can be surface or we can go deeper, we can stay on direct topic or go off in interesting yet related directions. Of course, when I find myself on the outside of the consensus, yet everyone seems to think their position is obvious and obviously correct, I really can’t resist digging in to the issues.

    • #133
  14. EJHill Podcaster
    EJHill
    @EJHill

    In addition to the incidents I mentioned in the original post, NASCAR returned the week after Dale Earnhardt Sr. died at Daytona.

    There has been a many in-season deaths of MLB players: Darryl Kyle… Thurman Munson… Tyler Skaggs… Nick Adenhart… no one thought to not play as a league.

    • #134
  15. Annefy Member
    Annefy
    @Annefy

    EJHill (View Comment):

    In addition to the incidents I mentioned in the original post, NASCAR returned the week after Dale Earnhardt Sr. died at Daytona.

    There has been a many in-season deaths of MLB players: Darryl Kyle… Thurman Munson… Tyler Skaggs… Nick Adenhart… no one thought to not play as a league.

    I’d leave it alone @ejhill. Some People have opined – some people disagree. Some agree. That’s okay. It’s a big world and there’s room for all of us.

    Edited to add: (after a few beers) I am not the same person that I was on 9/10/2001. For that matter, I am not the same person that I was in summer 2022. Or summer 2021. Or summer 2020. Or summer 2019. And guess what? None of these young men are the same young men as they should have been in 2020, 2021, 2022,  had those years not been so ridiculous. And know what? That’s on us. Boomers. We own this. We forced the young to pay a price to supposedly keep safe the old. That’s you and me.

    Bringing up instances in the past and trying to compare them to January 2023 does not work; it’s literally not relevant. Is that a good thing? A bad thing? I have no idea. But I do know it doesn’t work.

    • #135
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.