Krause: In complex situation, Chernovetz needs to adjust to changing times

The court case that pits Marblehead football coach Doug Chernovetz against Michael Morris – presuming that it’s not simply the retaliatory result of a disgruntled parent’s dissatisfaction over on-field issues involving his son – really comes down to a culture war in an ever-changing culture.First, we live in an increasingly litigious society (as if we need any reminders of that at all). But more importantly, we are undergoing a national introspection on matters of civility, whether it’s in politics, education, athletics or any other endeavor.All of a sudden, after years of enduring them, Americans are aware of how acrimonious political campaigns are. Perhaps because we have both an African-American and a woman running for president, the national dialogue on racism and sexism is changing (the uproar over the Rev. Jeremiah Wright’s incendiary sermons certainly proves that!).Maybe we’re all just getting a little tired of the notion that bullying, bellicose and abrasive discourse is a necessary component of persuasion, and that’s certainly not a bad thing.Into this maelstrom steps Doug Chernovetz, 40, the football coach at Marblehead High. Chernovetz, perhaps like all high school football coaches, played the game in a different era where a coach could use colorful language, use ethnic humor now and then as a way to bond people of diverse backgrounds, and – to use a popular expression – get in a player’s face if he thought the situation warranted it.Today, Chernovetz stands accused, in court, of using racially insensitive language, intimidating his players, and taking his anger out on one boy so much that the boy’s afraid to go to school.Obviously, things have changed. And that’s neither Chernovetz’s fault nor the fault of the family of Michael Morris, plaintiffs in this case. It happens to be the world in which we live, and all parties in this case are caught in its web. It’s not just that we’re unsure of how far we can go before we cross the line. We’re not even sure where to put the line.It’s easy for someone my age to dismiss all this as the work of a vindictive parent upset that the coach was “mean” to his son. And similarly, it’s just as easy to throw a scathing indictment at Chernovetz for being one of those “macho” coaches who feel they have to assert their authority by bullying and intimidating players younger than they are, and with less power over him than he has over them.And it’s possible that there are just as many elements of truth in those extremes as there are elements of untruth. The answer always lies somewhere between the extremes.But before we can find the answers, it’s quite possible we have to redefine the parameters of that imaginary “line.” It may have been possible, even 20 years ago, to use ethnic humor to get your point across. But our views as a society about that aren’t the same now, and it’s obviously not OK to do that in 2008.It may have been permissible 20 years ago for a coach to lose his temper, and attempt to browbeat a kid into towing the line. But perhaps today, we have a better understanding of the downside of that behavior, and it seems a little less acceptable.And perhaps once this issue is resolved (however it is resolved), it will serve as a guideline for future coaches so that they’ll know what the acceptable boundaries are in this new culture.Steve Krause is sports editor of The Item.