South Park Sex-Scandal Premiere

Wednesday's premiere of South Park tackled the issue that has been plaguing the media for the past few months: the recent sex-scandals of athletes.  And let me just say, though some may feel they satirized an issue that hasn't quite settled in the eyes of the press, I feel they ripped the band-aid off a wound and showed that it was just a scratch all along.

The episode begins with a scene ripped from the headlines: the incident involving Tiger Woods and his wife Elin Nordegren from last November.  Matt Stone and Trey Parker comically depict the events that took place in Woods' home, that first brought this "scandal" into the national eye, by placing them in the new EA Sports game "Tiger Woods PGA Tour 11".  As Cartman and Kenny play out the scene as Tiger and Elin,  the episode immediately shows us how ridiculous all this media scrutiny and publicity is.  The game characters fight it out using golf clubs as the levels move from Florida home, to press conference, to the golf course, and use special moves such as "the pre-nup power-up".  As the boys finish the game (at the end of the episode), the gameplay returns to strictly golf and Cartman and Stan are immediately bored with it and comment about how boring golf is.  I feel this sentiment rings true among the majority of Americans.  I personally enjoy golf, and Tiger Woods' video game, but as the show points out, without this "scandal" most Americans would never talk about golf.  Ask a random person to name you two current golfers on the tour besides Tiger Woods and I guarantee they'll struggle with the task.

The show poses the rhetorical question, "why do men with a lot of money and fame have extramarital affairs?"  It then shows a think-tank at the Center for Disease Control more or less answering the question by comparing celebrities to normal men.  They sarcastically say that normal men never desire to have sex with multiple partners and rarely think about sex at all.  The team then does nation-wide testing on schools to see why "sex addiction" has become so rampant.  Their findings (after showing a classroom a picture of a naked woman and then asking what color her handkerchief was) show that "sex addiction" (or is it a sex-drive/sexual curiosity?) climbs drastically in males beginning in the 4th grade and into high school. 

The team then joins forces with President Obama to find the source of the addiction and come to the conclusion that an alien wizard has cast a spell on the men of America.  It is during their search for the alien that the show presents their most poignant message.  A armed forces officer stops the team to express the lunacy of their theory and explains that these "sex-scandals" are not limited to the rich or famous.  He says that most men, given the same means, situation, notoriety, and temptations, would act in the same manner as athletes like Tiger.  It isn't that these athletes are different than the average Joe, but that they are under a microscope.  He suggests that instead of chastising and judging athletes like Tiger Woods, we should be understanding to the situation and realize that if the roles were reversed, most people would probably do the same thing.

It is episodes like this one that make me a firm believer in South Park's aptitude in social satire and commentary.  Matt Stone and Trey Parker, because of their apathy towards public opinion and backlash, are able to show us how utterly stupid and self-serving aspects of our society are.  The media and the Americans who feed into their hoopla, need to take a step back from their lenses of scrutiny and see the "human-ness" in these athletes.  As a society, we try to hold athletes and celebrities to a higher standard that no human is capable of.  Men and women alike are sexual beings, they fall into temptation, they have domestic and marital problems, why should Tiger Woods be any different?  The answer is:  He isn't, but because he is in the national spotlight for his athletic abilities people seem to care about his transgressions more.  If you or someone you know cheats on their significant other tomorrow, will anyone besides the parties involved care?  NOPE.  And why should they?  It's none of their business.  Are you gonna think less of that friend or stop supporting him as a friend?  Probably not. Now why does the situation become different when it's Tiger Woods and not your buddy Bill down the street?  Because somebody has to sell papers and fill their news programs with material.   Personally, I could care less.  I still support Tiger (the man is an incredible golfer), I will probably purchase his newest EA Sports video game, and I will STILL not really watch golf on TV.

Just wanted to add that the episode also featured a scene from sex-rehab with celebs like David Duchovny, Bill Clinton, David Letterman, Charlie Sheen, and Pittsburgh's favorite "sex-scandal", Ben Roethlisberger (who spoke in kind of a yinzer accent, which was a nice touch).

NHL's Kangaroo Court

Alex Ovechkin has just been issued another suspension for his "hit" on the Blackhawks' Brian Campbell.  As Bruce Boudreau has said, it was more of a push from the side than a check from behind.  OV didn't finish his "check" and send Campbell into the boards, Campbell fell awkwardly into the boards after catching his toe in the ice.

Now in no way am I defending Ovechkin's actions here, I feel he probably should have gotten a double minor for the hit;  it was an avoidable play in a dangerous part of the ice.  I also am not outraged by the league's decision to suspend him (he gets a little break before the playoffs and will return in enough time for me to see him play in Pittsburgh on April 6th).  What is frustrating is Colin Campbell's utter lack of consistency in his rulings.  On one hand he is trying to send a message to "repeat offenders", yet on the other he seems uncertain as to who those "repeat offenders" are.

Alex Ovechkin is an NHL superstar, 1st liner, and points leader who sometimes lets his physicality and intensity over-rule his better judgment.  Matt Cooke is a 3rd line scrub who has a history of headhunting in open ice (see his hit on Anisimov, it's vaguely similar to his latest hit on Savard).  They guy is a 30 point a year player, whose sole purpose on the pens is to throw his weight around.  Yet somehow Colin Campbell didn't feel it necessary to send a message to a guy who has repeatedly tried to take peoples' heads off.

Mike Richards, though more offensively gifted than Cooke, has made similar, repeat headhunting checks in the past (2006 on Pertovicky, obviously the booth hit, and a less extreme but also blindside hit in January on Mark Eaton).  Richards is closer to Ovechkin in terms of stats and both are their respective teams captains, yet Richards could easily be considered more of a "repeat offender" than Ovechkin.  Yet he has not faced a suspension for his hit on Booth.

Colin Campbell claims to be looking at punishing those "repeat offenders" and using precedents to make his rulings.  All he is really doing is creating a vast gray-area and forcing so much subjectivity into the NHL rulebook that neither players, coaches, nor referees have any idea what is or is not a dirty, illegal, or suspend-able hit.  No one would question his ability to make the right decision if he had suspended Cooke, Richards, and Ovechkin.  However, the fact that the two most severe and blatant cheapshots of the season went unpunished by Campbell while Ovechkin's "hit" on Brian Campbell got OV two games is mind-boggling.

Im not even going to get into the Steve Downie trip of Crosby.  The fact that a classless animal like Downie can attempt to injure Gary Bettman's Golden Boy and not get a suspension only further proves that Colin Campbell is lost in his own world of so-called "justice".

The idea of that the NHL might be more inclined to dish out suspension to the offender if the victim was seriously injured, in theory, should be helpful.  However, both Savard and Brian Campbell are out for the season and yet only one incident drew further punishment.  Questionably, it was the latter.  Using the severity of the injury to determine whether or not a player should be suspended for an illegal hit only adds more subjectivity to an already troublesome issue with the NHL.


Just for fun lets look at some of the aforementioned hits.

Matt Cooke:



Mike Richards:



Alex Ovechkin:




Here's a funny lil video I found... Does it look familiar?  It's a hit that happened only a month ago.  It drew no penalty (minor or major), no game misconduct, no ejection, no suspension, and no league wide debate:



I guess if you hit the NHL leader in points into the boards and he gets up, no call needed... I'll tell you what call IS needed..... the call for Colin Campbell's resignation.