• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

School Basketball Coach Suspended After His Team Drubbed Opponents 92-4

laughing dog

Contributor
Joined
Dec 29, 2004
Messages
21,331
Location
Minnesota
Gender
IT
Basic Beliefs
Dogs rule
Your 2nd sentence rebuts your claim of understanding - the situations are different. You clearly don't understand the difference which means you didn't understand the bolded part regardles of your belief to the contrary.
The distinctions you've made is special pleading. The distress caused is the same.
You are making positive claim - prove it or STFU.

Whether an outcome is desirable or undesirable does not necessarily entail a moral dimension - as anyone remotely capable of reason understands,
You no doubt want to win this semantic argument, but you are indeed claiming it is undesirable for people to behave like assholes and they ought not do it. Avoiding undesirable behaviour because of its negative effect on others is a choice with a moral dimension but if you don't want to call it that, obviously I'm not going to force you.
You are being illogical. If I am forgetful, that may have a negative effect on others, but it does not have a moral dimension. If I am clumsy, it may have a negative effect on others, but it does not have a moral dimension. If I choose to drive my car to the store that is 2 blocks away, that may have a negative effect on others, but it has no moral dimension.

You certainly feel the need to interject some sort of "moral dimension " into this discussion. But no one is compelled to accept your "reasoning" or your rhetoric.


Anyone who is not inept in reason understands that reasoning does not logically lead to "Playing effectively as you can" means "Scoring the most points possible".
Anyone who can read can see I wrote playing the best you can entails scoring points.
Yes, and anyone who is familiar with sports understands that what you wrote is ignorance driven silliness.
 

Metaphor

Adult human male
Warning Level 3
Warning Level 2
Warning Level 1
Joined
Apr 1, 2007
Messages
11,298
Gender
None. on/ga/njegov
You are making positive claim - prove it or STFU.
I am saying if I accept losing by a lot is a reason to change your sporting behaviour, the distinction that it is 'points' versus 'time' does not seem to make a moral difference.
You certainly feel the need to interject some sort of "moral dimension " into this discussion. But no one is compelled to accept your "reasoning" or your rhetoric.
I bet even the people who otherwise support you on this thread would say it is a moral duty to not be an asshole. But you do you.
 

laughing dog

Contributor
Joined
Dec 29, 2004
Messages
21,331
Location
Minnesota
Gender
IT
Basic Beliefs
Dogs rule
You are making positive claim - prove it or STFU.
I am saying if I accept losing by a lot is a reason to change your sporting behaviour, the distinction that it is 'points' versus 'time' does not seem to make a moral difference.
In other words, you are making an assumption about how runners feel. Got it.
You certainly feel the need to interject some sort of "moral dimension " into this discussion. But no one is compelled to accept your "reasoning" or your rhetoric.
I bet even the people who otherwise support you on this thread would say it is a moral duty to not be an asshole. But you do you.
LOL - you cannot defend your ill-defined and poorly thought out argument, so you inject another conjecture to deflect. But you keeping do you - defending assholes and their behavior.
 

Metaphor

Adult human male
Warning Level 3
Warning Level 2
Warning Level 1
Joined
Apr 1, 2007
Messages
11,298
Gender
None. on/ga/njegov
In other words, you are making an assumption about how runners feel. Got it.
Believe it or not, I've been in running races, and swimming races, in high school. I know how it feels to lose by a large margin.
LOL - you cannot defend your ill-defined and poorly thought out argument, so you inject another conjecture to deflect. But you keeping do you - defending assholes and their behavior.
I do not agree that there is evidence that the coach is an asshole (though apparently there is enough evidence for many people on this thread to not only say he did an asshole thing, but is an asshole). However, I am not deflecting anything. To call someone an asshole is to make a moral judgment about them.
 

Loren Pechtel

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Sep 16, 2000
Messages
36,661
Location
Nevada
Gender
Yes
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
In the Sacred Hill situation, the team did not ease up at all. The coach is a first class asshole and is lucky he was not suspended for more games.
There was a student in my high school who was mathematically gifted. I remember one particular test where he wrecked the curve for the entire rest of the class. Should he have been told to ease up, lest his mathematical gifts humiliate the other students? Should a long distance runner hold back from achieving a personal best if she is too far ahead of the competition? If not, why not?

In a test you can't know you're running away with it.
 

Metaphor

Adult human male
Warning Level 3
Warning Level 2
Warning Level 1
Joined
Apr 1, 2007
Messages
11,298
Gender
None. on/ga/njegov
In the Sacred Hill situation, the team did not ease up at all. The coach is a first class asshole and is lucky he was not suspended for more games.
There was a student in my high school who was mathematically gifted. I remember one particular test where he wrecked the curve for the entire rest of the class. Should he have been told to ease up, lest his mathematical gifts humiliate the other students? Should a long distance runner hold back from achieving a personal best if she is too far ahead of the competition? If not, why not?

In a test you can't know you're running away with it.
So, it's the knowing that is the moral difference? Runners know they are ahead, don't they? Do runners have an obligation to ease up?

In later tests, should the student have eased back on how many questions he got right? (This particular test, he was so far ahead it was humiliating, but he was always at the top of the mathematics class).
 

Loren Pechtel

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Sep 16, 2000
Messages
36,661
Location
Nevada
Gender
Yes
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
It’s not unusual for one student to regularly blow the curve for any class. The instructor has some choices, though. They can set an absolute grading scale, so if the entire class scores 100, they all get A’s, etc. in more subjective classes, they can grade very gifted students with greater rigor than the rest of the class. I’ve seen that done. I’ve also seen instructors add bonus questions that anyone may attempt but which are intended to give the very gifted student a challenge. And I’ve seen instructors give certain students a different test altogether. A good instructor does not share that they do this with the class and may or may not choose to do so with the especially gifted : Lawrence, I’m only awarding you a B+ on this essay because it is not up to the standard I know you are capable of achieving. Please put greater thought into how you support your major and minor themes…

And so on. I’ve seen that done.

And a professor that's worth anything will do something to keep a blowout from giving the rest of the students all bad grades.
 

Toni

Contributor
Joined
Aug 11, 2011
Messages
15,559
Location
NOT laying back and thinking of England
Basic Beliefs
Peace on Earth, goodwill towards all
To tell the truth, I thought I had explained it to you like you are five years old. Or ten, maybe. The overall lesson is that it isn’t ok to deliberately hurt other peoples feelings or to make them feel bad because you are better at something than they are ( or richer or smarter or more beautiful, etc.). Sometimes, we hurt peoples’ feelings by accident. Sometimes, people allow their feelings to be hurt when there was no offense intended.

A race is not the same as a basketball game. A race, except for relays, is individual competitors. But, if I were racing abs were beaten by a fraction of a second, I would look at small mistakes I had made that slowed me down. If I lost by a large margin, I’d re-think my race all together, and all of my training—and try to improve.

If I lost my race to someone who literally was running circles around me, running backwards, etc., I would think that the person who beat me was an utter and complete asshole and showed horrible sportsmanship. It would not inspire me to anything except anger —which I would need to control so as not to show poor sportsmanship myself and I would also feel a desire to avoid that person in any setting in the future. Poor sportsmanship is rarely confined to one competition. People can learn to not be poor sports but they need a framework to understand that their behavior affects how other people feel. Making other people feel bad about themselves does not help them learn to improve their skills.

I’m not certain that an athletic board can
It’s not unusual for one student to regularly blow the curve for any class. The instructor has some choices, though. They can set an absolute grading scale, so if the entire class scores 100, they all get A’s, etc. in more subjective classes, they can grade very gifted students with greater rigor than the rest of the class. I’ve seen that done. I’ve also seen instructors add bonus questions that anyone may attempt but which are intended to give the very gifted student a challenge. And I’ve seen instructors give certain students a different test altogether. A good instructor does not share that they do this with the class and may or may not choose to do so with the especially gifted : Lawrence, I’m only awarding you a B+ on this essay because it is not up to the standard I know you are capable of achieving. Please put greater thought into how you support your major and minor themes…

And so on. I’ve seen that done.

And a professor that's worth anything will do something to keep a blowout from giving the rest of the students all bad grades.

Exactly.
 

Metaphor

Adult human male
Warning Level 3
Warning Level 2
Warning Level 1
Joined
Apr 1, 2007
Messages
11,298
Gender
None. on/ga/njegov
To tell the truth, I thought I had explained it to you like you are five years old. Or ten, maybe.
No, you didn't. You explained what you thought, but you have yet to explain the moral difference between the basketball team winning by a lot and a runner winning by a lot. You really haven't. Saying 'points' vs 'time' cannot be what would make the difference between a moral requirement to change your sporting behaviour mid-stream versus no such moral requirement. Saying one is a team sport versus an individual sport surely cannot be the moral difference either--if anything someone would be more humiliated losing as an individual.

I then challenged you to explain the rules for not being an asshole in a girls basketball game. I do not mean 'do not be an asshole', because you already think the coach is an asshole (how essentialist of you), and how would he know how to act differently? No: I mean--since you believe neither the coach nor I are decent people, explain what a decent person would have done. Remember, we lack empathy and do not understand decency, so your reference point has to be like writing a computer program.
 

laughing dog

Contributor
Joined
Dec 29, 2004
Messages
21,331
Location
Minnesota
Gender
IT
Basic Beliefs
Dogs rule
In other words, you are making an assumption about how runners feel. Got it.
Believe it or not, I've been in running races, and swimming races, in high school. I know how it feels to lose by a large margin.
Good. Then you should understand that the point of a race is to run as fast as you can.

The point of playing a team game is to win by playing within the rules and with good sportsmanship.


 

Metaphor

Adult human male
Warning Level 3
Warning Level 2
Warning Level 1
Joined
Apr 1, 2007
Messages
11,298
Gender
None. on/ga/njegov
Good. Then you should understand that the point of a race is to run as fast as you can.

The point of playing a team game is to win by playing within the rules and with good sportsmanship.
So: good sportsmanship is not part of individual races? Or rather, I suspect you would say 'the humiliation you cause the losing runners by your margin of victory is not considered in the definition of 'good sportsmanship' in individual running races'.
 

Loren Pechtel

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Sep 16, 2000
Messages
36,661
Location
Nevada
Gender
Yes
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
No, basketball is different than track. In track, the fastest time is the fastest time. The second fastest time can bing to a different team, third place to a third team or one of the first two, etc. I don’t remember how many points one gets for the best time or for second, etc. It also depends on the toe if meet: cross country is one toe of meet. A different type of meet has different t types of competition: relays, sprints, middle and long distance, high jump, broad jump, pole vault, shot put, etc. different team members compete in different events and some will compete in multiple events. Except for relays, each competitor is scored individually.

One team can have the fastest runner in 3 states and still not win a meet or even that event if they don’t have enough excellent team members to take second, third, compete in different events, etc. performances are individual with a aggregate team score.

This. I've actually seen it happen. Back in high school I was on the chess team. (Yes, it's an actual sport--surprised me to find that out.) There were competitions where I won every game I played, yet we never had a hope of winning the competition. (We had only two decent players but had to field a team of 5.)
 

Loren Pechtel

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Sep 16, 2000
Messages
36,661
Location
Nevada
Gender
Yes
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
My husband's grandfather was a pretty good chess player. When my husband was a child, his grandfather taught him to be a pretty decent chess player---by playing with fewer pieces until his grandson could hold his own, at least a bit, gradually increasing his own level of playing as his grandson could withstand a bit--and taught him not only how to play chess well, but sportsmanship and compassion and encouraged him enough not to give up but to keep trying, that he could learn to do better.

It's not different in competitive sports. If coaches taught skills by punishingly beating their students by outplaying them at (insert whatever sport you like), the kids would likely give up before they actually learned. Instead, adults--parents, coaches, teachers, uncles, etc. teach children (or lesser skilled adults who may be their peers in other respects or even superior in some skills) teach a little at a time, meeting the student at the student's skill level and then helping them gain more skills.
This. If the match is sufficiently uneven you handicap the stronger.
 

Terrell

Veteran Member
Joined
Jan 7, 2006
Messages
1,166
Location
Winter Garden, Florida
Basic Beliefs
socially liberal/libertarian on most issues, but not all.
I don't think that the coach should be suspended. Even if it was a 222-0 beatdown. If you're getting the shit kicked out of you, then you need to find a way to play better or maybe basketball just isn't for you.
 

Jarhyn

Wizard
Joined
Mar 29, 2010
Messages
10,617
Gender
Androgyne; they/them
Basic Beliefs
Natural Philosophy, Game Theoretic Ethicist
I will say, it's been quite educational to say the least seeing who here reveals themselves as supporting this behavior vs who rejects it.

I can't say it's been surprising, though.
 

Jimmy Higgins

Contributor
Joined
Feb 1, 2001
Messages
36,979
Basic Beliefs
Calvinistic Atheist
I don't think that the coach should be suspended. Even if it was a 222-0 beatdown. If you're getting the shit kicked out of you, then you need to find a way to play better or maybe basketball just isn't for you.
If they are winning 90something to 4 clearly the opposition is a team they shouldn't even be playing. That isn't a 'they shouldn't be playing basketball', it is a 'one team has a much better pool of players to choose from' thing.
 

Jarhyn

Wizard
Joined
Mar 29, 2010
Messages
10,617
Gender
Androgyne; they/them
Basic Beliefs
Natural Philosophy, Game Theoretic Ethicist
I don't think that the coach should be suspended. Even if it was a 222-0 beatdown. If you're getting the shit kicked out of you, then you need to find a way to play better or maybe basketball just isn't for you.
If they are winning 90something to 4 clearly the opposition is a team they shouldn't even be playing. That isn't a 'they shouldn't be playing basketball', it is a 'one team has a much better pool of players to choose from' thing.
It's a highschool team. Every team plays every other. As to whether THAT is appropriate, it's an entirely different question, I think.

Here, the question is "why, of what is clearly a much larger highschool, do we not expect them to seat proportionate numbers of players so that they may select a set of them such that the set selected is still better than the team, or even their equals, while running the first press with the starters, and subbing them in if the score diverges?"

If a school has more students, this just means that a larger percentage of their student body is being excluded from the sport. That's not even fair to the students at the bigger school who wish to play, even if it's vs the smaller district teams.
 

TV and credit cards

Veteran Member
Joined
Nov 17, 2013
Messages
4,492
Location
muh-dahy-nuh
Basic Beliefs
Humanist
I don't think that the coach should be suspended. Even if it was a 222-0 beatdown. If you're getting the shit kicked out of you, then you need to find a way to play better or maybe basketball just isn't for you.
If they are winning 90something to 4 clearly the opposition is a team they shouldn't even be playing. That isn't a 'they shouldn't be playing basketball', it is a 'one team has a much better pool of players to choose from' thing.
It's a highschool team. Every team plays every other. As to whether THAT is appropriate, it's an entirely different question, I think.

Here, the question is "why, of what is clearly a much larger highschool, do we not expect them to seat proportionate numbers of players so that they may select a set of them such that the set selected is still better than the team, or even their equals, while running the first press with the starters, and subbing them in if the score diverges?"

If a school has more students, this just means that a larger percentage of their student body is being excluded from the sport. That's not even fair to the students at the bigger school who wish to play, even if it's vs the smaller district teams.
This is starting to remind me of Harrison Bergeron. We could make the better team strap on ankle weights. ;)

We don't know what advantages one school might have over another. Small pool of talent or large to select from. Mountains of cash for support or BYOB. Or possibly other impediments to training one might have that another does not. This is just another reason sportsmanship is so important.
 

ZiprHead

Loony Running The Asylum
Staff member
Joined
Oct 23, 2002
Messages
31,205
Location
Frozen in Michigan
Gender
Old Fart
Basic Beliefs
Democratic Socialist Atheist
Good. Then you should understand that the point of a race is to run as fast as you can.

The point of playing a team game is to win by playing within the rules and with good sportsmanship.
So: good sportsmanship is not part of individual races? Or rather, I suspect you would say 'the humiliation you cause the losing runners by your margin of victory is not considered in the definition of 'good sportsmanship' in individual running races'.
Individual racing is not only about beating your competition but beating yourself.
 

Jarhyn

Wizard
Joined
Mar 29, 2010
Messages
10,617
Gender
Androgyne; they/them
Basic Beliefs
Natural Philosophy, Game Theoretic Ethicist
I don't think that the coach should be suspended. Even if it was a 222-0 beatdown. If you're getting the shit kicked out of you, then you need to find a way to play better or maybe basketball just isn't for you.
If they are winning 90something to 4 clearly the opposition is a team they shouldn't even be playing. That isn't a 'they shouldn't be playing basketball', it is a 'one team has a much better pool of players to choose from' thing.
It's a highschool team. Every team plays every other. As to whether THAT is appropriate, it's an entirely different question, I think.

Here, the question is "why, of what is clearly a much larger highschool, do we not expect them to seat proportionate numbers of players so that they may select a set of them such that the set selected is still better than the team, or even their equals, while running the first press with the starters, and subbing them in if the score diverges?"

If a school has more students, this just means that a larger percentage of their student body is being excluded from the sport. That's not even fair to the students at the bigger school who wish to play, even if it's vs the smaller district teams.
This is starting to remind me of Harrison Bergeron. We could make the better team strap on ankle weights. ;)

We don't know what advantages one school might have over another. Small pool of talent or large to select from. Mountains of cash for support or BYOB. Or possibly other impediments to training one might have over another. This is just another reason sportsmanship is so important.
Not ankle weights. Just, allowing less-good players to rotate in.

Winning consistently with LOW spread is more skillful and supports the goals of the program in a way that running scores up does not.

It also really fucks with the bookies.
 

Gospel

Unify Africa
Joined
Oct 22, 2007
Messages
3,314
Location
Florida
Gender
B====D
Basic Beliefs
Agnostic
Good. Then you should understand that the point of a race is to run as fast as you can.

The point of playing a team game is to win by playing within the rules and with good sportsmanship.
So: good sportsmanship is not part of individual races? Or rather, I suspect you would say 'the humiliation you cause the losing runners by your margin of victory is not considered in the definition of 'good sportsmanship' in individual running races'.
Individual racing is not only about beating your competition but beating yourself.

And If I had the chance to break the national Highschool records in basketball, best believe yo ass Imma do it. Screw the other team's feelings. :ROFLMAO: I do understand and respect sportsmanship so I'll be sure to shake hands and smack butts at the end of the game. Then write a book about my hero's on the opposing team that made it all possible.
 

Jarhyn

Wizard
Joined
Mar 29, 2010
Messages
10,617
Gender
Androgyne; they/them
Basic Beliefs
Natural Philosophy, Game Theoretic Ethicist
Good. Then you should understand that the point of a race is to run as fast as you can.

The point of playing a team game is to win by playing within the rules and with good sportsmanship.
So: good sportsmanship is not part of individual races? Or rather, I suspect you would say 'the humiliation you cause the losing runners by your margin of victory is not considered in the definition of 'good sportsmanship' in individual running races'.
Individual racing is not only about beating your competition but beating yourself.

And If I had the chance to break the national Highschool records in basketball, best believe yo ass Imma do it. Screw the other team's feelings. :ROFLMAO: I do understand and respect sportsmanship so I'll be sure to shake hands and smack butts at the end of the game. Then write a book about my hero's on the opposing team that made it all possible.
And shame on your coach if he doesn't bench you after the first quarter, and you're playing a crappy team.

Sure, do your best on the court (within whatever bounds your coach places on your play), but shame on him for leaving you there.
 

Toni

Contributor
Joined
Aug 11, 2011
Messages
15,559
Location
NOT laying back and thinking of England
Basic Beliefs
Peace on Earth, goodwill towards all
I don't think that the coach should be suspended. Even if it was a 222-0 beatdown. If you're getting the shit kicked out of you, then you need to find a way to play better or maybe basketball just isn't for you.
If they are winning 90something to 4 clearly the opposition is a team they shouldn't even be playing. That isn't a 'they shouldn't be playing basketball', it is a 'one team has a much better pool of players to choose from' thing.
It's a highschool team. Every team plays every other. As to whether THAT is appropriate, it's an entirely different question, I think.

Here, the question is "why, of what is clearly a much larger highschool, do we not expect them to seat proportionate numbers of players so that they may select a set of them such that the set selected is still better than the team, or even their equals, while running the first press with the starters, and subbing them in if the score diverges?"

If a school has more students, this just means that a larger percentage of their student body is being excluded from the sport. That's not even fair to the students at the bigger school who wish to play, even if it's vs the smaller district teams.
This is starting to remind me of Harrison Bergeron. We could make the better team strap on ankle weights. ;)

We don't know what advantages one school might have over another. Small pool of talent or large to select from. Mountains of cash for support or BYOB. Or possibly other impediments to training one might have that another does not. This is just another reason sportsmanship is so important.
It doesn't matter what advantage one team had over the other or why. Sometimes, a small rural school with a very small student body manages to mount an extremely good team that is well coached and wins championships. See the movie Hoosiers for a movie example but IRL, the movie is loosely based on another real team in Indiana. For another real life example, the next small town down the road from where I lived was a school with an exceptionally good basketball team, long before I was born. Way back in the 1920's, their basketball team 3 state basketball championships in a row, against much larger and more well funded teams. By the time I was in high school, that town was usually slightly better than our team but we were competitive and sometimes won against them. That particular team in the 20's was just extremely talented and extremely well coached.

Anyway, none of that matters. If one competitor or team finds that they are dramatically better than the other team, then they should do what they can to either even up the match: play second or 3rd stringers, insist that shots only be taken from (some point on the court) or that only the guards can shoot, etc. A score that disparate is shameful for both teams. And pointless. The team being beaten so badly is not learning a lesson that it didn't already know. The team that is winning is effectively not playing against an opponent. Both teams risk injury by being on the court, with the losing team perhaps taking more foolish chances or committing more hard fouls, etc. Nobody walks away looking like a winner, no matter what the scoreboard says. It's simply wrong.

Look, when I was a kid, I saw some exhibition basketball games played by the famous Harlem Globetrotters playing against whatever highschool or college team was local. It was more than obvious that the Globetrotters could handle the home team with very, very, very little effort. Mostly, they did a lot of exhibition shooting, showed off some dramatic skills and when the home team would start to get a little too close or even tie up the score, they'd play straight--and they always won their game--unless they decided not to win it. I'm not much of a sportsperson but even I could tell when I was just a kid when they were playing serious basketball and trying to win and when they were putting on a show for the audience. Few high school players have anything close to the ball handling skills of the Globetrotters and frankly, using them in a real game would perhaps be unsportsmanlike. My point was that a much more highly skilled team found ways to play such that the less skilled team was not blown out of the water. The Globetrotters would never have been popular if all they did was roll into town and give whatever team before them a good drumming. They played exhibition games for entertainment. And did not humiliate anyone.
 

Jarhyn

Wizard
Joined
Mar 29, 2010
Messages
10,617
Gender
Androgyne; they/them
Basic Beliefs
Natural Philosophy, Game Theoretic Ethicist
I don't think that the coach should be suspended. Even if it was a 222-0 beatdown. If you're getting the shit kicked out of you, then you need to find a way to play better or maybe basketball just isn't for you.
If they are winning 90something to 4 clearly the opposition is a team they shouldn't even be playing. That isn't a 'they shouldn't be playing basketball', it is a 'one team has a much better pool of players to choose from' thing.
It's a highschool team. Every team plays every other. As to whether THAT is appropriate, it's an entirely different question, I think.

Here, the question is "why, of what is clearly a much larger highschool, do we not expect them to seat proportionate numbers of players so that they may select a set of them such that the set selected is still better than the team, or even their equals, while running the first press with the starters, and subbing them in if the score diverges?"

If a school has more students, this just means that a larger percentage of their student body is being excluded from the sport. That's not even fair to the students at the bigger school who wish to play, even if it's vs the smaller district teams.
This is starting to remind me of Harrison Bergeron. We could make the better team strap on ankle weights. ;)

We don't know what advantages one school might have over another. Small pool of talent or large to select from. Mountains of cash for support or BYOB. Or possibly other impediments to training one might have that another does not. This is just another reason sportsmanship is so important.
It doesn't matter what advantage one team had over the other or why. Sometimes, a small rural school with a very small student body manages to mount an extremely good team that is well coached and wins championships. See the movie Hoosiers for a movie example but IRL, the movie is loosely based on another real team in Indiana. For another real life example, the next small town down the road from where I lived was a school with an exceptionally good basketball team, long before I was born. Way back in the 1920's, their basketball team 3 state basketball championships in a row, against much larger and more well funded teams. By the time I was in high school, that town was usually slightly better than our team but we were competitive and sometimes won against them. That particular team in the 20's was just extremely talented and extremely well coached.

Anyway, none of that matters. If one competitor or team finds that they are dramatically better than the other team, then they should do what they can to either even up the match: play second or 3rd stringers, insist that shots only be taken from (some point on the court) or that only the guards can shoot, etc. A score that disparate is shameful for both teams. And pointless. The team being beaten so badly is not learning a lesson that it didn't already know. The team that is winning is effectively not playing against an opponent. Both teams risk injury by being on the court, with the losing team perhaps taking more foolish chances or committing more hard fouls, etc. Nobody walks away looking like a winner, no matter what the scoreboard says. It's simply wrong.

Look, when I was a kid, I saw some exhibition basketball games played by the famous Harlem Globetrotters playing against whatever highschool or college team was local. It was more than obvious that the Globetrotters could handle the home team with very, very, very little effort. Mostly, they did a lot of exhibition shooting, showed off some dramatic skills and when the home team would start to get a little too close or even tie up the score, they'd play straight--and they always won their game--unless they decided not to win it. I'm not much of a sportsperson but even I could tell when I was just a kid when they were playing serious basketball and trying to win and when they were putting on a show for the audience. Few high school players have anything close to the ball handling skills of the Globetrotters and frankly, using them in a real game would perhaps be unsportsmanlike. My point was that a much more highly skilled team found ways to play such that the less skilled team was not blown out of the water. The Globetrotters would never have been popular if all they did was roll into town and give whatever team before them a good drumming. They played exhibition games for entertainment. And did not humiliate anyone.
You know, I've never seen a sports movie where I liked "the bad guys" just because "the bad guys" drubbed the protagonists.

In fact, such dubbings are used quite pointedly as a basis for establishing the badness of "the bad guys".
 

Rhea

Cyborg with a Tiara
Staff member
Joined
Feb 1, 2001
Messages
13,347
Location
Recluse
Basic Beliefs
Humanist
If a school has more students, this just means that a larger percentage of their student body is being excluded from the sport. That's not even fair to the students at the bigger school who wish to play, even if it's vs the smaller district teams
This has always bothered me about high school sports a large schools.

As a taxpayer, I want the sports program to be accessible to ALL students for the purpose of learnning ways to enjoy lifetime fitness and camaraderie. I do not give a fuck about division titles, they are meaningless.

So in a large school, I expect the sports program to be available to all students and participate in appropriate leagues. And if that means a varsity, and a jr varsity, and a jr jr jr varsity, or if it means an A-varsity and a B-varsity so that all the students have an opportunity to play, then that is what should be done. And if it requires and internal school leage where 8 teams play round robin, then that should be available, too.

I am not a supporter of these idea that a title is more important to spend taxpayer money on than a larger pool of kids. Nope, not ever.
 

Gospel

Unify Africa
Joined
Oct 22, 2007
Messages
3,314
Location
Florida
Gender
B====D
Basic Beliefs
Agnostic
In fact, such dubbings are used quite pointedly as a basis for establishing the badness of "the bad guys".

Nah, it's usually Unsportsmanlike conduct in the form of overly violent assaults on the field. Not just the other team being better.
 

Rhea

Cyborg with a Tiara
Staff member
Joined
Feb 1, 2001
Messages
13,347
Location
Recluse
Basic Beliefs
Humanist
Recalling a great sportsmanship moment from my own past;

I’m running a half marathon. (I am not a runner. I am doing this because my daughter asked me to train with her, and one never says “no” to a 13yo who is requesting many hours of your company).

The race is a very hilly race, which doesn’t bother me at all as I will be walking a great deal of it either way.

At any rate, I am dead last. Last last. Already, after mile 2. Someone has to be last. But I’m not here for the win, anyway. The course is a “lollipop” course, meaning it goes out, does a loop and then joins back to the original path a couple of miles before the finish.

At about mile 2.5 (of the 13-mile race) I am doing my shuffle jog up an incline of about 600 feet (context: look at topo map of Cornell Uni), with the sweep riders patiently pacing me from behind, when down the hill comes the race leader, with the lead-bikes keeping an eye on him. As I huff and shuffle, I give him a thumbs up and a ragged clapping. He applauds me loudly and shouts, “you’re doing great! You’ve got this!” It was such a nice thing to do.

And then, of course, my daughter goes a step further (pun intended) and after she finishes, she gets a water, high-fives her dad, and turns around and starts running back up the course. Workers are telling her she’s going the wrong way, she’s shouting back, “I’m going to get my mom! She’s still running!” She runs 2 miles back to where I am, and then stays with me for my last two miles. (I tell the workers as we pass, “she came back to get me!” They reply, “we know!”)


Anyway, story is intended to share that there’s a way to win by miles, and there’s a way not to. And even while we were all each running our own race against our own goals, while that first place finisher had no reason to slow down for me (I never saw him except that one moment), there is, even then, a supportive pose and a dismissive or even mocking pose.

This coach clearly took the dismissive (or even mocking) pose, and that was unsportsmanlike, and this was clear to most of the people involved, based on the outcomes. The coach perhaps still thinks he did nothing wrong, but when there is a social backlash, sometimes one needs to admit the need for recalibration.
 

horhangi

Junior Member
Joined
Dec 29, 2016
Messages
81
Location
Ca
Basic Beliefs
Athiest
Regarding runners winning by huge amounts. I ran track in high school and Gail Devers went to a school we competed against. Every time we competed against them all of the girl sprinters wanted to know what events she would be racing, because she would win those. One meet she ran the 330 hurdles, first time she had ever run that event. She fell on the first hurdle, on her face in the dirt. She still won the race. Thing is no one hated her or felt she was anything but nice. she won her races but was still a good sportsman, she congratulated her competitors on their races.
 

Gospel

Unify Africa
Joined
Oct 22, 2007
Messages
3,314
Location
Florida
Gender
B====D
Basic Beliefs
Agnostic
I'd like to see the game in question. Somehow I doubt there was anything other than kids playing basketball and the losing team giving it their all the whole time. Basketball games usually don't make it to 94-4 without breaking into a fight if any malice was involved. Besides, a quick google search reveals this is not the first time a blowout like this happened. Why all of a sudden a coach is punished now if that's something not known to be done before? Sounds to me like someone's mommy or daddy is on the school board. :cautious:
 

laughing dog

Contributor
Joined
Dec 29, 2004
Messages
21,331
Location
Minnesota
Gender
IT
Basic Beliefs
Dogs rule
Good. Then you should understand that the point of a race is to run as fast as you can.

The point of playing a team game is to win by playing within the rules and with good sportsmanship.
So: good sportsmanship is not part of individual races? Or rather, I suspect you would say 'the humiliation you cause the losing runners by your margin of victory is not considered in the definition of 'good sportsmanship' in individual running races'.
Running as fast as you can is the goal of a race. Most runners understand that. It is not poor sportsmanship to embrace the goal of the sport. I find it fascinating you are unable to grasp this simple point. There would be no reason for them to feel humiliated.

Winning by as many points as possible is not the goal of team sport. The fact you are either unable or refuse to grasp that good sportsmanship means not running up the score while others can, reflects solely on you.

In some sports in some states, competition rules limit the scope (I mentioned some earlier), which indicates that there is a general acceptance of that sportsmanship in some areas to actually legislate it. Having played a number of youth and high school sports, and officiated high school and college sports, I know there are plenty of coaches who also embrace that idea of sportsmanship. I also know there are plenty who don't.

No one needs your understanding, permission or approval on this issue. You continue to do you - defend asshole behavior with progressively thoughtless questions and examples.
 

Jarhyn

Wizard
Joined
Mar 29, 2010
Messages
10,617
Gender
Androgyne; they/them
Basic Beliefs
Natural Philosophy, Game Theoretic Ethicist
I'd like to see the game in question. Somehow I doubt there was anything other than kids playing basketball and the losing team giving it their all the whole time. Basketball games usually don't make it to 94-4 without breaking into a fight if any malice was involved. Besides, a quick google search reveals this is not the first time a blowout like this happened. Why all of a sudden a coach is punished now if that's something not known to be done before? Sounds to me like someone's mommy or daddy is on the school board. :cautious:
Well, for the same reason that the first few times various posters brought up concerns about trans athletes, the threads were a little interesting, and the second time they were brought up a few years later from the same court they were fairly annoying, and then when they were brought up this last year or so by the same folks, they were grating and everyone could clearly recognize the orientation of the position.

One point is an anomaly, two points gives a suggestion of effect, three points gives a clear trend, and once a bad trend has been identified, any additional action on that trend requires response.

In short it takes a few instances to really generate a clear-enough case.
 

Toni

Contributor
Joined
Aug 11, 2011
Messages
15,559
Location
NOT laying back and thinking of England
Basic Beliefs
Peace on Earth, goodwill towards all
I'd like to see the game in question. Somehow I doubt there was anything other than kids playing basketball and the losing team giving it their all the whole time. Basketball games usually don't make it to 94-4 without breaking into a fight if any malice was involved. Besides, a quick google search reveals this is not the first time a blowout like this happened. Why all of a sudden a coach is punished now if that's something not known to be done before? Sounds to me like someone's mommy or daddy is on the school board. :cautious:
Well, for the same reason that the first few times various posters brought up concerns about trans athletes, the threads were a little interesting, and the second time they were brought up a few years later from the same court they were fairly annoying, and then when they were brought up this last year or so by the same folks, they were grating and everyone could clearly recognize the orientation of the position.

One point is an anomaly, two points gives a suggestion of effect, three points gives a clear trend, and once a bad trend has been identified, any additional action on that trend requires response.

In short it takes a few instances to really generate a clear-enough case.
OR: It had been discussed with the coach earlier that running up the score was unsportsmanlike and counter to whatever principles the school was trying to impart to its student body----and the coach ran up the score anyway.
 

Gospel

Unify Africa
Joined
Oct 22, 2007
Messages
3,314
Location
Florida
Gender
B====D
Basic Beliefs
Agnostic
I'd like to see the game in question. Somehow I doubt there was anything other than kids playing basketball and the losing team giving it their all the whole time. Basketball games usually don't make it to 94-4 without breaking into a fight if any malice was involved. Besides, a quick google search reveals this is not the first time a blowout like this happened. Why all of a sudden a coach is punished now if that's something not known to be done before? Sounds to me like someone's mommy or daddy is on the school board. :cautious:
Well, for the same reason that the first few times various posters brought up concerns about trans athletes, the threads were a little interesting, and the second time they were brought up a few years later from the same court they were fairly annoying, and then when they were brought up this last year or so by the same folks, they were grating and everyone could clearly recognize the orientation of the position.

One point is an anomaly, two points gives a suggestion of effect, three points gives a clear trend, and once a bad trend has been identified, any additional action on that trend requires response.

In short it takes a few instances to really generate a clear-enough case.
Except that it's not the same parties. In fact, the only thing similar is the blow-out. Different coaches different teams different school boards. What is it about this coach that sets him apart from the others? Is it written anywhere in the school board's rules for coaches to avoid blowouts? My understanding is, the coach (losing team) can just bench everyone forcing a forfeit & the referee would award the win to the other team only with fewer points. The forfeiting team getting penalized (up to disqualified from the tournament entirely if done too many times) doesn't help teams in this situation either. So for them to get all high and mighty about sportsmanship while having rules in place that force underperforming teams to grind through a game where their opponents are clearly holding back is actually more humiliating than going down like warriors.

Maybe I am just being an ass but I don't see how holding back helps anyone improve their basketball skills win or lose anyway. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
 

Toni

Contributor
Joined
Aug 11, 2011
Messages
15,559
Location
NOT laying back and thinking of England
Basic Beliefs
Peace on Earth, goodwill towards all
I'd like to see the game in question. Somehow I doubt there was anything other than kids playing basketball and the losing team giving it their all the whole time. Basketball games usually don't make it to 94-4 without breaking into a fight if any malice was involved. Besides, a quick google search reveals this is not the first time a blowout like this happened. Why all of a sudden a coach is punished now if that's something not known to be done before? Sounds to me like someone's mommy or daddy is on the school board. :cautious:
Did the same coach/same school win by such a large margin against this team? If not, then there are a couple of likely scenarios:

Sacred Heart has a different set of ethics that it expects its faculty and coaches to operate under compared with other schools that ran up the score and the coach violated this set of ethics.

Schools within a division are well known by other schools within the division, particularly with regards to any type of competition such as athletics. It could well be that within the division, school ADs had quietly talked with one another about the one school being so badly beaten repeatedly and how to proceed. There could well have been a gentleman's agreement that teams would not run up scores against one another or against this particular team--and the coach violated that agreement. It goes without saying that ADs would have spoken with their coaches about such expectations prior to any game.
 

Jarhyn

Wizard
Joined
Mar 29, 2010
Messages
10,617
Gender
Androgyne; they/them
Basic Beliefs
Natural Philosophy, Game Theoretic Ethicist
I'd like to see the game in question. Somehow I doubt there was anything other than kids playing basketball and the losing team giving it their all the whole time. Basketball games usually don't make it to 94-4 without breaking into a fight if any malice was involved. Besides, a quick google search reveals this is not the first time a blowout like this happened. Why all of a sudden a coach is punished now if that's something not known to be done before? Sounds to me like someone's mommy or daddy is on the school board. :cautious:
Well, for the same reason that the first few times various posters brought up concerns about trans athletes, the threads were a little interesting, and the second time they were brought up a few years later from the same court they were fairly annoying, and then when they were brought up this last year or so by the same folks, they were grating and everyone could clearly recognize the orientation of the position.

One point is an anomaly, two points gives a suggestion of effect, three points gives a clear trend, and once a bad trend has been identified, any additional action on that trend requires response.

In short it takes a few instances to really generate a clear-enough case.
Except that it's not the same parties. In fact, the only thing similar is the blow-out. Different coaches different teams different school boards. What is it about this coach that sets him apart from the others? Is it written anywhere in the school board's rules for coaches to avoid blowouts? My understanding is, the coach (losing team) can just bench everyone forcing a forfeit & the referee would award the win to the other team only with fewer points. The forfeiting team getting penalized (up to disqualified from the tournament entirely if done too many times) doesn't help teams in this situation either. So for them to get all high and mighty about sportsmanship while having rules in place that force underperforming teams to grind through a game where their opponents are clearly holding back is actually more humiliating than going down like warriors.

Maybe I am just being an ass but I don't see how holding back helps anyone improve their basketball skills win or lose anyway. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Some are already being held back: the second and third stringers (or the kids entirely denied a team because their school has no 'fourth string').

The most effective game is always going to be between closely matched opponents with access to occasional examples of better strategy
 

Jimmy Higgins

Contributor
Joined
Feb 1, 2001
Messages
36,979
Basic Beliefs
Calvinistic Atheist
I'd like to see the game in question. Somehow I doubt there was anything other than kids playing basketball and the losing team giving it their all the whole time. Basketball games usually don't make it to 94-4 without breaking into a fight if any malice was involved. Besides, a quick google search reveals this is not the first time a blowout like this happened. Why all of a sudden a coach is punished now if that's something not known to be done before? Sounds to me like someone's mommy or daddy is on the school board. :cautious:
Well, for the same reason that the first few times various posters brought up concerns about trans athletes, the threads were a little interesting, and the second time they were brought up a few years later from the same court they were fairly annoying, and then when they were brought up this last year or so by the same folks, they were grating and everyone could clearly recognize the orientation of the position.

One point is an anomaly, two points gives a suggestion of effect, three points gives a clear trend, and once a bad trend has been identified, any additional action on that trend requires response.

In short it takes a few instances to really generate a clear-enough case.
OR: It had been discussed with the coach earlier that running up the score was unsportsmanlike and counter to whatever principles the school was trying to impart to its student body----and the coach ran up the score anyway.
To be clear, running up the score is 95 to 40. Giving up an average of one basket a half?! There is no term for that.
 

Jimmy Higgins

Contributor
Joined
Feb 1, 2001
Messages
36,979
Basic Beliefs
Calvinistic Atheist
I'd like to see the game in question. Somehow I doubt there was anything other than kids playing basketball and the losing team giving it their all the whole time. Basketball games usually don't make it to 94-4 without breaking into a fight if any malice was involved. Besides, a quick google search reveals this is not the first time a blowout like this happened. Why all of a sudden a coach is punished now if that's something not known to be done before? Sounds to me like someone's mommy or daddy is on the school board. :cautious:
Well, for the same reason that the first few times various posters brought up concerns about trans athletes, the threads were a little interesting, and the second time they were brought up a few years later from the same court they were fairly annoying, and then when they were brought up this last year or so by the same folks, they were grating and everyone could clearly recognize the orientation of the position.

One point is an anomaly, two points gives a suggestion of effect, three points gives a clear trend, and once a bad trend has been identified, any additional action on that trend requires response.

In short it takes a few instances to really generate a clear-enough case.
Except that it's not the same parties. In fact, the only thing similar is the blow-out. Different coaches different teams different school boards. What is it about this coach that sets him apart from the others? Is it written anywhere in the school board's rules for coaches to avoid blowouts? My understanding is, the coach (losing team) can just bench everyone forcing a forfeit & the referee would award the win to the other team only with fewer points. The forfeiting team getting penalized (up to disqualified from the tournament entirely if done too many times) doesn't help teams in this situation either. So for them to get all high and mighty about sportsmanship while having rules in place that force underperforming teams to grind through a game where their opponents are clearly holding back is actually more humiliating than going down like warriors.

Maybe I am just being an ass but I don't see how holding back helps anyone improve their basketball skills win or lose anyway. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
How in the heck is playing a team that you give up two baskets to (presumably) improving your skill on anything? If anything, you could work on ball control, killing the clock, passing, any number of things that doesn't involve humiliating your opponents.
 

Gospel

Unify Africa
Joined
Oct 22, 2007
Messages
3,314
Location
Florida
Gender
B====D
Basic Beliefs
Agnostic
I'd like to see the game in question. Somehow I doubt there was anything other than kids playing basketball and the losing team giving it their all the whole time. Basketball games usually don't make it to 94-4 without breaking into a fight if any malice was involved. Besides, a quick google search reveals this is not the first time a blowout like this happened. Why all of a sudden a coach is punished now if that's something not known to be done before? Sounds to me like someone's mommy or daddy is on the school board. :cautious:
Well, for the same reason that the first few times various posters brought up concerns about trans athletes, the threads were a little interesting, and the second time they were brought up a few years later from the same court they were fairly annoying, and then when they were brought up this last year or so by the same folks, they were grating and everyone could clearly recognize the orientation of the position.

One point is an anomaly, two points gives a suggestion of effect, three points gives a clear trend, and once a bad trend has been identified, any additional action on that trend requires response.

In short it takes a few instances to really generate a clear-enough case.
Except that it's not the same parties. In fact, the only thing similar is the blow-out. Different coaches different teams different school boards. What is it about this coach that sets him apart from the others? Is it written anywhere in the school board's rules for coaches to avoid blowouts? My understanding is, the coach (losing team) can just bench everyone forcing a forfeit & the referee would award the win to the other team only with fewer points. The forfeiting team getting penalized (up to disqualified from the tournament entirely if done too many times) doesn't help teams in this situation either. So for them to get all high and mighty about sportsmanship while having rules in place that force underperforming teams to grind through a game where their opponents are clearly holding back is actually more humiliating than going down like warriors.

Maybe I am just being an ass but I don't see how holding back helps anyone improve their basketball skills win or lose anyway. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Some are already being held back: the second and third stringers (or the kids entirely denied a team because their school has no 'fourth string').

The most effective game is always going to be between closely matched opponents with access to occasional examples of better strategy

Man, now you got me going all philosophical so I've reached my personal limits on my own argument. :ROFLMAO:

I see sports the same as I do in other fields of work/play. If you can learn it and do it well, you got it. There are a lot of people who want to do that thing you want to do so there is limited access to do it on a professional level for that reason alone. For those of you, not top talent, you can still do that thing on your personal time (as I did), no one is stopping you. That thing itself is always in need of improvements which it gets from talented individuals. If talented individuals are told to hold back the field suffers from slower reception of said much-needed talent ultimately shorting everyone of said talent. How do you think coaches build strategies? They review tapes of high-performing competitors because competitor coaches tended to build strategies around their high-performing athletes. Said strategy is built into workouts techniques to counter the competition.

High school is a place to find your strengths and weaknesses so that you can have a laser beam focus on selecting the best options for your college education. If you go through basketball holding hands in high school and think you can just George Jefferson walk into the NCAA you got another thing coming.

Low key I'm drawing from my dislike towards the totally unrelated ★★affirmative action★★.
 

Gospel

Unify Africa
Joined
Oct 22, 2007
Messages
3,314
Location
Florida
Gender
B====D
Basic Beliefs
Agnostic
I'd like to see the game in question. Somehow I doubt there was anything other than kids playing basketball and the losing team giving it their all the whole time. Basketball games usually don't make it to 94-4 without breaking into a fight if any malice was involved. Besides, a quick google search reveals this is not the first time a blowout like this happened. Why all of a sudden a coach is punished now if that's something not known to be done before? Sounds to me like someone's mommy or daddy is on the school board. :cautious:
Well, for the same reason that the first few times various posters brought up concerns about trans athletes, the threads were a little interesting, and the second time they were brought up a few years later from the same court they were fairly annoying, and then when they were brought up this last year or so by the same folks, they were grating and everyone could clearly recognize the orientation of the position.

One point is an anomaly, two points gives a suggestion of effect, three points gives a clear trend, and once a bad trend has been identified, any additional action on that trend requires response.

In short it takes a few instances to really generate a clear-enough case.
Except that it's not the same parties. In fact, the only thing similar is the blow-out. Different coaches different teams different school boards. What is it about this coach that sets him apart from the others? Is it written anywhere in the school board's rules for coaches to avoid blowouts? My understanding is, the coach (losing team) can just bench everyone forcing a forfeit & the referee would award the win to the other team only with fewer points. The forfeiting team getting penalized (up to disqualified from the tournament entirely if done too many times) doesn't help teams in this situation either. So for them to get all high and mighty about sportsmanship while having rules in place that force underperforming teams to grind through a game where their opponents are clearly holding back is actually more humiliating than going down like warriors.

Maybe I am just being an ass but I don't see how holding back helps anyone improve their basketball skills win or lose anyway. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
How in the heck is playing a team that you give up two baskets to (presumably) improving your skill on anything? If anything, you could work on ball control, killing the clock, passing, any number of things that doesn't involve humiliating your opponents.

After repeatedly giving up the ball you'll learn at some point to change tactics. You may not win but somewhere down the line, you'll find something that works. It's just unfortunate that the game is not only about passing as you'd have to do the same for defending & scoring. Maybe the losing team needs a new coach & captain. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

I'd love to actually watch this game. I bet 92-4 was a combination of poor training, lesser athletic abilities, giving up on defending & not capitalizing on possessions by taking nothing but easy shots.
 

Bomb#20

Contributor
Joined
Sep 28, 2004
Messages
6,427
Location
California
Gender
It's a free country.
Basic Beliefs
Rationalism
Evidently what's sportsmanlike is culturally constructed and subjective, and people's views of it make sense to themselves but are not necessarily communicable to others...

 

Toni

Contributor
Joined
Aug 11, 2011
Messages
15,559
Location
NOT laying back and thinking of England
Basic Beliefs
Peace on Earth, goodwill towards all
I'd like to see the game in question. Somehow I doubt there was anything other than kids playing basketball and the losing team giving it their all the whole time. Basketball games usually don't make it to 94-4 without breaking into a fight if any malice was involved. Besides, a quick google search reveals this is not the first time a blowout like this happened. Why all of a sudden a coach is punished now if that's something not known to be done before? Sounds to me like someone's mommy or daddy is on the school board. :cautious:
Well, for the same reason that the first few times various posters brought up concerns about trans athletes, the threads were a little interesting, and the second time they were brought up a few years later from the same court they were fairly annoying, and then when they were brought up this last year or so by the same folks, they were grating and everyone could clearly recognize the orientation of the position.

One point is an anomaly, two points gives a suggestion of effect, three points gives a clear trend, and once a bad trend has been identified, any additional action on that trend requires response.

In short it takes a few instances to really generate a clear-enough case.
Except that it's not the same parties. In fact, the only thing similar is the blow-out. Different coaches different teams different school boards. What is it about this coach that sets him apart from the others? Is it written anywhere in the school board's rules for coaches to avoid blowouts? My understanding is, the coach (losing team) can just bench everyone forcing a forfeit & the referee would award the win to the other team only with fewer points. The forfeiting team getting penalized (up to disqualified from the tournament entirely if done too many times) doesn't help teams in this situation either. So for them to get all high and mighty about sportsmanship while having rules in place that force underperforming teams to grind through a game where their opponents are clearly holding back is actually more humiliating than going down like warriors.

Maybe I am just being an ass but I don't see how holding back helps anyone improve their basketball skills win or lose anyway. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
How in the heck is playing a team that you give up two baskets to (presumably) improving your skill on anything? If anything, you could work on ball control, killing the clock, passing, any number of things that doesn't involve humiliating your opponents.

After repeatedly giving up the ball you'll learn at some point to change tactics. You may not win but somewhere down the line, you'll find something that works. It's just unfortunate that the game is not only about passing as you'd have to do the same for defending & scoring. Maybe the losing team needs a new coach & captain. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

I'd love to actually watch this game. I bet 92-4 was a combination of poor training, lesser athletic abilities, giving up on defending & not capitalizing on possessions by taking nothing but easy shots.
At a certain point in time, it’s just disheartening to be so outclassed. At that point, very little learning takes place. Remember these are high school
Students—adolescents. No one is suggesting the better skilled team does not deserve to win. A good team, under the guidance of a good coach, can manage to build skills without shooting baskets. The losing coach can also help his team by helping them learn from watching specific players or how certain players work together, etc. maybe even score a little more.

My assumption is that no one has NBA aspirations on either team. Maybe college ball for one or two players. But all of them, from the very best to the absolute worst, can learn from playing together. As a parent, what I wanted my kids to learn was to enjoy being active, to gain skills, and to learn something about being a good person. I liked their coaches who were good people. I really disliked the coaches ( and parents on the sideline) who showed poor sportsmanship.
 

Jimmy Higgins

Contributor
Joined
Feb 1, 2001
Messages
36,979
Basic Beliefs
Calvinistic Atheist
Except that it's not the same parties. In fact, the only thing similar is the blow-out. Different coaches different teams different school boards. What is it about this coach that sets him apart from the others? Is it written anywhere in the school board's rules for coaches to avoid blowouts? My understanding is, the coach (losing team) can just bench everyone forcing a forfeit & the referee would award the win to the other team only with fewer points. The forfeiting team getting penalized (up to disqualified from the tournament entirely if done too many times) doesn't help teams in this situation either. So for them to get all high and mighty about sportsmanship while having rules in place that force underperforming teams to grind through a game where their opponents are clearly holding back is actually more humiliating than going down like warriors.

Maybe I am just being an ass but I don't see how holding back helps anyone improve their basketball skills win or lose anyway. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
How in the heck is playing a team that you give up two baskets to (presumably) improving your skill on anything? If anything, you could work on ball control, killing the clock, passing, any number of things that doesn't involve humiliating your opponents.

After repeatedly giving up the ball you'll learn at some point to change tactics.
92 to 4 isn't a "tactics" issue. It is similar to what the score would be if I played Lebron James in one-on-one. One team was AAA grade, the other was BBB grade, not remotely in the same league. Scores like that don't happen without an aggressive amount of disparity.
You may not win but somewhere down the line, you'll find something that works. It's just unfortunate that the game is not only about passing as you'd have to do the same for defending & scoring. Maybe the losing team needs a new coach & captain. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

I'd love to actually watch this game. I bet 92-4 was a combination of poor training, lesser athletic abilities, giving up on defending & not capitalizing on possessions by taking nothing but easy shots.
Whatever you want to tell yourself. This was a result of two wildly incompatible programs "playing" each other.
 

Gospel

Unify Africa
Joined
Oct 22, 2007
Messages
3,314
Location
Florida
Gender
B====D
Basic Beliefs
Agnostic
Learning how to lose gloriously is a lesson I'm happy to have learned. Can't tell you how many times I got 100% owned on the basketball court with no coach, school board, or referee, and still showed my appreciation to the assholes for a wild ride. I used to enjoy talking about those moments I figured out their weakness (though they simply changed up) and was able to use what I learned against people in other towns. Losing in so many incredibly bad ways made me impervious to all lessor losses and earned me above average status on the streets of Central Islip NY Wreck center after learning from the roughest and toughest and most skilled in the neighborhood. I used to go to towns like Smithtown, Hempstead & Amneiville to wreak havoc on the no so hood hood over there. Fun memories. I was playing against a gang named "The Legion of Doom" (stupid name) where rap artists like Keith Murray were a member (played against him as well). What these kids got isn't all that bad because I got my ass literally kicked (broken nose, a concussion here and there) a few times for not backing off the defense. All that and losing to boot. :ROFLMAO:

I just really liked basketball until the Knicks made me kick the habit. I get it though, 92-4 is not a good look for high school games and sportsmanship. But what's there to do when they need that experience? As long as the winning team ain't breaking noses & being verbally abusive but are encouraging the other team to keep going and showing them respect for staying with it I see no foul.
 

Gospel

Unify Africa
Joined
Oct 22, 2007
Messages
3,314
Location
Florida
Gender
B====D
Basic Beliefs
Agnostic
92 to 4 isn't a "tactics" issue. It is similar to what the score would be if I played Lebron James in one-on-one.

I felt that. :ROFLMAO: But I bet after losing against LeBron for 32 minutes if you were able to play against the you before then you'd win (the you that Played against Lebron that is).
 

Jarhyn

Wizard
Joined
Mar 29, 2010
Messages
10,617
Gender
Androgyne; they/them
Basic Beliefs
Natural Philosophy, Game Theoretic Ethicist
Learning how to lose gloriously is a lesson I'm happy to have learned. Can't tell you how many times I got 100% owned on the basketball court with no coach, school board, or referee, and still showed my appreciation to the assholes for a wild ride. I used to enjoy talking about those moments I figured out their weakness (though they simply changed up) and was able to use what I learned against people in other towns. Losing in so many incredibly bad ways made me impervious to all lessor losses and earned me above average status on the streets of Central Islip NY Wreck center after learning from the roughest and toughest and most skilled in the neighborhood. I used to go to towns like Smithtown, Hempstead & Amneiville to wreak havoc on the no so hood hood over there. Fun memories. I was playing against a gang named "The Legion of Doom" (stupid name) where rap artists like Keith Murray were a member (played against him as well). What these kids got isn't all that bad because I got my ass literally kicked (broken nose, a concussion here and there) a few times for not backing off the defense. All that and losing to boot. :ROFLMAO:

I just really liked basketball until the Knicks made me kick the habit. I get it though, 92-4 is not a good look for high school games and sportsmanship. But what's there to do when they need that experience? As long as the winning team ain't breaking noses & being verbally abusive but are encouraging the other team to keep going and showing them respect for staying with it I see no foul.
Difference is, you stepped into a hard court on a hard street accepting that it was hard, so as to learn hard lessons.

That's not what this game was.
 

Gospel

Unify Africa
Joined
Oct 22, 2007
Messages
3,314
Location
Florida
Gender
B====D
Basic Beliefs
Agnostic
In basketball players feed off each other and get better as a result. To play against another player holding back is doing you a disservice. That's all I'm saying.
 

Gospel

Unify Africa
Joined
Oct 22, 2007
Messages
3,314
Location
Florida
Gender
B====D
Basic Beliefs
Agnostic
Learning how to lose gloriously is a lesson I'm happy to have learned. Can't tell you how many times I got 100% owned on the basketball court with no coach, school board, or referee, and still showed my appreciation to the assholes for a wild ride. I used to enjoy talking about those moments I figured out their weakness (though they simply changed up) and was able to use what I learned against people in other towns. Losing in so many incredibly bad ways made me impervious to all lessor losses and earned me above average status on the streets of Central Islip NY Wreck center after learning from the roughest and toughest and most skilled in the neighborhood. I used to go to towns like Smithtown, Hempstead & Amneiville to wreak havoc on the no so hood hood over there. Fun memories. I was playing against a gang named "The Legion of Doom" (stupid name) where rap artists like Keith Murray were a member (played against him as well). What these kids got isn't all that bad because I got my ass literally kicked (broken nose, a concussion here and there) a few times for not backing off the defense. All that and losing to boot. :ROFLMAO:

I just really liked basketball until the Knicks made me kick the habit. I get it though, 92-4 is not a good look for high school games and sportsmanship. But what's there to do when they need that experience? As long as the winning team ain't breaking noses & being verbally abusive but are encouraging the other team to keep going and showing them respect for staying with it I see no foul.
Difference is, you stepped into a hard court on a hard street accepting that it was hard, so as to learn hard lessons.

That's not what this game was.

And those are all the lessons of competitive sports. High school sports build character not from holding hands and singing kumbaya but through team efforts win or lose, keep going and try to overcome challenges. If they lose against the best team playing their best they learn how to defeat teams that are not as good. Heck next time around their chances of beating the best team increase as they feed off the experience and grow. But to ask a team to hold back is doing nobody on the court favors.

I wonder what the players have to say about that game.
 

Toni

Contributor
Joined
Aug 11, 2011
Messages
15,559
Location
NOT laying back and thinking of England
Basic Beliefs
Peace on Earth, goodwill towards all
Learning how to lose gloriously is a lesson I'm happy to have learned. Can't tell you how many times I got 100% owned on the basketball court with no coach, school board, or referee, and still showed my appreciation to the assholes for a wild ride. I used to enjoy talking about those moments I figured out their weakness (though they simply changed up) and was able to use what I learned against people in other towns. Losing in so many incredibly bad ways made me impervious to all lessor losses and earned me above average status on the streets of Central Islip NY Wreck center after learning from the roughest and toughest and most skilled in the neighborhood. I used to go to towns like Smithtown, Hempstead & Amneiville to wreak havoc on the no so hood hood over there. Fun memories. I was playing against a gang named "The Legion of Doom" (stupid name) where rap artists like Keith Murray were a member (played against him as well). What these kids got isn't all that bad because I got my ass literally kicked (broken nose, a concussion here and there) a few times for not backing off the defense. All that and losing to boot. :ROFLMAO:

I just really liked basketball until the Knicks made me kick the habit. I get it though, 92-4 is not a good look for high school games and sportsmanship. But what's there to do when they need that experience? As long as the winning team ain't breaking noses & being verbally abusive but are encouraging the other team to keep going and showing them respect for staying with it I see no foul.
Difference is, you stepped into a hard court on a hard street accepting that it was hard, so as to learn hard lessons.

That's not what this game was.

And those are all the lessons of competitive sports. High school sports build character not from holding hands and singing kumbaya but through team efforts win or lose, keep going and try to overcome challenges. If they lose against the best team playing their best they learn how to defeat teams that are not as good. Heck next time around their chances of beating the best team increase as they feed off the experience and grow. But to ask a team to hold back is doing nobody on the court favors.

I wonder what the players have to say about that game.
There is more to winning than the point spread.

Nobody is suggesting holding hands and singing campfire songs. People are saying Don’t be a jerk if you can help it. Patronizing the other team is awful just as running up a score unnecessarily.

Even in the pros, players and coaches and fans appreciate generous players.
 

Metaphor

Adult human male
Warning Level 3
Warning Level 2
Warning Level 1
Joined
Apr 1, 2007
Messages
11,298
Gender
None. on/ga/njegov
Not ankle weights. Just, allowing less-good players to rotate in.
The coach did that. But he is still an asshole, as decent people everywhere would know.
 
Top Bottom