Ad Nauseam .Re: [sumo] [complaints]More Asashoryu News

[Jezz]

On 12/12/2007, Scott M. Kahn <smk1 at columbia.edu> wrote:
> First, my apologies to those of you who do not find this debate of
> interest.

Apology accepted on my part, if it is genuine.

> I try to keep the debate on topic and respectful.

We can all try harder at times.

> There
> are many subjects that not everyone wishes to read or partake in.

Most certainly.

> I
> don't mind the teasing or good natured ridicule,

Really?

> but instead of just
> complaining, may I suggesst using your efforts to come up with other
> topics that can amuse, teach, and inform.

I've just reread the 'complaining' emails.  All of them were a)
teasing and b) good natured.   Some possibly c) ridiculing.  Please
show one that was none of the above.

I would be interested to know which you consider is your strongest
point when you reply to topics

Is it a ) to amuse, b) to teach or c) to inform?

>
> Otherwise, may I suggest a new heading, [sumo][complaints]...!

You may.  But for what purpose?

> Now, on to another of my well intended ad nauseum responses.

You *intend* your responses to be ad nauseum?

>
> Quoting Jezz <jejima at gmail.com>:
> >
> > My apologies.  Please suggest what penalties could be given to a
> > Yokozuna who (and I am quoting your previous email here), 'not
> > behaves
> > as requested'.
>
> That would be up to Kitanoumi.

You have added nothing here.  You are just restating your point from a
previous email.  I believe in the past that you have suggested what
Kitanoumi should have said / done on other issues.  Why imply
self-censorship on this occasion?

> As would a penalty for any maverick
> oyakata who denies training access to Asashoryu.  Condoning such
> behavior on the part of the oyakata only means that the underlying
> hatred towards Asashoryu will stir up trouble in the future.

Condoning (if indeed he does condone it) does not have to mean what
you say.  In my opinion there is no 'underlying hatred' (whatever that
means).

> >
> > A better comparison to sumo would be...
> > The NE Patriots had been having regular practice with Smaller
> > Team in
> > the past, during which they had been going in a part harder then
> > necessary causing some injuries to Small Team - meaning that
> > Smaller
> > Team was less competitive in league matches.
>
> I get the impression that you are too caught up with indirectly
> implicating Asashoryu for yet another Kyokai problem.

No.

> Running up
> the score in a professional football game is one of the most
> humliating things a team can do to its opponent.  I would say it is
> the biggest form of payback for a prior indescretion on the part of
> the opponent.

You can say that if you like.   I have no idea what this proves.

>
> > >then this means his apology was not
> > >accepted by
> > > all oyakata.
> >
> > No, it doesn't.  It means the Oyakata wants to protect his
> > rikishi.
> >
> If an apology was made for Asashoryu's past behavior, and it was
> accepted by Kitanoumi on behalf of the Kyokai, should not all the
> Kyokai members accept the apology?

Asahoryu not being welcomed for degeiko has nothing to do with the apology.

> If not, then why request an
> apology?

Asahoryu not being welcomed for degeiko has nothing to do with the apology.

> Perhaps a transcript of Asashoryu's latest apology would
> help here.

Asahoryu not being welcomed for degeiko has nothing to do with the apology.

> Sure, an oyakata needs to protect his rikishi

Great, we are agreed!  We can move on.

> (how
> ironic is that argument following the alleged manslaughter),

Oh...  We can move backwards too.

> but
> Asashoryu is on a short leash, and a repeat of such prior behavior
> would not be tolerated.

It was noted that Asashoryu was being a  little 'over-enthusiastic' in
a 'rough-house way' with keiko during the recent Winter jungyo.   I
presume that this repeat of prior behaviour has not been tolerated.

> If the past is not buried, then it will
> undoubtedly rear its ugly head in the future, and for this, the
> oyakata would be responsible.

What could possibly happen from this?  Why would the Oyakata be solely
responsible?  Have you considered the possibilty that positive things
could come from this?

> Is that what the Kyokai desires?

What?  'Ugly heads'?  If they have big bodies to match, maybe they
won't mind.  They will recruit them for a heya.

> Tell me, what standard of behavior do you expect from Kyokai
> members to put the August incident in the past?  Is Asashoryu's
> apology meant to be a humiliation with nothing forgotten?

Asashoryu's apology was not for his behaviour at degeiko.  His apology
was not meant to be a humiliation either.
>
> > I note that you have responded to all of my comments in my
> > previous
> > email, except for the point that I requested clarification for.
> > I
> > presume that this was simply overlooked.
>
>
> Please refresh my memory, which point was that?

I think this could be an excellent time to polish up your research
skills.  I think this is an easy challenge for you.  Try and find your
'point'.  I would suggest that you start by looking in your email
folder.

>
> Sukibidubidu

Jejima
PS  Just because you have glued wings, webbed feet and a beak on it,
does not make it a duck. Nor does it make it entertaining to watch.