Elizabeth Lambert Hair Pull Video: Defending the "Indefensible"

Elizabeth Lambert Defends Her Aggressive Style of Play to The New York Times

Saul Relative
Elizabeth Lambert, hair-pulling takedown star of a viral video and the Univerisity of New Mexico women's soccer team defender, has had enough of the enmity she has inspired by her rough play video. In short, Elizabeth Lambert is speaking out and she's blaming society's seeming inherent sexist attitudes toward women. Since various videos have hit the internet that encapsulate several unsportsmanlike jabs, hits, kicks, and one extreme hair-pulling incident (almost all of the videos are from events occurring in a single game between BYU and New Mexico), Elizabeth Lambert has been lambasted by the sporting media, soccer fans, and casual web surfers offended by her overtly physical style of play. And Elizabeth Lambert is tired of it.

Shortly after the first video was posted to YouTube following the BYU win over New Mexico, Elizabeth Lambert became a video star. But it wasn't in a good sense or one that reflected well on the University of New Mexico's women's soccer team. Within hours, sporting blogs and journalists began excoriating her, her coach, and her style of play. Although she had a few defenders, they remained just that -- few. She was soon suspended indefinitely by New Mexico for her unsportsmanlike actions on the field in the videotaped game, a game in which she only received on yellow card the entire game (she was also the only person penalized in the game). She immediately issued an apology that denied that the video was a true indicator of her or her character.

Elizabeth Lambert told the New York Times that what she did was "indefensible." She then went on the defensive.

In her first interview since her hair-pulling video went viral and she subsequently was placed on indefinite suspension, Elizabeth Lambert is now saying that her playing has been "misinterpreted" and "taken out of context on a condensed video." She says she regrets the way she played and

Lambert said, "I definitely feel because I am a female it did bring out a lot more attention than if a male were to do it. It's more expected for men to go out there and be rough. The female, we're still looked at as, oh, we kick the ball around and we score a goal. But it's not. We train very hard to reach the highest level we can get to. The physical aspect has maybe increased over the years. I'm not saying it's for the bad or it's been too overly aggressive. It's a game. Sports are physical."

Most agree that sports are physical. But so physical, they might question, that an opposing player grabbing your shorts deserves extreme hair-pulling to the point the girl hits the ground writhing in pain? Has the game gotten so physical that an opponent digging an elbow into one's ribs deserves a vicious punch to the back? And how about taking opponents out at the knees? Sports being "physical" requires that degree of "aggressive" behavior?

And is it sexist, the reaction that most have had toward Elizabeth Lambert's style of soccer? To some extent it might very well be, but when a male soccer player deliberately punches another, takes out an opponent with a cheap shot knee-block, or head butts an opponent, soccer fans and society in general call foul. Most find it repugnant for any player to use undue force or violence against another player, whether in initiating the action or in retaliation for some offense. Certainly nothing in the videos suggest that the actions of others and on Lambert's behalf could be construed as an even trade in aggressive acts. Lambert was by far the more dominant aggressor. For Lambert to use sexist values as reasoning for the outcry against her unrestrained actions of the field of play might be seen as abstract scapegoating at its very best.

"I think the way the video came out, it did make me look like a monster," Lambert told the Times. "That's not the type of player I am. I'm not out there trying to hurt players. That's taking away from the beauty of the game. And I would never want to do that."

But she did do that. She did just that. Shoving an opponent, bumping an opponent, running into other players, making physical picks to allow your team an advantage are all acceptable parts of the game. Punching, deliberately taking out other players, pulling hair in a takedown worthy of professional MMA fighter are not acceptable parts of the game. And that Elizabeth Lambert would do them all in a single game, whether retaliatory in nature or not, exemplifies that she most definitely is that kind of player. But taken out of context? Hardly. Even her retaliatory strikes were "overly aggressive," unsportsmanlike, and uncalled for. Some would call them monstrous.

Elizabeth Lambert is correct about one thing: Her conduct was "indefensible." It was also inexcusable. She would have been better served had she left her defense at the apology.

******

Source:

NYTimes.com

Published by Saul Relative

WVU graduate, with degrees in History, English, Secondary Education, Computer Programming, and Psychology (and nearly a degree in Political Science). Originally from West Virginia, with stints in Virginia,...   View profile

18 Comments

Post a Comment
  • watch closely 11/23/2009

    One girl elbows her in the solar plexus,then, she hits her in the back.The other girl grabs her shorts and gives her a backwards wedgie,she responds by yanking her hair.I didn't see this the first time I watched the video.

  • Abby Greenhill 11/20/2009

    Why does Bridget even bother to comment...

  • Joe 11/20/2009

    Saul, thanks for the opportunity to express my views and thanks for expressing yours. I sincerely appreciate it. And, thanks for letting me get to know you a little bit more than when I first "clicked" on.

  • saul relative 11/20/2009

    The problem with too many people today, Joe, seems not only to rush to judgment but also to be too quick to apologize, defend, and attempt to manipulate. People do not seem to take the time to consider their words and actions, they just do. And in the doing, a very reactionary public will hit from both sides. Catch 22, damned if you do, damned if you don't. But much of this can be avoided by being extremely careful with what is said, especially after the public has turned its unforgiving eye on you. Or say nothing at all. Of course, there are the detractors that will nail you also for not saying anything, but better that than handing out ammunition. Now, there are those who have taken the criticism too far, gotten personal, said she should be barred from collegiate sports for life, etc. Ridiculous.

  • Joe 11/20/2009

    I'm with you. What I object to is the ongoing battering she is taking. Her background, what little of it any of us know, in school and sports suggests she is not the bad person she is being made out to be. Her apology; maybe she really does feel the physical and verbal jabs she took contributed, maybe she's just being too honest. She's young and not a polished or experienced speaker or writer as are you (nor am I which you probably know by now). She did say, in the end, that she let it get in her head (implying, to me, it was wrong for her to do so). So if she defended herself a little, so what; she still said her action (everything considered?) was wrong. She was given a forumn to do that, at least, I think. Saul, when you interview someone, don't you want their words or feelings? By the way, I'm not from the sothwest and know noone in school there. I'm looking at the story as an outsider.

  • saul relative 11/20/2009

    No, it wasn't up to you and I. The University of New Mexico decided she should be suspended indefinitely. Do I agree with that? No. Just like the LeGarrette Blount suspension, it is overly harsh. Pull her for two-three games and go on. But do not pull an Urban Meyer and make a joke of someone deliberately, INTENTIONALLY trying to hurt someone (her protestations are irrelevant). Punching, that hair pull is intentional. Just as Brandon Spikes' attempt at eye-gouging. Either deal with it in a forceful manner (Blount), or not at all, but don't make a joke of disciplining (Spikes).

  • Joe 11/20/2009

    But that's the point, we all and she knows pulling the hair was wrong (by the way, its not a capital crime as it is now being made to be - I've had my hair pulled and I've been kicked in the wrong spot - I'd rather have my hair pulled!). As far as the rest, so many are judging harshly and we really don't know what we're talking about. We can be surprised and may not like certain aspects of a sport but it's not for you and I to govern the sport anymore than it is for the soccer fanatic to govern my football. It's too easy to pile up on one who's already down. Fore many, so much fun. I do agree with you relative to immatuity/youth; I'll add experience to the mix - not used to being in the position she's in (who is)?

  • saul relative 11/20/2009

    I mentioned that, Reality, and I also maintain that she had no right to retaliate the way she did. I'll stand by that statement. It's soccer, not wrestling or rugby or MMA...

  • saul relative 11/20/2009

    Not all of it, Joe. Just enough of it from what she's said and how she's said it... All this time to come up with something or nothing and she fades into an "oh-it's-society's-double-standard-that's-at-fault" routine. That shows lack of character. It may just be immaturity, so we can give her benefit of the doubt, but justifying your own hotheadedness because of a sexist societal perspective and a "everybody does it" doesn't quite get there...

  • Reality 11/19/2009

    surf the net till you get the longer version of the incidents and you'll confirm that the shorter videos are totally distorted - she was provoked in both instances

Displaying Comments
Next »

To comment, please sign in to your Yahoo! account, or sign up for a new account.