|
|
|
Perhaps it is fitting that James Han's column on the
whiteness of Stony Brook's upper administration and Shaun Powell's column
in Newsday are both appearing the same week. Number 11 on James' list
could be Jim Fiore, Director of Athletics.
Copyright: Newsday
http://www.newsday.com/news/columnists/ny-sppow064501513nov06,0,280616.
column?coll=ny-rightrail-columnist
Apparently, no
lessons when a title is at stake
Shaun Powell
SPORTS COLUMNIST
November 6, 2005
In any hard-fought college soccer match, a player understands
certain things will fly his way, such as: A few aggressive defenders. A
frantic goalkeeper trying to protect the net. And, obviously, the ball.
He does not anticipate being called the N-word.
Or being told to "go back to Africa." Or hear someone follow up
that request by asking: "What are you doing here?"
No soccer player expects to hear stuff that stings harder than a kick to
the shin.
"It is not the thing to say to a child," said the player's
mother, who was told this by her son.
"In the 1950s and '60s," said the father, "those things
happened in this country. We thought those days were gone."
Well, the day in this case was just a few weeks ago, on Oct. 22, when
Tatiana and Kolma Tobey learned what was said and done to their son while
he played against Stony Brook University. Lee Stephane Kouadio, a
University of Vermont freshman who is black, was in that contest at
LaValle Stadium and apparently enraged at least one Stony Brook player, if
not others. According to the parents, who agreed to speak out the other
day, Kouadio heard taunts with racial overtones and became a target of
attempted physical abuse.
"He said that even when he didn't have the ball, they hit him,"
Tatiana Tobey said. "They said something to him. He didn't like that.
I didn't like that."
And that's not all they don't like.
In a statement acknowledging that an incident took place, the Stony Brook
athletic department said an "aggressive and thorough
investigation" was conducted. The school considered it a "very
serious action" and an episode that "should not have happened
and will not be tolerated."
Those terse and strong words usually lead to stiff consequences, right?
Well, after finally reaching their conclusion, school officials decided
the incident wasn't "serious" enough to kick anyone off the
team.
Citing policy, Stony Brook refused further comment and didn't announce any
suspensions, although one starting player, a senior who is white, missed
the next two games before returning last Wednesday.
"That they're letting this kid play says they don't care about our
feelings," Kolma Tobey said.
Complicating matters is that Stony Brook is the No. 1 seed in the America
East Tournament, which gives the appearance, if nothing else, that the
school doesn't want to hurt its chances of winning.
If that's the case, which a school spokesman denies, Stony Brook would
hardly be the first or the last school to throw that factor into the mix
when deciding how to punish a player who's important to the program.
But that's not the major reason why zero tolerance should've been applied
in this case by a school that claims to embrace diversity. Any player
involved in racial harassment should be a spectator, not preparing for the
big game, because playing soccer or engaging in any school activity is a
privilege and not a right.
Plus, appearance and image must be weighed heavily by an institution that
employs and affects thousands of people, as Stony Brook does. Firing off
the N-word doesn't just insult the intended victim; it fragments and hits
every black person in that game and on that campus.
Or is there a difference between a black soccer player and a black history
professor? You wonder how the school would have reacted had this happened
during a men's basketball game witnessed and heard by thousands of people,
instead of a soccer game attended by a sparse few. Or if it had happened
in a classroom.
Suppose a white student said that and more to a black student during a
heated exchange. Would he be invited back to class after sitting out a few
days? I hope not. Or would he be told to grab his books and try again next
semester?
Strangely, the smaller issue here is the incident itself and why anyone
would engage in a racial diatribe in public in this day and age. The
Tobeys said a Stony Brook player verbally attacked their son repeatedly,
not just once. If so, then this wasn't a slip of the tongue but a flip
through the thesaurus.
Sure, in any tense competition, players go on emotion and impulse. Things
are said that wouldn't get repeated on Sunday mornings. Fine. That's
understood. But is there anything their son could've said or done to
justify a racist rip job?
"Some people just don't like other people," Kolma Tobey said.
"I don't know how the other kid was brought up."
In hushed tones, some in the Stony Brook athletic department have chalked
it up to the way kids of all colors talk to each other these days.
In that warped sense, sadly, they're right. If an immature 20-year-old,
who wasn't born when Rosa Parks refused to give up her seat, listens to 50
Cent and Kanye West enough, he probably thinks it's OK to say what's on
the iPod. No different from calling someone a punk.
Which only underlines how much we've decayed as a society, thanks to the
misguided fools who try to mainstream a historically vicious word, and
those stupid enough to repeat it.
Anyway, college life and sports must go on, and Stony Brook is all fired
up to host the most anticipated men's soccer game in school history. The
chance to play for a championship has every player anxious to suit up. And
we mean every player, Mrs. Tobey.
After a sigh, the mother of a victim said: "We wanted the people
responsible to be punished so they could not have a chance to do this
again."
Email: spowell@newsday.com
|
|
|
