n on a small rule or apparently insignificant play, but also for the sake of building character and playing fair (American 69-72).
The role of the coach in developing leadership in players, and the nature of leadership itself, is brought into question by the case of Bobby Knight, former coach at Indian University and now at Texas Tech after having been ousted from Indiana. From the standpoint of this study, the important question with respect to Knight is whether he represents leadership and whether what he does represent should be passed on to the young players under his guidance.
The perspective of this writer is that leadership has not primarily to do with victory, although a winning record is often the result of a team with effective leadership from a coach and a player or players. Leadership has primarily to do with the leader's setting an example of the qualities of a person who cares about other people, who wants to do his best and lead others to do their best, and who shows others how to both play and live according to virtuous values. A leader, in other words, is a person who demonstrates how to live a good life as a good person as well as a good citizen, in the sense of social responsibility.
Considering Bobby Knight in this context, he would not be a good leader. A leader is not abusive to others, does not throw furniture around as he loses his temper, does not choke a player with whom he grows impatient. A leader can make mistakes, but he must learn and grow from those mistakes, and be willing to change. Knight shows that he is unwilling or unable to change. He was fired for, among other things, physically abusing two students. "So you tell me I've got to change," says Knight, "Why do I need to change?" (Norwood D1). In this writer's view, Knight is not a leader because he teaches, by example, that it is acceptable to abuse others in order to win. He would not be able to protest if one of his players, a leader ...