The recent coverage of the murder trial and subsequent conviction of a father who killed another father over a disagreement regarding the rules of hockey engagement was reported as having implications for youth sport and our sport culture in general.

Nothing could be further from the truth.

This was not a sports trial, nor was it an evaluation of youth sport; rather it was a trial of man who was subsequently convicted of a crime that occurred in a sport setting.

To put it simply, it is not the setting or venue that committed the crime, it was the person!

The point is that when people act inappropriately it is primarily caused by their social-emotional state and not their intellectual ability. And if the latter premise were true which would assume the individual in question was endowed with low intellectual ability, there would not be a lot that could be done for those who truly lack the ability to grasp concepts that are necessary to meet the demands of their environments.

Sports psychologists, various associations, and assorted experts had a field day with this story.

I believe that having the story framed around sport and in this case youth sport, did not address or explain the real reason for these peoples actions.

What it did do was to give every "expert" the chance to offer his or her same old tired educational solutions for the problems of sport and society.

Typical cognitive-educational suggestions ranged from offering courses to parents, giving homework assignments from workbooks, followed by a multiple-choice test.

It is of course presumed that at the end of all these psycho-educational interventions parents will earn a certificate, and the violence will end.

Crimes and inappropriate behaviors are committed in all parts of our society, not just on the playing field.

The individual who engages in these inappropriate behaviors is not necessarily uneducated about the situational demands they are placed in (such as a sporting event), as many would like us to believe, and in fact at times it is quite the contrary.

People who commit crimes are often very well read and have a wall full of certificates and diplomas to show for it.

The majority of people can easily pass most multiple-choice tests about how to meet the demands of a wide range of situations, including how to avoid confrontations.

If it were just this simple, then why does rage reign over good judgment?

These solutions have not worked, because it is most often a failure of the individual's emotional capacity to cope in a particular situation rather than the their lack of cognition or knowledge that causes them to act out.

For example, feelings of being in a diminished or secondary position and powerlessness cause people not to use their full intellectual capabilities, and choose less enhancing behaviors. And at times both intellect and emotional capacities fail.

When the problem is framed in this manner it is easier to explain why we continue to have violence in all sports, corruption in companies, interpersonal conflicts, and ultimately violence in our society despite an adequately educated public.

The call for stringent consequences, behavioral guidelines, parental codes, behavioral contracts and the like are unfortunate but necessary steps to control abhorrent behaviors at sporting events, and various pundits are perhaps rightfully championing them. But they are all a part of a general trend resulting in forfeiting civil liberties in exchange for personal security and safety.

It is hoped that the loss of civil liberties in our society as well as the imposed restrictions and changes that are both necessary and inevitable to sustain youth sport will only be a small part of the final change process. Further analysis of the problems and solutions rests upon us.