"B.C. teen kicked off soccer team in fish-farm spat"
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 01:19:14 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  Political Debate (Moderator: Torie)
  "B.C. teen kicked off soccer team in fish-farm spat"
« previous next »
Pages: [1]
Poll
Question: Was this move Justified? (please read story before voting)
#1
Yes
 
#2
No
 
Show Pie Chart
Partisan results

Total Voters: 14

Author Topic: "B.C. teen kicked off soccer team in fish-farm spat"  (Read 1240 times)
Pragmatic Conservative
1184AZ
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,735


Political Matrix
E: 3.00, S: -0.41

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: October 29, 2015, 08:54:08 PM »



While this issue may seem like a local issue, I think it is an interesting issue surrounding Business and politics, as well as sponsorship and armature teams.     

http://globalnews.ca/news/2306052/b-c-teen-kicked-off-soccer-team-in-fish-farm-spat/

Discuss
Logged
Mr. Reactionary
blackraisin
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,784
United States


Political Matrix
E: 5.45, S: -3.35

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: October 30, 2015, 12:57:39 AM »

No one has a right to play soccer for a private team. If she's actively undermining her sponsor, why should they support the team? It'd be like Dale Jr. saying on TV that he exclusively drinks Coke products even though he's sponsored by Pepsi. The soccer player wasn't being forced to eat the fish, she probably wasn't asked to speak publicly about her love for the fish, the article said she and her mother (probably mom's fault TBH) were interfering with the sponsorship agreement just because they personally did not like the fish and therefore have some kind of dignity interest in demanding that what they don't like goes away. Yes, you can protest, but don't expect some guarantee against retaliation, especially with something as trivial as a private children's soccer league.
Logged
Intell
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,817
Nepal


Political Matrix
E: -6.71, S: -1.24

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: October 30, 2015, 04:47:34 AM »

No one has a right to play soccer for a private team. If she's actively undermining her sponsor, why should they support the team? It'd be like Dale Jr. saying on TV that he exclusively drinks Coke products even though he's sponsored by Pepsi. The soccer player wasn't being forced to eat the fish, she probably wasn't asked to speak publicly about her love for the fish, the article said she and her mother (probably mom's fault TBH) were interfering with the sponsorship agreement just because they personally did not like the fish and therefore have some kind of dignity interest in demanding that what they don't like goes away. Yes, you can protest, but don't expect some guarantee against retaliation, especially with something as trivial as a private children's soccer league.

Yep, Corporation's rights and corporate advertisements come before children.
Logged
Mr. Reactionary
blackraisin
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,784
United States


Political Matrix
E: 5.45, S: -3.35

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: October 30, 2015, 01:34:13 PM »

No one has a right to play soccer for a private team. If she's actively undermining her sponsor, why should they support the team? It'd be like Dale Jr. saying on TV that he exclusively drinks Coke products even though he's sponsored by Pepsi. The soccer player wasn't being forced to eat the fish, she probably wasn't asked to speak publicly about her love for the fish, the article said she and her mother (probably mom's fault TBH) were interfering with the sponsorship agreement just because they personally did not like the fish and therefore have some kind of dignity interest in demanding that what they don't like goes away. Yes, you can protest, but don't expect some guarantee against retaliation, especially with something as trivial as a private children's soccer league.

Yep, Corporation's rights and corporate advertisements come before children.

The fun of all the other children who get to play soccer because a team exists come before one mom's weird grievance with penned fish.
Logged
ingemann
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,226


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: October 30, 2015, 04:51:54 PM »

We all need to learn that the world doesn't revolve around us, sad that it happened this way for the girl, but honestly this is a sport's club for young teens. I imagine that the coach is a volunteer or part timer and if he's full time employed, I doubt he make a lot of money. Imagine for him to have to deal with this kind of drama. I know enough people voluntering to work with children to hear the stories about obnoxious parents who suck the pleasure and time out of the coaches and the other parents.
Logged
Figueira
84285
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,175


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: October 30, 2015, 07:38:50 PM »

Of course not. Why is this even a question?
Logged
DC Al Fine
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,085
Canada


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: October 31, 2015, 12:51:39 PM »

We all need to learn that the world doesn't revolve around us, sad that it happened this way for the girl, but honestly this is a sport's club for young teens. I imagine that the coach is a volunteer or part timer and if he's full time employed, I doubt he make a lot of money. Imagine for him to have to deal with this kind of drama. I know enough people voluntering to work with children to hear the stories about obnoxious parents who suck the pleasure and time out of the coaches and the other parents.

That was my first thought. I coach basketball and have had parents like that. The mother seems like a bit of a pill.

No one has a right to play soccer for a private team. If she's actively undermining her sponsor, why should they support the team? It'd be like Dale Jr. saying on TV that he exclusively drinks Coke products even though he's sponsored by Pepsi. The soccer player wasn't being forced to eat the fish, she probably wasn't asked to speak publicly about her love for the fish, the article said she and her mother (probably mom's fault TBH) were interfering with the sponsorship agreement just because they personally did not like the fish and therefore have some kind of dignity interest in demanding that what they don't like goes away. Yes, you can protest, but don't expect some guarantee against retaliation, especially with something as trivial as a private children's soccer league.

Yep, Corporation's rights and corporate advertisements come before children.

The fun of all the other children who get to play soccer because a team exists come before one mom's weird grievance with penned fish.

Indeed. It's a travel soccer team, hardly a massive civil rights case.
Logged
Why
Unbiased
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 612
Australia


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: November 01, 2015, 06:21:00 AM »

If she doesn't like the sponsor the she shouldn't play for the team. The team can choose to have any legal sponsor.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.03 seconds with 16 queries.