The Screaming Viking

Looks like a student died last night.  The article says “hours after reporting being hit during football practice”.  I’d be worried if he didn’t get hit during practice.  Being a former athlete, a comment like that makes me think it was an “incorrect” hit, be it on purpose or simply a mistake.

link

FARGO – Police here are investigating the death of a 16-year-old Shanley High School student overnight, hours after he reported being hit during football practice.

Foul play is not suspected, Fargo Police Sgt. Glen Hanson said.

Fargo police and F-M Ambulance responded to a report of a boy not breathing in his room at 2:40 a.m. today in the 1700 block of 10th Street South.

The family member who called said they had last talked to the boy at 10 p.m., Hanson said.

The boy told his father he had been hit during football practice Monday, but it’s unknown if that contributed to his death, Hanson said.

An autopsy will be conducted.

Shanley has put its grief response plan into action, spokeswoman Tanya Watterud said.

Fargo Public Schools spokesman Lowell Wolff said the district is providing additional counselors for Shanley students at the request of Shanley Superintendent Kyle Edgerton.

Read www.inforum.com for updates.

The Moorhead potatoes have won their first round game in the Minnesota state class ?? hockey tournament.

I didn’t catch the game until about 12 min or so left in the 2nd period.  The spuds had a 3-1 lead at this point.  I am told, by twistednut, that they played very well the first period.  They must have been in an offensive “attack” style of play to score that much in one period.  When I tuned in it was clear they were in a defensive “attack” style of play.

While I don’t understand a whole lot about hockey, I do understand sports and the mentality that goes in to different parts of the game depending on the score/time remaining.  Knowing this and understanding the theory behind the different modes will help you over come your adversary and emerge victorious.  It sounds like a lot of thought to put in to a game, and it is…but it works.

What I would consider a defensive “attack” style of play as it relates to hockey would be a max defensive position with intense physical play.  You check and attack the puck and player at ever possible moment.  You punish the opponent with hard checks, and make them pay for spending time in your zone.  IMO the difference between a defensive attack and offensive attack is you do not put max effort in to spending time in their zone.  You don’t take any chances that would put you a man down on a break.  You are always prepared to retreat, sacrificing your advance for a favorable retreat.  But you still physically attack the players and puck.  Constantly punishing the team for having the audacity to take a shot at your goal….or so the mentality should go.

In the 3rd period…it looked like it was over for Moorhead.  They seem to have shifted their mindset into a style that is commonly referred to as “playing not to lose”.  At this point teams get overly safe, they forgo an extremely physical style of play for a softer “bend but don’t break” style.  The major downside to this is that players, especially kids whom are more susceptible to the “emotions” of a game, lose their aggression…they allow the opponent to drive into their (lane|zone|red zone) and do not punish them for doing so.  There are no hard checks, no hard fouls…no physicality at all.  It’s designed to allow the opponent to be successful, but hopefully at such a cost in game time that there is not going to be enough time left for them to overcome the lead.  It’s my opinion that this is a horrible technique and one that should never be encouraged.  Kids should always be told to go all out and with all the aggression necessary to punish the opponent.  Edina was able to slip in a goal to close within one.

At this point, I really expected it to be over for the hash browns.  They had zero energy and it just felt like they were hoping luck would see them through.  After that…I’m not entirely sure what the hell happened.  The french fries seemed to get a garbage goal…then suddenly another.  I was really shocked.  After those two goals, they once again played the defensive attack style that lead them to victory.

In all my time studying child psychology, coaching and generally interacting with kids…I will never understand a coach that allows his players slip in to a “playing not to lose” mentality.  Children should always be in an “attack! the game is not over till the last buzzer sounds” frame of mind.  Once they slip out of attack mode…it might be too late to get it back.  In games where the score is 100-1, people blame the coaches.  I think that’s ridiculous.  A child should never be forced to be less than their best just so someone else doesn’t feel “bad”.  Buncha shit…but that’s a different post.

An interesting article from si.com.

People can preach and preach about how sports shouldn’t be a focus and there needs to be more attention to academics but the bottom line is by and large participating in an after school activity is immeasurably good for a child’s development. The sense of accomplishing something as a team, being part of something bigger than yourself and over all self worth that activities bring are as important as the academic side of school. In addition to what the sport gives to the students directly, they indirectly take up time that would otherwise be spent potentially causing mischief.

Maybe high school sports will need to aquire more private funding for their programs. You can’t really argue with the school cutting sports first, they are the most obvious thing that should be at the top of the list to go, but anytime you have to look at making cuts to programs for kids it’s pretty sucky.

For reasons that shall stay my own I’m going to intentionally keep vague statements that might indicate where the moster might be at a given time.

Yesterday I took the monster to her 2nd session of a coached sport. Her mother took her to her first one. After they got home I was made aware of some behavior that was quite disturbing. Mostly it was taking shortcuts when the instructor said to do something or generally screwing around with other kids. Some of it is expected, it’s her first time but a lack of effort and trying “I can’t…it’s too hard…” really chaps my ass. Her mother had a discussion with her, then I expressed my disappointment when they came home. When I took her, her effort and listening was much improved (at least from where I was told it was before). She still screws around with the other girls a little too much. I hope she can get over that part, she learns quick and has a bit of coordination and so forth…along with what seems like genuine interest but whether it’s interest in just being with other kids or actually playing is hard to say yet.

Yesterday I think I inadvertantly stumbled on the temporary solution to the effort problem though. The kid needs alot of attention, I suppose that’s normal but not sure. So while she was messing around in the living room practicing, I told her to do what she couldn’t do earlier in the evening (well, not that she couldn’t do it, more that she wouldn’t try) and there was no effort in there at all. I stopped watching and started hacking away on the computer. I get the “are you watching….you gonna watch me?” “nope baby, if you arn’t going to put in effort I’m not going to watch” Well, I’ll be damned…she actually started trying. Her mother came home and she stopped putting in effort again, then sara got on her about it a little and they started playing together and she started to put in effort again. She did ok, wasn’t successful with what she was trying…but she did well for her first couple of tries. It seems like the big problem is her worrying that she’s going to get hurt. She’s getting alot better with stuff like that, but there’s still some hesitation. We almost have to force her to do something the first time…then she’s fine. Weird.