You Were Saying? Bob Costas' Sad Mishandling of Bolt and Phelps' Characters
by Sherman L. McClesky (Contributor)
3 101 reads
Editorial
February 05, 2009
Today's Must Reads
Three MLB Teams Having Quietly Quality Offseasons
The 10 Steps To Becoming an NFL Dynasty
Big Ten Signing-Day Dream Team: Offense
So there I was, eating some Cheetos and watching the 100-meter finals in the 2008 Summer Olympics on TV.
I'm looking at the favorite, Usain Bolt, from Jamaica. He's warming up; he's getting into the blocks, and BAM!, we're off. And there he goes. Like his surname, he came out like a bolt and easily won the 100 meters with a new world record.
Bob Costas was watching the event as well, but with a whole different agenda. You see, with Michael Phelps (USA) clearly on his way to winning more gold medals in a single Olympic games than any other swimmer, Costas may have had a bias toward Phelps.
So you pretty much figured that Costas' attitude toward Bolt, once he saw the Jamacian thumping his chest while coming across the finish line, was: "Oh, this is my chance to trash him."
So here I am, stuck with watching Costas' 24-hour exclusive coverage of how Usain Bolt ruined the Olympics.
With a bigoted and determined mindset, Costas went after Bolt with extreme prejudice. He called Bolt everything but a child of God for his chest thumping; meanwhile, he'd placed Phelps on a pedestal, as if Phelps was some sort of god.
Author Poll
If you had a chance to question Bob Costas, about the Michael Phelps controversy, would you ask him what he thinks now about Usain Bolt's character, when compared to Phelps?
Ok, I'll bite. Usain Bolt is a thug and a menace to society for celebrating too early. I wonder what Costas thinks of athletes who celebrate later by taking illegal drugs? How about touchdown dances when a wide receiver is five yards away from the end zone with nobody behind him?
Costas, coming of his self-proclaimed "victory" over Barry Bonds during his coverage of the steroid scandal, may have prematurely thought that he knew everything and everyone in the sporting world.
In his arrogance, he thought that he possessed the "political capital" to execute character assassinations of any athlete he believes did not live up to his "high expectations of sportsmanship."
So what really made him foam at the mouth, when it came to his "evaluation" of Usain Bolt? Was it a simple case of nationalism; was he simply being bias for America?
Or perhaps it was "steroidal profiling;" did Bob Costas assume that because this athlete had won in such a dominating fashion, that he'd been on the juice?
Or was it racial? Being that Michael Phelps is a white American, did Costas feel that he had political room to attack the character of a black athlete? I don't know.
All that I know is this. Costas had stuck his neck out there in his praising of Michael Phelps; meanwhile, at the same time, he tarnished one of the most amazing running feats of all time in saying that Usain Bolt's celebration was classless.
Bob Costas' position was clear: Michael Phelps was a better citizen, a better sportsman, and a better role model for children than Usain Bolt!
Fair enough. So where are these two athletes now?
Usain Bolt—Bolt's first outing of 2009 will be a low-key meeting in Jamaica on Valentine's Day, but his first serious action of the year will be at the Kingston International meeting in his native land in early May.
Manager Ricky Simms had nothing but praises for Bolt's character and charisma. Six months on from his incredible performances in Beijing, Simms is pleased to report that Bolt's personality "hasn't changed."
Bolt has yet to test positive for any performance enhancing or recreational drugs.
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1...elps-character
by Sherman L. McClesky (Contributor)
3 101 reads
Editorial
February 05, 2009
Today's Must Reads
Three MLB Teams Having Quietly Quality Offseasons
The 10 Steps To Becoming an NFL Dynasty
Big Ten Signing-Day Dream Team: Offense
So there I was, eating some Cheetos and watching the 100-meter finals in the 2008 Summer Olympics on TV.
I'm looking at the favorite, Usain Bolt, from Jamaica. He's warming up; he's getting into the blocks, and BAM!, we're off. And there he goes. Like his surname, he came out like a bolt and easily won the 100 meters with a new world record.
Bob Costas was watching the event as well, but with a whole different agenda. You see, with Michael Phelps (USA) clearly on his way to winning more gold medals in a single Olympic games than any other swimmer, Costas may have had a bias toward Phelps.
So you pretty much figured that Costas' attitude toward Bolt, once he saw the Jamacian thumping his chest while coming across the finish line, was: "Oh, this is my chance to trash him."
So here I am, stuck with watching Costas' 24-hour exclusive coverage of how Usain Bolt ruined the Olympics.
With a bigoted and determined mindset, Costas went after Bolt with extreme prejudice. He called Bolt everything but a child of God for his chest thumping; meanwhile, he'd placed Phelps on a pedestal, as if Phelps was some sort of god.
Author Poll
If you had a chance to question Bob Costas, about the Michael Phelps controversy, would you ask him what he thinks now about Usain Bolt's character, when compared to Phelps?
- Yes
- No
Ok, I'll bite. Usain Bolt is a thug and a menace to society for celebrating too early. I wonder what Costas thinks of athletes who celebrate later by taking illegal drugs? How about touchdown dances when a wide receiver is five yards away from the end zone with nobody behind him?
Costas, coming of his self-proclaimed "victory" over Barry Bonds during his coverage of the steroid scandal, may have prematurely thought that he knew everything and everyone in the sporting world.
In his arrogance, he thought that he possessed the "political capital" to execute character assassinations of any athlete he believes did not live up to his "high expectations of sportsmanship."
So what really made him foam at the mouth, when it came to his "evaluation" of Usain Bolt? Was it a simple case of nationalism; was he simply being bias for America?
Or perhaps it was "steroidal profiling;" did Bob Costas assume that because this athlete had won in such a dominating fashion, that he'd been on the juice?
Or was it racial? Being that Michael Phelps is a white American, did Costas feel that he had political room to attack the character of a black athlete? I don't know.
All that I know is this. Costas had stuck his neck out there in his praising of Michael Phelps; meanwhile, at the same time, he tarnished one of the most amazing running feats of all time in saying that Usain Bolt's celebration was classless.
Bob Costas' position was clear: Michael Phelps was a better citizen, a better sportsman, and a better role model for children than Usain Bolt!
Fair enough. So where are these two athletes now?
Usain Bolt—Bolt's first outing of 2009 will be a low-key meeting in Jamaica on Valentine's Day, but his first serious action of the year will be at the Kingston International meeting in his native land in early May.
Manager Ricky Simms had nothing but praises for Bolt's character and charisma. Six months on from his incredible performances in Beijing, Simms is pleased to report that Bolt's personality "hasn't changed."
Bolt has yet to test positive for any performance enhancing or recreational drugs.
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1...elps-character
Comment