Oh fred you dst wannabe
Oh fred you dst wannabe
it's ok, fred hasn't filled his prescription today. Here's something that will trigger him and his alter-ego, jimmy.
KTHXBAI wrote:
I thought Canada might be more enlightened, this is a good reminder that it's probably more backwoods/backwards than much of the USA.
We are not any better on these issues in the US.
A) Doesn't matter he was still inducted and has the memories of the night it happened...its an aesthetically pleasing move, no guts shown here by guelph.
B) Aside from the past 2 decades in track, its one of the worst hall of fames in the country.
jimmyx wrote:
A) Doesn't matter he was still inducted and has the memories of the night it happened...its an aesthetically pleasing move, no guts shown here by guelph.
B) Aside from the past 2 decades in track, its one of the worst hall of fames in the country.
It was the City of Guelph sports hall of fame not the U of G. Good riddance.
jimmyx wrote:
I asked twice now for your name to verifty if I now you or not and you refuse to answer...lets hear it and It will confirm the answer to your question
See Jimbo - I never asked for your name so your ask is disproportionate. I asked you to verify if you were at U of T when I was. This ask is proportionate with information you already shared stating that you trained with MB after her time at Guelph.
I'm calling BS on your posts being removed. Posts get removed for a variety of reasons such as profanity, inciting violence etc; not for answering yes or no to a question.
You are too afraid to out yourself fully.
jimmyx wrote:
you are siding with someone who has been institutionalized think about that for a second...someone who has been in the cuckoos nest, thats your source of info.
Just because someone went and got help doesn't mean they are "cuckoo". Some people desperately need help but don't seek it for example ...
And yes, I am "siding" with her. Anyone who knows both parties, and read the incredibly well researched article would.
So Jimmyd: you still haven't told all of us why MB is "partially to blame" as you stated many pages ago. How about it - ready to break you silence on that asinine claim?
jimmyx wrote:
you are siding with someone who has been institutionalized think about that for a second...someone who has been in the cuckoos nest, thats your source of info.
Well, you're siding with a rapist who drove someone to the cuckoos nest.
A well researched, one sided article. Not one quote siding with DST, and no follow up questions such as if things were so awful why did you move in beside him? Or run through the park where you would run into him many times in later years after the relationship.
Those are just two of many questions the one sided reporter did not follow up on...
"Hall of fames"?! God, you're a stupid idiot.
Maybe I should start a separate thread on this.
I've never seen the SafeSport guidelines before. They seem pretty good except for one.
"An ethical coach will not text, email or call an athlete separately from teammates"
I can see tons of reasons a coach would text or email an athlete apart from their teammates or even call them - to give individual instruction. Am I way off base here?
Email is a professional means of communication and a written record is left. "Hey Jim, you need to 5x mile @ such and such pace . Let me know how the workout goes."
Hey "Jim, how is the injury going? Did we learn anything from the PT appointment?"
Is this only dealing with minors? Or all coach athlete relationships? I guarantee pro coaches are texting/calling/ athletes all the time individual in tons of pro sports and college sports too.
Calling leaves no record but the others do.
What happens if you violate this guideline?
fred wrote:
The same lynch mob party on here wanting to tear the coach to shreds, are the same people who just last week were on these very same message boards gushing praise for Kobe Bryant and how wonderful he was and what a great person he was, despite the fact he was accused of sexual assault, battery and rape of a woman
I hope you are better at not raping than you are at logic. Let's see here...
In Bryant's case, a 24 year-old man had sex, on one occasion, with a 20 year-old and there was later a disagreement about consent.
In DST's case, a 38 year-old had an ongoing relationship, including repeated sex, with a 16 year-old, who by law cannot give consent to sex with an authority figure.
Can you tell there difference? Can you?
jimmyx wrote:
A well researched, one sided article. Not one quote siding with DST
The article is clear that the reporter attempted to talk to everyone who was anywhere near the situation.
The obvious fact is that nobody exists who WILL side with him.
wejo wrote:
Maybe I should start a separate thread on this.
I've never seen the SafeSport guidelines before. They seem pretty good except for one.
"An ethical coach will not text, email or call an athlete separately from teammates"
I can see tons of reasons a coach would text or email an athlete apart from their teammates or even call them - to give individual instruction. Am I way off base here?
Email is a professional means of communication and a written record is left. "Hey Jim, you need to 5x mile @ such and such pace . Let me know how the workout goes."
Hey "Jim, how is the injury going? Did we learn anything from the PT appointment?"
Is this only dealing with minors? Or all coach athlete relationships? I guarantee pro coaches are texting/calling/ athletes all the time individual in tons of pro sports and college sports too.
Calling leaves no record but the others do.
What happens if you violate this guideline?
It seems innocent enough and no idea on the pro level but if you think back to pre-email days coaches / teachers rarely if ever contacted players/ students individually by phone so why should they now. If they needed to address someone individually they did it in person at school/ practice. I can understand the rule re group communication only as it leaves little opportunity for he said/ she said situations.
I've seen rules for coaches about never giving a player a ride unless other teammates are along for the same reason.
Td stocks and bizzcoin wrote:
I think it's human nature for people to not believe they're guilty of things. It's a defense mechanism of some sort. Heck DST probably, in his mind, somehow believes he's not guilty or rationalizes his actions. Ever heard people rant and blame everyone but themselves? What I'm leading into is that a lot of people to some capacity probably knew/heard/"heard the rumours". I think a lot of people are using that term, "rumours" as a justification for them being dismissive and absolving any guilt they may otherwise feel. Again, human nature to believe one is not guilty. I think that most people who mention rumours were aware that it entailed MB and Dave having sex. They were not entirely sure of all the details beyond sex so they didnt feel obliged to come forward, not their problem. It's a real gray area. The passing of time indicated to some that he had got away with it. That's no longer the case. Ultimately, Dave is rightfully the guilty party. I do think blaming others is unfair to an extent. A lot of people will be hurt by this regardless. Dave has several kids from what other posts have indicated. Think of the rest of his family. Think of Megan Brown and her family. Think of anyone else who was hurt directly or indirectly. There are a lot of genuinely good people in the track and field community. Dont let this story overshadow the many good and amazing individuals and groups within the track and field community.
In regards to Megan Brown, I'd think DST rationalizes it as their relationship was consensual, or even that she was at fault, she had nothing to lose and he had his family and reputation at stake after all. The problem with this, I and others have already stated - and didn't this story come to light because DST pursued additional relationships with athletes he coached? No college coach or lower level should have a sexual relationship with his or her athletes. I don't know how DST could possibly rationlize preying on girls under his care multiple times.
very BAD idea running down Martin Goodman Trail in UG or SR jacket or hoodie
just don't do it
jimmyx wrote:
A well researched, one sided article. Not one quote siding with DST, and no follow up questions such as if things were so awful why did you move in beside him? Or run through the park where you would run into him many times in later years after the relationship.
Those are just two of many questions the one sided reporter did not follow up on...
Well, you seem sycophantic enough to provide a good word about DST; why don't you call up the globe and mail and go on record?
ps. The new coach at UG might end up being mr. Paul DiSimone