Newbie's PS (Promise you haven't read about it) Forum

[rwc]

Been on this forum for a while, but haven't posted yet.

Thought this would be a good one to start with! Definitely could use all the feedback I could get, from structural to topical issues.

I am trying to get this ready for an early decision packet (which is why there are so many specifics at the end)


It was bound to be a tense soccer match. On one side, the Los Angeles Police Department and on the other, the Royal Air Force from the United Kingdom. And somehow in this international friendly, with a Blue Fox40 whistle clutched in my left hand and dawning a fluorescent yellow, I took a deep breath and blew the whistle, starting the 90 minute match in the center as the referee.

There are, undoubtedly, a few things that can make a man sweat. For me, refereeing has been one of them. Especially in the fast paced game that I found myself in, tensions were high and the temperature, at 89 degrees, did not help. Early on, in the 13th minute, the first foul occurred. A burly police officer dug his elbow into the back of a British player, causing him to topple over and ultimately lose possession of the ball.

I immediately blew the whistle, ran to the site of the foul, and reached for my back pocket where I stored my red card. Law 12 in the Laws of the Game, the governing rules for soccer, was clear: Serious Foul Play must be punished by sending the player off the field and suspending him for the duration of the match. But as I ran to the location of the foul, the Airman had helped the police officer up, and both moved into position for a direct free kick, ready and waiting for the next signal to initiate play. In a split second decision, I moved my hand to the side pocket and showed the police officer a yellow card.

After the match had ended, the Brits claiming victory over the Angelinos, I sat on a bench, conducting the post-game assessment I always did, and I could not help but question whether my actions had been fair. I had been the judge in this courtroom on a field and I had delivered a much smaller sentence than the law had prescribed. Had justice been served?

There were many factors that had led to my actions. No one from the British team had demanded for a red, and even after delivering the yellow, there was no outcry. At the same time, I knew that the action itself could not go completely unpunished. In the spirit of the law, I had to demonstrate that the foul was still against the themes of sportsmanship and safety. But in the spirit of the game, I understood that the yellow card had been sufficient enough to demonstrate that point. Despite my justifications, I still question my application of justice.

As I graduate college, I hope to continue to reconcile what justice means and how it is applied. This formative question, that is, the spirit of the law versus the letter of the law has continued to plague me. There has not been a clear or conclusive answer.

I do believe, however, that a legal education at X Law School will bring me one step closer to, if not at the doorstep of, the answer to the question that continues to press me. Having done my undergraduate education at X, I know how valuable a X education, one that emphasizes interdisciplinary studies and the character of the individual, is to the formation of one's academic and professional development. I have come to know Morningside Heights as my home. It has not only been where I have physically lived for four years, but it has also been the community that I work for, whether as a tutor for high school students in X, or as an Army Officer in the National Guard. I know thatX Law School, in it's leading faculty and programs in legal theory, philosophy, and criminal law, will help me strive to culminate the strong foundation to define justice within the realm of law and make me not only a lawyer grounded in the law, but a man eternally cognizant of and embodying ethics, professionalism, and resilience.

[tigershark]

Not a huge fan of the topic. I think you tell a decent story, but for it to essentially be about "justice" and "doing the right thing" just seems way overdone and not original to me.

I know absolutely nothing about soccer so my apologies if this comes across as ignorant...but in a typical match, would it be standard to show the red card if a player did what the police officer did? If so, I think your description of changing your mind about which card to show could be in dangerous territory because adcomms may think 1. you are unable to be a firm and fair in your decisions; 2. that you're in the wrong field if you're questioning the fairness of the law or how just it is.

Also, the last paragraph doesn't flow at all for me and came off as a restatement of your resume. I know you mention you were just cramming things in there, but I think that there are aspects of the last paragraph that deserve further discussion (maybe your National Guard service?).

[Samara]

Scrap it. Sorry, dooder, but not everything is some grand analogy for justice. This comes off as trivializing the actual law. No one cares (not even the people in the game cared) that you pulled a yellow card rather than a red. It's ridiculous that you're still thinking about it.

It's donning, not dawning.

You can write about soccer, but don't make it more than it is. And what does the soccer match have to do with your decision to go to law school, other than your strained analogy?

My first essay sucked, too. It takes a few tries to get a good one. Why do you want to go to law school? What events have helped shape that decision? What events or characteristics define you?

[rwc]

Thanks for the honest feedback. This is exactly what I was thinking of.

I guess it's back to the drawing board.