Is social media helping youth sports—or making them worse? Recent incidents involving an Arizona State hockey player who collapsed during training and a viral youth hockey altercation demonstrate how quickly the Internet can turn a sports incident into a public trial. Social media can expose dangerous behavior and create accountability, but are we sometimes reaching conclusions before investigations are complete and all the facts are known? We look at the difference between accountability and online outrage—and why a few seconds of viral video may not always tell the entire story.

Is Social Media Changing Youth Sports for the Worse?

There was a time when something controversial happened at a youth sporting event and the people who knew about it were the players, coaches, parents, and maybe a few people in the stands.

Today, somebody pulls out a phone.

Within hours, a short video can be viewed hundreds of thousands of times. It gets reposted to Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, X, and YouTube. Comment sections fill with opinions. People who weren't at the game, don't know the players, don't know the coaches, and have no idea what happened before or after the video suddenly become judge and jury.

Sometimes the outrage is justified.

But sometimes we should ask a different question:

Are we reaching conclusions before we know the whole story?

Two recent hockey stories demonstrate just how quickly sports incidents can become social-media events—and how difficult it can be to separate what we actually know from what we think we know.

The Arizona State Hockey Story

Arizona State hockey player Matthew Mayich collapsed during an outdoor team workout on August 20. According to Arizona State's preliminary report, the 21-year-old collapsed during a wind-down run while carrying a 10-pound medicine ball. The workout began around 7 a.m., with reported temperatures between 86 and 89 degrees. Mayich remains hospitalized, and his family's attorney has said he suffered exertional heat stroke that reduced oxygen flow to his brain.

Read the NBC report about the Arizona State hockey incident

It is an awful situation.

As details emerged, however, the story quickly became about much more than a player collapsing.

Arizona State's preliminary review found that the hockey coaching staff had not submitted the planned training activities to the school's strength-and-conditioning coaches for review before the event. The university also said it was undertaking additional review and would assemble experts to recommend best practices for outdoor athletic activities.

Police are separately investigating the incident, with their report expected to receive independent review by the Maricopa County Attorney's Office.

Meanwhile, Mayich's family attorney has made serious criticisms of the workout and the people involved, including characterizing it as a "punishment workout." Those statements are allegations from the family's attorney, not conclusions reached by the university's preliminary report or the still-pending law-enforcement investigation.

And that distinction matters.

Social media doesn't always wait for investigations.

It wants an answer right now.

Who is responsible?

Who should be fired?

Who should be suspended?

Who is the villain?

Those are understandable questions after something terrible happens. But asking questions and reaching conclusions aren't the same thing.

There may ultimately be accountability. Investigations may determine that policies weren't followed or that mistakes were made. But shouldn't those conclusions come after the evidence is collected?

That's what investigations are supposed to determine.

Then Came the Youth Hockey Video

Just days later, another hockey story exploded online.

A video from a youth hockey game in Massachusetts showed an 11-year-old Bay State Breakers player striking a South Shore Kings player with his stick. Reports say the stick broke during the incident.

The player was ejected and subsequently suspended indefinitely from practices and games while Massachusetts Hockey investigates and determines the length of any additional discipline. The opposing player's father reportedly said his son was OK.

The video is disturbing.

There is no reason to minimize dangerous behavior involving a hockey stick. Players need to be protected, and organizations have a responsibility to address conduct that puts another player at risk.

But something else happened almost immediately.

The Internet took over.

Thousands of people could suddenly watch a few seconds from the life of an 11-year-old child.

People who had never met him could decide what kind of person he was.

People could demand punishment.

People could speculate about his parents.

People could speculate about his coaches.

And people could make permanent judgments about a child based on one terrible moment captured on video.

The player's organization suspended him indefinitely, and Massachusetts Hockey said the incident was being handled through its disciplinary process. Reports also said the player wrote an apology to the other player.

That doesn't excuse what happened.

But it should make us think about something larger.

How much punishment should come from the sport—and how much should come from the Internet?

Social Media Gives Us the Moment, Not Always the Story

Video can be incredibly valuable.

For decades, parents complained about incidents at youth sporting events where one person's version of what happened was completely different from another's.

Today we often have video.

That's a good thing.

Video can expose dangerous behavior. It can hold adults accountable. It can protect players. It can help leagues investigate incidents and make better decisions.

But a video also has limitations.

A 10-second clip may show exactly what happened during those 10 seconds.

It doesn't necessarily tell us what happened during the previous 10 minutes.

It doesn't tell us what happened in the locker room.

It doesn't tell us what coaches said.

It doesn't tell us what officials saw.

It doesn't tell us whether someone immediately accepted responsibility.

And it certainly doesn't tell us everything about the character of a child, parent, coach, or organization.

Yet social media encourages us to make those judgments anyway.

We Have Turned Sports Into Instant Courtrooms

Social-media platforms reward engagement.

The most emotional version of a story is often the version people share.

"Something happened and investigators are gathering information" isn't particularly exciting.

"THIS COACH SHOULD BE FIRED!"

"BAN THIS PLAYER FOR LIFE!"

"THIS IS EVERYTHING WRONG WITH YOUTH SPORTS!"

Those statements generate reactions.

And once thousands of people start repeating the same conclusion, it can begin to feel like established fact.

But popularity isn't evidence.

A viral post isn't an investigation.

And a comment section isn't a courtroom.

Adults Can Handle Criticism. Children Are Different.

The Massachusetts incident raises an especially important question because we're talking about an 11-year-old.

Children make mistakes.

Sometimes those mistakes are serious.

A serious mistake should have consequences. Coaches, leagues, parents, and governing organizations have an obligation to protect other players and teach appropriate behavior.

But discipline and public humiliation are two very different things.

An 11-year-old can serve a suspension, apologize, learn from what happened, receive coaching and parental guidance, and hopefully become a better person because of it.

The Internet doesn't work that way.

The video may exist forever.

Years from now, someone searching that player's name could potentially encounter the worst few seconds of his childhood.

Is that what youth sports are supposed to be about?

Coaches and Organizations Aren't Above Scrutiny Either

None of this means coaches, programs, or organizations should escape accountability.

Quite the opposite.

When legitimate concerns arise about player safety, training methods, abuse, hazing, dangerous conduct, or inappropriate coaching behavior, they should be investigated thoroughly.

RankCoaches exists in part because parents and players deserve information about the people and organizations they trust with athletes.

But there is an important difference between accountability and a rush to judgment.

Good accountability asks:

What happened?
What evidence exists?
Were policies followed?
Were previous complaints made?
Is this an isolated incident or part of a pattern?
What does the coach or organization say happened?
What do players and parents who were actually there say?
What did an independent investigation determine?

Social media often asks only:

Did you see the video?

Maybe the Problem Isn't Social Media. Maybe It's How We Use It.

Social media has done plenty of good for youth sports.

Players can share accomplishments with relatives across the country. Teams can promote their programs. Athletes can create recruiting videos. Parents can watch games remotely. Organizations can communicate instantly.

And when something genuinely wrong happens, social media can prevent it from being quietly swept under the rug.

That's powerful.

But with that power comes responsibility.

Maybe the problem isn't that we're recording these incidents.

Maybe the problem is believing that watching a short video makes us experts on everything surrounding them.

We can condemn dangerous behavior without condemning a child for life.

We can demand answers from coaches without deciding they're guilty before an investigation is finished.

We can question organizations without turning rumors into facts.

And we can acknowledge that sometimes the first version of a story isn't the complete version.

Before You Hit Share

The next time a youth-sports video appears on your feed and makes you angry, consider waiting a moment before joining the pile-on.

Ask yourself:

Do I know what actually happened—or do I know what a 15-second video showed me?

That doesn't mean ignoring bad behavior.

It means leaving room for facts.

It means recognizing the difference between accountability and outrage.

Most importantly, it means remembering that youth sports involve real people—often children—whose lives continue long after the Internet moves on to its next viral controversy.

Youth sports are supposed to teach accountability, teamwork, discipline, resilience, respect, and second chances.

Maybe social media could use a little more of those things too.

Help Make Youth Sports Better

Great coaches can have an enormous positive impact on athletes. Poor coaching experiences can stay with players just as long.

That's why RankCoaches.com gives players and parents a place to share their experiences, rate coaches, and help other families learn more about the people leading their teams.

Had a great coach who deserves recognition? Tell people about them.

Had an experience that other families should know about? Share it responsibly and honestly.

Your experience could help another family make a more informed decision—and help recognize the coaches who are doing youth sports the right way.

Visit RankCoaches.com and Review a Coach