By J.M Henriksen
The author writes "...I am
more aware of what kind of people our society breeds today: Quitters."
I have to say that this statement was made in a state of anger.
Nope. It was made in the statement everybody involved in Norwegian football knows very well: Frustration. That's next door to anger, but it isn't anger. You all know what I mean.
Because if this is the general attitude of the author towards the general population
Nope. It's the general attitude towards those who commit so little (time/effort) to the team that they actually end up hurting the team instead of helping it.
then maybe that is the reason why people quit.
I don't mind if quitters quits. I mind when the good people are forced to quit (it may look like a choice, but it is mentally forced upon them) because they get frustrated with the quitters. That does however not make them themselves quitters, just very tired, frustrated and pissed off. Ok; and angered. But if someone is a quitter -which I define as anybody who has so little dedication to what they claim as their interest that they end up hurting the team- then that person is an opponent. The difference simply being that this opponent works from within. On the other side you get the chance to tackle your opponent in practise the four-five times he actually shows up.
one should not judge a person by his interest/dedication to American football and to his team.
I think one should if one is interested in seeing the team improve. Get rid of those who hurt the club in its efforts, and you end up with a happier bunch of players & coaches. It may hurt you for a day or two to lose some people, but you gain in the long run. I know that at least the main RB is a great guy in other aspects of his life, but when it comes to football he has not proven to be who he seems to otherwise be. And it is in football his life affects my life and the fortunes of my team. Everybody who was on that team knows what I'm talking about. I don't care what his reasons are, if he's on the same team as me, and hurting us by not committing as much as he can (and he could have!), then he is working against us. I don't want saboteurs on my team. I'll take the less talented but more dedicated player each and every time, if that's what it comes down to.
Look at Bill Parcells and the New York Jets. He recently made the Jets a winning organisation again. How ? He brings with him a bunch of people he knows he can trust, both coaches and players. Those players may not be the most physically gifted athletes around, but they do what they do with a passion, and they take a stand when somebody else doesn't. Look at Keyshawn Johnson now. He isn't bitching every time Wayne Chrebet gets the ball. He doesn't write books about it like he did. He is happy because he knows his team just got another first down. (Although he would have been happier if he caught that ball himself ;-)
But the main RB, (the squash socializer) merely shows that his priorities are not the same as those of the author.
That "merely" is
enough for me to jump on his back -at least in my thoughts- and stay there when it comes
to football. Hey, I think he's a nice guy otherwise, but unless he changes his attitude or
the way his priorities are set, he will continue to hurt his team. I must at the same time
mention that the same guy was of great assistance to us during the 1997 junior season. He
didn't play, but was always at practise to help out. That was appreciated, but doesn't
make up for quitting again (1995) and again (1996) and AGAIN (1998) during the senior
season. I don't care what his reason is (washing the car on a Friday night when there was
a practise, 'come on !), he is hurting my team !
I guess he'll be around in '99 too. Hopefully he proves me wrong this time around, though
I doubt it.
I will here point out that I do not know any of the persons mentioned in the article, I am just trying to use the author's statements in a more general way.
And I agree with your statements to a certain degree. I agree with them in that you say you shouldn't judge exclusively based on commitment to the team when making up your opinion about someone. But I disagree as well; if you (in general terms) are looking out for the team's best interest, and that is what's important in a team sport (only beaten by looking out for the sport itself), then you will make the quitters quit. Because they are hurting you, the guy next to you, the coach, the waterboy, the TEAM. That was and is my point in referring to these stories. With that attitude -emphasizing and maybe sometimes overexaggerating being a team player- you may end up playing Tight End instead of Runningback, or O-line instead of D-line, even when it isn't what you yourself would prefer. But whats best for you may not be in the best interest of the team, and it is the team as a whole that win games.
As I said, I understand what you're saying, and I agree that under the conditions of present-day European football one must be able to tolerate different attitudes and different commitment by players. But there is a pain limit. And the pain starts when the team is hurting.
The Norwegian Football Junkie takes no responsibility for the views that emerge in the Articles:Commentary section. It is open to anybody to give their opinion on matters regarding Norwegian football. All articles in this section must be written under the writers' own name. Those are the rules.
