82SiouxGuy Posted February 20, 2013 Share Posted February 20, 2013 I'm sorry for wanting some more information about the suspension. If that makes me a "hater" than so be it. As CMSioux said, this is a personnel issue. That involves a lot of legal privacy issues. There is probably not much more that can be said. The simple truth is that it is never wise to publicly insult your employer. Using the words "choke job" could be considered an insult. Not a good choice of words. One of the hazards of live broadcasts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NODAK13 Posted February 20, 2013 Share Posted February 20, 2013 I'm sure Ralston has already talked to Jones about this informally and hopefuly it won't affect their relationship down the road and they put it behind them. Probably not the best choice of words for Ralston, but it's obvious he cares about the success of the program and that's what you want from your people. As for the 2 games...seems a little harsh but whatever. I agree it was a poor choice of words but Ralston is a true fan of UND mens basketball and wants them to succeed as much as anybody. I have talked to him many times before and after games and he truly cares about this program. He speaks his mind on the radio about what he thinks about the calls on the floor and speaks highly of all the players and calls the games as he truly sees them whether its good or bad. When we take a poor shot he will state it was a poor shot and that when a certain player is out of control he will again comment that this player is out of control, I personally like to hear his truthful comments. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cratter Posted February 20, 2013 Share Posted February 20, 2013 In other news a five year old girl was suspended from school for talking to her friend about them playing with a hello kitty bubble gun. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CMSioux Posted February 20, 2013 Share Posted February 20, 2013 In other news a five year old girl was suspended from school for talking to her friend about them playing with a hello kitty bubble gun. I blame Faison. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oxbow6 Posted February 20, 2013 Share Posted February 20, 2013 I blame Faison. Don't say that too loud...he might kick you out of his basement and not let you live there anymore! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CMSioux Posted February 20, 2013 Share Posted February 20, 2013 Don't say that too loud...he might kick you out of his basement and not let you live there anymore! That's not very nice - it's a room over his garage. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeftyZL Posted February 20, 2013 Share Posted February 20, 2013 We made the front page of espn.com....Any publicity is good publicity right? http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/8966526/paul-ralston-play-play-announcer-suspended-saying-choke-job-north-dakota-basketball-game Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdub27 Posted February 20, 2013 Share Posted February 20, 2013 We made the front page of espn.com....Any publicity is good publicity right? http://espn.go.com/m...basketball-game Must be a slow news day. Oh well, I guess there are worse things you could be on ESPN's front page for... Also, I don't recommend looking at the comments. Wow. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teeder11 Posted February 20, 2013 Share Posted February 20, 2013 I think Tom Miller nailed it here. A good summation of a not-so complicated but very misunderstood situation. Discuss. http://www.grandforksherald.com/event/article/id/257042 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UNDvince97-01 Posted February 20, 2013 Share Posted February 20, 2013 I think Tom Miller nailed it here. A good summation of a not-so complicated but very misunderstood situation. Discuss. http://www.grandfork...ticle/id/257042 It doesn't happen often with you Teeder, but I respectfully disagree. Think Tom Miller totally misses the point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UND92,96 Posted February 20, 2013 Share Posted February 20, 2013 I think Tom Miller nailed it here. A good summation of a not-so complicated but very misunderstood situation. Discuss. http://www.grandfork...ticle/id/257042 I don't think very many people dispute whether Faison had the right to do what he did. I don't think very many people dispute that Ralston's choice of words was unfortunate. But where I have some issue with Faison, and apparently Tom as well, is whether it was really necessary for an employer to announce a punishment and publicly embarrass an employee who probably felt worse than anybody that the incident happened. It just seemed like overkill to me. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UNDvince97-01 Posted February 20, 2013 Share Posted February 20, 2013 I don't think very many people dispute whether Faison had the right to do what he did. I don't think very many people dispute that Ralston's choice of words was unfortunate. But where I have some issue with Faison, and apparently Tom as well, is whether it was really necessary for an employer to announce a punishment and publicly embarrass an employee who probably felt worse than anybody that the incident happened. It just seemed like overkill to me. Exactly. Do it behind the scenes. Double secret probation or whatever. Put it in his file. A 2 game public suspension is BS for the crime. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jodcon Posted February 20, 2013 Share Posted February 20, 2013 I don't think very many people dispute whether Faison had the right to do what he did. I don't think very many people dispute that Ralston's choice of words was unfortunate. But where I have some issue with Faison, and apparently Tom as well, is whether it was really necessary for an employer to announce a punishment and publicly embarrass an employee who probably felt worse than anybody that the incident happened. It just seemed like overkill to me. In fairness though, if they would not have announced the punishment publicly, certain schools who shall remain nameless would point to it as "another UND cover-up job not reported by them or the Herald". Not agreeing on the punishment, just saying. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teeder11 Posted February 20, 2013 Share Posted February 20, 2013 I don't think very many people dispute whether Faison had the right to do what he did. I don't think very many people dispute that Ralston's choice of words was unfortunate. But where I have some issue with Faison, and apparently Tom as well, is whether it was really necessary for an employer to announce a punishment and publicly embarrass an employee who probably felt worse than anybody that the incident happened. It just seemed like overkill to me. No offense taken. I like the discussion. I just thought that Tom's piece laid out some concrete facts that were missing from the debate. It set a nice foundation, albeit, a couple days late. I think the reason it was made public the way it was is because UND is a public institution that, for good and for bad must do things in the open, and can't get away, all the time, with what the private sector can, and because the public would presumably miss Paul and wonder about his absence, and in this town, when it comes to our local media "celebs," that gets tongues wagging. So the statement was brief, factual and to the point, but unfortunately, because of those things, it didn't allow for it to be the end of it. So here we are. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UND-1 Posted February 20, 2013 Share Posted February 20, 2013 I think Tom Miller nailed it here. A good summation of a not-so complicated but very misunderstood situation. Discuss. http://www.grandfork...ticle/id/257042 Tom paints himself into a corner here. Quote: "UND missed five free throws in the final four minutes of regulation, but the Green and White also shot 17-for-23 (73.9 percent) from the line for the game". So in essence - UND missed 5 of their 6 free throws for the game in the last 4 mins of the game, once they had taken the lead. They led by 3 for the entire last three minutes of the game until NAU tied it up with 11 secs left. In those three minutes, they missed 4 free throws and only made two. That is choking to me. Not the worst ever, but still kind of a choke-job. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UND92,96 Posted February 20, 2013 Share Posted February 20, 2013 In fairness though, if they would not have announced the punishment publicly, certain schools who shall remain nameless would point to it as "another UND cover-up job not reported by them or the Herald". Not agreeing on the punishment, just saying. I understand what you're saying, but the reality is that apparently almost nobody even knew anything about the post-game interview until the suspension was announced. Handling it internally was probably not going to result in any sort of outcry from anybody. If I were Faison, I have a behind-closed-doors-discussion with Ralston and Jones, let Ralston apologize, tell him it can't happen again, and be done with it. No suspension was really necessary IMO. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jodcon Posted February 20, 2013 Share Posted February 20, 2013 I understand what you're saying, but the reality is that apparently almost nobody even knew anything about the post-game interview until the suspension was announced. Handling it internally was probably not going to result in any sort of outcry from anybody. Possibly, unless someone sniffed it out when he was suspiciously missing the next two games. To me it probably should have been handled differently, but I understand why they went public. Either way it's a done deal, need to move on and win some games on the court. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UND92,96 Posted February 20, 2013 Share Posted February 20, 2013 Possibly, unless someone sniffed it out when he was suspiciously missing the next two games. To me it probably should have been handled differently, but I understand why they public. Either way it's a done deal, need to move on and win some games on the court. I just don't think he needed to be suspended, period. If a suspension absolutely was necessary, then I agree it should probably be announced. I just don't think one unfortunate choice of words that did not include any obscenities rose to that level. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fightingsioux4life Posted February 21, 2013 Share Posted February 21, 2013 Tom paints himself into a corner here. Quote: "UND missed five free throws in the final four minutes of regulation, but the Green and White also shot 17-for-23 (73.9 percent) from the line for the game". So in essence - UND missed 5 of their 6 free throws for the game in the last 4 mins of the game, once they had taken the lead. They led by 3 for the entire last three minutes of the game until NAU tied it up with 11 secs left. In those three minutes, they missed 4 free throws and only made two. That is choking to me. Not the worst ever, but still kind of a choke-job. Tom Miller (and especially YOU Wayne Nelson), stop calling our teams this!!! Take Ryan Bakken's advice and knock it off!!! Thank you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mksioux Posted February 21, 2013 Share Posted February 21, 2013 In addition to being on the front page of espn.com and si.com, this issue was also discussed on Dan Barreiro's show on KFAN in the Twin Cities tonight. And he predictably cut into and laughed at the administration for being thin skinned. With all the negative publicity UND has received in the last few years with the nickname thing, the last thing UND needed right now was more regional/national negative publicity, this time self-inflicted. The point is not whether Ralston should have said it or whether Faison had the right to do it. Of course Faison had the right to make this move, but it was a boneheaded PR blunder. Hundreds of thousands of people now know about this situation that otherwise would have had no clue precisely because of the suspension. And UND comes across looking thin-skinned and amateurish. Of all the ways Faison could have handled this, this might have been one of the worst. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teeder11 Posted February 21, 2013 Share Posted February 21, 2013 I just don't think he needed to be suspended, period. If a suspension absolutely was necessary, then I agree it should probably be announced. I just don't think one unfortunate choice of words that did not include any obscenities rose to that level. Good point. However, my guess is that the administration treated the exchange between Paul and Jones as an employee matter in which one employee used objectionable and/or off-color language with another employee. I think this discussion and the whole debate that has gone national got derailed from the get go when the assumption was that Paul was suspended for being overly critical. One explanation that I got is that that the term "choke job" is perceived by some (including some in the administration, obviously), and erroneously so, in my opinion, as a description of a pornographic act. If that was the consensus by the administration and it was decided that Paul's language toward a fellow employee was at the very least off-color or at worst obscene, then, it would make sense that, by university policy, Paul would get some sort of disciplinary action. In this case, as Tom put it, the penalty is akin to a couple days vacation with pay. I also don't think Jones would have had to complain about the exchange in this instance due tot the public nature of it all. Now, I must also say that I have done a little research on the words "choke" and "choke job" as it pertains to sport and no where could I find any reference that they stemmed from pornographic origins. So, it's still all very baffling even to me. Whatever happened here, I also truly believe that there is some extreme over-sensitivity going on within the administration or possibly just an overzealous interpretation of university human resources codes and policies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mksioux Posted February 21, 2013 Share Posted February 21, 2013 Good point. However, my guess is that the administration treated the exchange between Paul and Jones as an employee matter in which one employee used objectionable and/or off-color language with another employee. I think this discussion and the whole debate that has gone national got derailed from the get go when the assumption was that Paul was suspended for being overly critical. One explanation that I got is that that the term "choke job" is perceived by some (including some in the administration, obviously), and erroneously so, in my opinion, as a description of a pornographic act. If that was the consensus by the administration and it was decided that Paul's language toward a fellow employee was at the very least off-color or at worst obscene, then, it would make sense that, by university policy, Paul would get some sort of disciplinary action. In this case, as Tom put it, the penalty is akin to a couple days vacation with pay. I also don't think Jones would have had to complain about the exchange in this instance due tot the public nature of it all. The reason everyone jumped to the conclusion the suspension was for being critical is because no normal person would think the term "choke-job" (in the context of sporting event) is a reference to a pornographic act. Every sports fan knows what "choking" or a "choke-job" means in the context of a sporting event. And if some egghead at the University perceived it to be a sexual reference, then Faison should have had the leadership ability to calmly explain to that person what a choke-job really means, tell Ralston to be a little more tactful in his criticism in the future, and move on. End of story. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdub27 Posted February 21, 2013 Share Posted February 21, 2013 In fairness though, if they would not have announced the punishment publicly, certain schools who shall remain nameless would point to it as "another UND cover-up job not reported by them or the Herald". Not agreeing on the punishment, just saying. Don't agree with the suspension but since that is the route they decided to go, glad they announced it rather than not. Otherwise, as you state, it looks like a "cover-up". Like your associate AD being suspended an no one knowing about it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teeder11 Posted February 21, 2013 Share Posted February 21, 2013 The reason everyone jumped to the conclusion the suspension was for being critical is because no normal person would think the term "choke-job" (in the context of sporting event) is a reference to a pornographic act. Every sports fan knows what "choking" or a "choke-job" means in the context of a sporting event. And if some egghead at the University perceived it to be a sexual reference, then Faison should have had the leadership ability to calmly explain to that person what a choke-job really means, tell Ralston to be a little more tactful in his criticism in the future, and move on. End of story. Agreed. I think I've heard similar discussions about the word "suck" over the years. There is a talk radio guy in Grand Forks who used to say the word "suck" a lot on his show, as in, "that sucks," that is until someone called in and railed on him for using such an "obscene" word on the air. The caller went on to say that the word is a reference to a pornographic act. The host was incredulous at first, but eventually swore off using the word on the air. Now, while the word "suck" has found its way into our common vernacular, it would seem there are still some out there that think, either rightly or wrongly, that it is inappropriate speech in polite society. There must be a few out there that also think "choke job" is obscene. Goes to show you where their mind is! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oxbow6 Posted February 21, 2013 Share Posted February 21, 2013 That fact that Ralston's comments and his suspension by our AD are getting more press than team's coached by Jones continually blowing games that they should win when leading down the stretch shows why this MBB program is such a mess! Bump. In light of the fact that ESPN and SI are running with this Faison fiasco really shows the shallowness of this BB program, it's HC and our AD. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.