Scott Powell wrote: >So it was Bill Buckners fault that the Red Sox lost the series? It seems to me that it was not the last game of the series and the Red Sox could have still won the series the next day(how many people would remember that play then?). There were far more discisions made by the manager that series than errors by Bill Buckner that yes the manager does get some of the blame. Going back to your analogy, did Bill Buckner make the errror because he didn't practice or he watched too much tv? In fact Bill Buckner was playing a lot of that season in extreme pain from bad legs and he was one of the reasons they made it to the world series. Didn't the manager get credit for getting them to the series that year?(manager of the year?) Why shouldn't he be given the blame(or part of it) for losing the world series?
Harv I think this analogy is kinda off. Why do people want to compare education to sports? It is a dangerous comparison because it leads to people thinking that being able to do math is like having athletic ability. You have probably heard people say "I never good at math" like you would say "I was never good at playing golf". It leads people to think of understanding math as some inherited talent.
Just some thoughts.
It was Bill Buckner's fault that the ball went through Bill Buckner's legs was my only point. Of course, he may have been in pain and so the pain contributed to HIS inability to field the ground ball.
When a student does not do his/her homework.....that student is the one who did not do the homework. Of course, he/she may have been in paid and so the pain contributed to his/her inability to do the homework.
Oh...and by the way I did forget to mention ....I'm also the kind of guy who thinks it ludicrous when the manager takes the credit for the team's win when Buckner hits a slam in the bottom of the ninth for the victory.
PS...had Bill Buckner fielded that ball....the Redsox would have won the series right then and there as I recall.