Ivor Evan's boys and coaches suspended.

[bettermirror]

Did anyone read the article in the Vancouver Province yesterday?

A u15 cup match between Guildford and North Delta (or was it another Surrey team? I can't remember just now - but the clubs were located quite closely geographically speaking) was suspended due to player and parent violence.

Apparently, players and coached from Guildford's u15 gold team have been suspended indefinately awaiting investigation into an incident shorly following Guildford's goalie being injured while trying to catch a ball in the air.

At least two Guildford players were kicking an opponent while down and threatening his life. There was about 10 minutes left in the match which was level at 1-1. Some parents became involved for both the violent and non-violent act of things. Ivor Evans refused comment and could not be reached.

A number of other players were also involved in a brawl at the same time. I assume the match was awarded to the opponent but who knows.

Earlier this year after a player scored against Guildford the Guildford players threatened him by saying they'd beat him up at his school. The next week that's exactly what happened as the player was beaten quite seriously. No sanctions were taken for this action.

Absolutely disgusting and not at all a surprising action out of a team from this association which has a reputation for ill-begotten players.

On another side note: What the hell were these parents doing??? If I was involved in ANYTHING like this my dad would have run out onto that field, grabbed me by the neck and dragged me away, and probably have suspended me from any activity ESPECIALLY soccer for a year! These boys clearly have no fear of authority. This isn't a unique characteristic nowadays.

[Richard]

Didn't see the article (don't read the Province). How was Ivor Evans involved, you use his name in the subject line but make no reference in the post?

[bettermirror]

I apologize. Evans is the coach of the Guildford team.

[Richard]

Ah, OK. Somehow this doesn't surprise me.

This is the kind of situation where I would expect the BC Soccer Association to step in and suspend the responsible coaches, involved players and parents from any kind of soccer involvement for life.

[River City]

I'd be careful about basing opinions on what's reported in newspapers as well as what this person said who knows this person, who knows this person.

[The Beaver]

I hope the BCSA does exactly what Richard is calling for. Send a message and make it big.

Mind you, sending a message to the upstanding citizens of Guilford may be an act of futility. Sure, other associations will take notice, but will it change much in Guilford (or Whalley)? For those of you who aren't aware of these "neighborhoods," they are both located in the arm-pit of Surrey, which has traditionally been considered the arm-pit of the Lower Mainland. (Surrey has many great neighborhoods, by the way, but Guilford and Whalley do well to cast a bad reputation on the entire city.)

I once tutored a kid from the Guilford area who'd been kicked out of his school because he'd threatened to bring a gun to school and kill his teacher. He was 13. He was already messing around with booze and ice. If the kid is alive, I'd guess that he is probably living in east van on the street right now. He was a pretty good soccer player, too.

I hated playing against or coaching against Guilford or Whalley at provincials, though I can't recall our ever losing to one of their teams.

This is sad stuff.

[Richard]

Whalley and Guildford have both made great strides in recent years due in large part to the efforts of the City of Surrey. There are plenty of good, hardworking, upstanding, honest folks who live and work in the area. Beware with your broad brush stereotyping, you come across like somebody from the North Shore.

[bettermirror]

hehe, good one richard.

it's true you can't stereotype an entire district by a few bad kids who make the headlines.

but frankly, this is typical of the mob-mentality a lot of the youth take (into adulthood) from this region.

[Daniel]

As bad as it is, I don't think any U18 should be barred for life.

[Richard]

I can make references to the North Shore with impugnity as I lived in West Vancouver myself for many years

Thuggish behaviour is by no means exclusive to people from less wealthy areas.

[The Ref]

If it made the papers it must have been bad. The fact that Ivor Evans is the coach it makes for a good story to sell papers. I hope that the BCSA Discipline guys don't sweep this under the carpet.

[bettermirror]

the BCSA is taking this very seriously. Especially since this club (and specific team) has a documented history of violence.

No one said they'd be barred for life. All that was reported is certain (unnamed) players and coaches have been suspended indefinately - probably awaiting a hearing and judgement.

[Richard]

I think this incident which is by no means without precedent for the personalities involved, has far more to do with a few undesirable people than the neighbourhoods concerned. Something needs to be done to rid soccer of these people, now and for good.

[The Beaver]

quote:Originally posted by Richard

I can make references to the North Shore with impugnity as I lived in West Vancouver myself for many years

You're joking, right? having lived in the area that you are slighting does not grant you immunity to generalize. I live in East Van, but that does not give me the right to stereotype about this neighborhood. Yes, Surrey is making strides, but Guilford and Whalley have a long, long way to go. They are rough neighborhoods. Whether upstanding citizens live in the area does not change this fact. Nobody would argue that just because there are some good people living near main and hastings that the area isn't a cesspool. Maybe the language I'm using is too graphic, but Guilford and Whalley are NOT great neighborhoods. I hope for the sake of the upstanding citizens that these areas improve, but don't pretend the truth is otherwise. I'm not pulling my observations out of my ass. (Though the odd chuff-nut I find does resemble Whalley a fair bit.) [xx(]

[silkyjohnson]

I grew up playing youth soccer in Windsor Ontario, seems like an incident like this happened at least once a year.[]

[Richard]

quote:Originally posted by The Beaver

You're joking, right? having lived in the area that you are slighting does not grant you immunity to generalize. I live in East Van, but that does not give me the right to stereotype about this neighborhood. Yes, Surrey is making strides, but Guilford and Whalley have a long, long way to go. They are rough neighborhoods. Whether upstanding citizens live in the area does not change this fact. Nobody would argue that just because there are some good people living near main and hastings that the area isn't a cesspool. Maybe the language I'm using is too graphic, but Guilford and Whalley are NOT great neighborhoods. I hope for the sake of the upstanding citizens that these areas improve, but don't pretend the truth is otherwise. I'm not pulling my observations out of my ass. (Though the odd chuff-nut I find does resemble Whalley a fair bit.) [xx(]

You say the fact that you live in East Vancouver does not give you the right to stereotype East Vancouver or me the North Shore, then you promptly proceed to stereotype Whalley and Guildford? Why is it not OK for you to stereotype where you live but it is perfectly acceptable for you to badmouth these areas where you don't live, and with some crudity I might add?

[The Beaver]

quote:Originally posted by Richard

You say the fact that you live in East Vancouver does not give you the right to stereotype East Vancouver or me the North Shore, then you promptly proceed to stereotype Whalley and Guildford? Why is it not OK for you to stereotype where you live but it is perfectly acceptable for you to badmouth these areas where you don't live, and with some crudity I might add?

Wow, you aren't making much sense. I see what you are trying to get at, but you are missing my point. The stereotyping of Whalley and Guilford (or anywhere else, for that matter) is entirely beside the point. It has nothing to do with your thinking that it is fine to stereotype the North Shore because you once lived there. Sorry, you are not immune just because you lived there. And, aside from an admittedly cheap, arguably crude chuff-nut metaphor, I've not said anything about these neighborhoods that is not based in real evidence. I've spent plenty enough time in both neighborhoods; they are rough. If you find that crude or a stereotype, then I don't know what to say to you. Go for a walk in Whalley. Hang with the people that live there for a while. Even the upstanding ones will admit it is rough there, even if it is improving.

crudity. fun stuff.

[Richard]

You apparently don't see the disconnect between objecting to stereotyping the place where you live but readily stereotyping somewhere else.

You don't do yourself or any neighbourhood any favours by belabouring the negatives.

[The Beaver]

quote:Originally posted by Richard

You apparently don't see the disconnect between objecting to stereotyping the place where you live but readily stereotyping somewhere else.

You don't do yourself or any neighbourhood any favours by belabouring the negatives.

Come man, how much clearer do I have to be? I'll be as blunt as possible:

Yes, by referring to Whalley as the arm-pit of Surrey, and by comparing it (favourably, mind you) to a chuff-nut hanging from my ass, I WAS indeed resorting to generalization (or stereotype). But that was never the issue nor my point. My point is that you, too, are stereotyping a neighborhood and its people and that just because you once lived in said neighborhood does not suddenly reduce your stereotyping to some less offensive form of observation.

To put it even plainer: Yes, I stereotyped (me bad). And, yes, you stereotyped (you bad). And most importantly, Whalley and Guilford are still rough neighborhoods. (They bad.)

Really, there is no disconnect. Denial? Yes, but that has nothing to do with me.

[The Beaver]

quote:Originally posted by Richard

You apparently don't see the disconnect between objecting to stereotyping the place where you live but readily stereotyping somewhere else.

You don't do yourself or any neighbourhood any favours by belabouring the negatives.

Come man, how much clearer do I have to be? I'll be as blunt as possible:

Yes, by referring to Whalley as the arm-pit of Surrey, and by comparing it (favourably, mind you) to a chuff-nut hanging from my ass, I WAS indeed resorting to generalization (or stereotype). But that was never the issue nor my point. My point is that you, too, are stereotyping a neighborhood and its people and that just because you once lived in said neighborhood does not suddenly reduce your stereotyping to some less offensive form of observation.

To put it even plainer: Yes, I stereotyped (me bad). And, yes, you stereotyped (you bad). And most importantly, Whalley and Guilford are still rough neighborhoods. (They bad.)

Really, there is no disconnect. Denial? Yes, but that has nothing to do with me.

[Richard]

You still objected to stereotyping of neighbourhoods then promptly stereotyped one yourself. That was my point and it still stands. You're also displaying an unpleasant elitist attitude.

My other point and one you appear to have chosen to ignore, is that the incident in question was far more the responsibility of a few involved adults, some of whom who have a history of undesirable behaviour, than the fault of the neighbourhood where the incident took place. Put the blame where the blame belongs.

[The Beaver]

quote:Originally posted by Richard

You still objected to stereotyping of neighbourhoods then promptly stereotyped one yourself. That was my point and it still stands. You're also displaying an unpleasant elitist attitude.

My other point and one you appear to have chosen to ignore, is that the incident in question was far more the responsibility of a few involved adults, some of whom who have a history of undesirable behaviour, than the fault of the neighbourhood where the incident took place. Put the blame where the blame belongs.

Richard, why can't you admit that, according to your own, very clearly stated standards, you have been caught in the act of stereotyping?

Elitist? Well, now you're getting personal. I've not crossed that line, and will not. Mind you, your dismissal of North Shore attitudes--based on massive generalization, of course--smacks of elitism, does it not?

And yes, sure, the adults involved with this Guilford incident must shoulder the blame, but should they shoulder all of it? I mean, how do these kids and their parents determine that this sort of behavior is in any way acceptable? Did the parents learn from their own parents? And so on and so forth? Are bad apples created by bad apples, the rot slipping from generation to generation? Or are there other factors that lead to rot and bad apples? Is it possible that some of these other factors play a role in where individuals live? Is there a connection? Is it elitist to say that Whalley and Guilford are rough neighborhoods? Do you live in Guildford? Spent any time there? I have. Whalley, too. They are rough neighborhoods.

Listen, this is a silly debate. You're clearly a bright guy and a considerate citizen. I'm sure you are fully aware that your stereotyping of the North Shore and its citizens is not okay, even if you won't admit it. My only beef--all along--is that you should be sure your record in these matters is squeaky-clean before you start witch-hunting for other "stereotypers". I take issue with the moralist who condemns injustice on one hand while inflicting his own injustice with the other. Nobody likes a hypocrite. (Okay, maybe the Beast does, but he barely counts. Is that elitist?)[}]

[Richard]

I was not the one who objected to stereotyping per se. I took issue with your broad brush characterisation of Whalley and Guildford as it pertained to this nasty soccer incident and I pointed out that it was people who were responsible, not a place. I also jokingly suggested your stereotyping was typical of the kind of comment that comes from some North Shore people. You were the one who objected to what you perceived as my stereotyping the North Shore after you had just yourself stereotyped Whalley/Guildford and you have continued right on reinforcing your negative stereotyping in each one of your posts. It is amazing that you fail to see this. And you further have the gall to accuse ME of hypocrisy! Practise what you preach my friend.

You say: "I'm sure you are fully aware that your stereotyping of the North Shore and its citizens is not okay, even if you won't admit it." So according to you it is very wrong for me to stereotype a neighbourhood where I spent many years living but perfectly alright for you to stereotype in the most perjorative manner a neighbourhood where you have clearly never lived? Where do you derive the moral authority to pass such judgements?

[The Beaver]

quote:Originally posted by Richard

So according to you it is very wrong for me to stereotype a neighbourhood where I spent many years living but perfectly alright for you to stereotype in the most perjorative manner a neighbourhood where you have clearly never lived? Where do you derive the moral authority to pass such judgements?

Where do you get the moral authority to pass judgement on the North Shore? (By the way, how very typical and cheap to hide behind the excuse of "I was just making a joke about the North Shore." You were just joking, eh? So, where do you get the moral authority to pass judgement or make cheap jokes about the North Shore and its citizens? Because you LIVED there? What bull****! And you know it. And where do you derive the moral authority to determine that your jokes are "appropriate" (even if they are prejudiced). Do you not see the humour in chuff-nuts? Am I not allowed such jokes? I don't mind your taking issue with my broad brush stroke generalisations of Whalley and Guilford, but I take considerable issue with your doing so while you at the same time disparage the North Shore and its residents. The fact that you cannot admit the hypocrisy, that you continue to skirt this issue speaks volumes. Like I said, you show verbal accuity and a semblance of civic concern, and I assume you are well-meaning and not a bad guy, but I find your criticism rather hard to swallow in light of your own "broad brush stroking generalizations."

Clearly you've not much else to do if you are arguing with some guy who refers to Whalley as the arm-pit of Surrey. (Never lived in Whalley, but I lived in Guilford with my Uncle and Aunt while finishing by BA at UBC: bloody awful commute!! And, I worked in Whalley for two months. Guess what, they are truly rough neighborhoods! Different from main and hastings, but rough all the same.)

Listen, I've had my fill of this. I wanted you to come clean, but I see that will not happen. Feel free to rip into me again, but I'm done here. I'm done.[^]

[Richard]

You find my criticism hard to swallow, tough, you earned it.

I too have had enough of your blind bigotry, this discussion with you is at an end as far as I am concerned.