by Dr. U.R. Short, Dr. I.M. Slow, and Dr. I.S. Tungincheek. From Eagle Forum on 11/13/96
It is important to recognize that most basketball teams are
comprised of players of differing backgrounds, orientations, and
abilities. The underlying effort in this essay is to identify some
of those differences and to suggest procedures designed to protect
players from various forms of discrimination particularly as
related to players' height, speed, and shooting ability.
Basketball is a game fraught with unfair practices. Several
examples of discrimination related to basketball are addressed in
this article.
One of the most egregious and obvious discriminatory practices
seen in the game of basketball today is, of course, the height of
the basket, the so-called "glass ceiling." It is totally
insensitive to have the height of the basketball goals at ten
feet. How can anyone give credence to the notion that a vertically
challenged player can compete on an equal footing with a player
who may have a foot or more vertical advantage. In fact, they may
have had that advantage for many years, with the strong likelihood
that the player's parents (at least one) also had the same
advantage.
Most vertically disadvantaged players trace their ancestry back to
the country of Guardvilla. It's a simple fact: most
Guardvillian-Americans are vertically disadvantaged. It's not
their fault. It was simply the result of genetic endowment. In
every other way, they are just like everyone else. What is unfair
though is that they are asked to shoot for the same goals as the
vertically advantaged Forwardian-Americans and
Centerian-Americans. While it is often the case that
Guardvillian-Americans have an advantage over the speed-challenged
and sometimes shooting-challenged characteristics of
Forwardian-Americans and Centerian-Americans, that still does not
justify the "glass ceiling" foisted upon the
Guardvillian-Americans. What does seem logical and appropriate, in
order to create fairness in this regard, is to have two baskets at
each end of the court thus taking into account the height
differences. The Guardvillian-Americans would shoot at a basket
eight feet high, and the Forwardian-Americans and
Centerian-Americans would shoot at the traditional goal (10').
While such a change may have some immediate impact on game play,
strategy, etc., over time, the fairness that would certainly
emanate would make the modifications totally justifiable. Some may
complain that there will be additional costs for the equipment
needed. However, it is almost certain that federal funds would
become available for this kind of equal opportunity effort.
If one pays close attention to the strategies employed by many
"Good Ol' Boy & Girl" coaches involved in basketball today, it
will be noted that they often purposely scheme to get what they
call "advantage matchups." It should be perfectly clear that this
is nothing more than a calculated creation of an unfair situation.
The rules should be adjusted so that the second such a tactic is
employed, the vertically disadvantaged, or speed disadvantaged
player should immediately point out this violation.
The attending official should then "blow the whistle" and apply
the appropriate penalty. The consequence of this foul act could
be, for example, providing a free throw from a distance of ten
feet as opposed to the traditional fifteen feet.
The comments above are directed at but a few of the many unfair
practices rampant in basketball today. Unfortunately, space does
not provide the opportunity to consider all of the injustices.
However, one other travesty must be mentioned. That some coaches
still allow inter-team scrimmaging between shirt advantaged
players and shirt disadvantaged players is simply unconscionable.
With the emphasis most people are placing on political correctness
today, the fact that the practice of "shirts against skins" still
exists is simply mind boggling. It should be pointed out, much to
their credit, that female coaches never have supported this
practice.
The time to make basketball an equal opportunity sport for all
participants is long overdue. Playing basketball should not be
based on one's speed, height or shooting advantages; rather, it
should be based on a participant's desire to share in the point
distribution. It's bad enough that one team is dubbed "loser."
Such terminology should be eventually changed to "temporarily win
challenged." Please help to rid the game of basketball of
multicultural biases.
R. Thomas Trimble, Ph.D., author of this satire, recently retired
from the University of Georgia.