Celebrating equality in sports?

I think it's complete idiocy that they won't let him play because he's too good, and I frankly don't think the fact that he's so dominant has anything to do with gender. He's pretty clearly not hit puberty yet, and the physiological difference between kids before puberty is much, much smaller.

He's good because he grew up playing the sport in a place where it's popular while most American girls don't get introduced to field hockey at all until high school. The gender thing is a complete excuse to get him off the field so the other players don't get their feelings hurt by being schooled by a middle schooler - if a girl had grown up playing field hockey and came over to most US schools, she'd wipe the floor with everyone too. Then they'd probably kick the kid out since she didn't fit the "must be in high school" eligibility requirements, which I'm not sure how this boy got around in the first place.

As for the "should boys be allowed to play on girls teams" arguments, as a girl, I have no problem with it if the sport is not sanctioned for boys in that state. If the sport is sanctioned but the school doesn't offer a team, however (see: Massachusetts and boys swimming on girls teams even though there's the state runs boys swimming), then tough luck. That's like playing at a tiny school that doesn't offer volleyball. Move.

 

Agreed.

I just posed the question to the individual who believes anyone who thinks the little kid should be allowed to play is no better than Al Bundy.

 

This is not the first time this has happened. I mentioned this case in a column once, and ultimately, the ACLU will get involved, as it did 20 years ago. Just crazy to think we haven't evolved.

http://www.chron.com/CDA/archives/archive.mpl/1991_812665/judge-says-boy-can-join-girls-field-hockey-team.html

 

I don't think it should have been OK at age 11.

Regarding his size and the lack of physical dominance, you're all forgetting speed as part of the equation. Boys at 11 (or 13) run faster than girls too.

 

I am asking you to explain the league's change of heart, which appears oh sooooooo sincere.

There is no legit reason for the league to deny the kid to play if there is no alternative for boys. None. Other than discrimination.

And in this case it is clear league officials are worried about one thing: widdle kids' feewings getting hurt. :

If they truly were worried about boys joining the league they should have tried to block him from playing two years ago.

 

Girls are weak and do nothing particularly well, so this is only fair. [/LTL]

 

Title IX does not mandate equality.

 

There. Fixed that for you.

 

Then the league can change the rules with the kid grandfathered in.

As for him running faster, he's 13 and playing varsity against girls who are 16, 17 and 18. I don't know of a national database on split times for 13-year-old boys vs. 17-year-old girls but I'm guessing he's not faster than they are.

 

if the boy's so good at hockey maybe he should strap on a pair of skates and play some real hockey. they actually have boys teams for that

 

More physically in common with a girl at 11 than 13? That's all I can come up with.

 

Random 13 year old male athlete vs. random 17 year old female athlete in a footrace? I'll take the boy every time, and not expect it to be close.