Cincinnati Enquirer columnist Paul Daughterty has his own take on the death of PRP player Max Gilpin. I’ve heard, in recent days, some say that the player should have realized his own limits. Paul does a good job of thinking back to his own experiences as a teenage athlete.
I was a little more cautious about making a judgment on the facts than the columnists site here. Writing in the city of the trial, I just didn’t think it was right for me to render a verdict of my own. The practice that day is going to be picked apart in excruciating detail during the course of this trial. Stinson’s attorney has taken to the airwaves with players to say that water breaks were given. But were they given during the “gasser” portion at the end of practice. I think the whole thing is going to hinge on the staff’s reaction once Stinson and another player were clearly in distress. But I’ve also covered enough trials to know that every day is a twist and turn, and you really can’t have a clear picture until both sides have been presented.
But this column is really well done, and hard to argue with.
You can read Daugherty’s column here.
Offering an opposing viewpoint, and just as thought-provoking, John Smallwood in the Philadelphia Daily News asks a pertinent question: “How do you determine when pushing an athlete becomes a crime?”
Like Daugherty, he offers a well-written, well-reasoned piece.
Same story. Two different arguments. Be ready for more.