• 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
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.
That is simply untrue. "Holding back" does not mean playing poorly, it just means not running up the score. You'd still have to try to move the ball against a superior defense and defend against a superior offense.
 

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
I wonder what the players have to say about that game.
Those high school girls playing basketball to their utmost? Assholes from A to Z.
 

Gospel

Unify Africa
Joined
Oct 22, 2007
Messages
3,312
Location
Florida
Gender
B====D
Basic Beliefs
Agnostic
Defending and scoring against a player playing at 50% is learning from 50% of what's offered. Its like saying you learn as much from a punching bag as you do from a boxer in the ring.
 

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
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.
Sure, why not? You have no evidence that this happened, but because the coach is an asshole, it is certainly consistent with that.
 

Toni

Contributor
Joined
Aug 11, 2011
Messages
15,557
Location
NOT laying back and thinking of England
Basic Beliefs
Peace on Earth, goodwill towards all
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.
Sure, why not? You have no evidence that this happened, but because the coach is an asshole, it is certainly consistent with that.
My post was obviously speculation.
 

Gospel

Unify Africa
Joined
Oct 22, 2007
Messages
3,312
Location
Florida
Gender
B====D
Basic Beliefs
Agnostic
Blowouts happen in the NBA too. I mean not exactly 92-4 but large enough margin to suspend the coach for a game or two for the same reason.
 

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
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.
I was humiliated to have my bottom of the barrel athletic ability put on such public display.
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.
The 'goal' of team sports is to win, and you win by playing to your utmost and scoring as many points as it is possible for you to score. Sometimes, all the points you can get isn't enough and you'll lose.

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.
I didn't try to give my "permission". I'm discussing something on a message board.
 

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
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.
Sure, why not? You have no evidence that this happened, but because the coach is an asshole, it is certainly consistent with that.
My post was obviously speculation.
And as I said, since you have determined the character of the coach from the outcome of a single game (not just his behaviour in one game mind, his entire character of 'asshole'), I was merely trying to be helpful to our audience to show how you are able to infer other things that might have happened that are consistent with the coach being an asshole.
 

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
Blowouts happen in the NBA too. I mean not exactly 92-4 but large enough margin to suspend the coach for a game or two for the same reason.
Can you indicate some recent examples of this?
 

laughing dog

Contributor
Joined
Dec 29, 2004
Messages
21,331
Location
Minnesota
Gender
IT
Basic Beliefs
Dogs rule
Defending and scoring against a player playing at 50% is learning from 50% of what's offered. Its like saying you learn as much from a punching bag as you do from a boxer in the ring.
Why do you assume that refraining from scoring is playing at 50%?
 

Toni

Contributor
Joined
Aug 11, 2011
Messages
15,557
Location
NOT laying back and thinking of England
Basic Beliefs
Peace on Earth, goodwill towards all
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.
Sure, why not? You have no evidence that this happened, but because the coach is an asshole, it is certainly consistent with that.
My post was obviously speculation.
And as I said, since you have determined the character of the coach from the outcome of a single game (not just his behaviour in one game mind, his entire character of 'asshole'), I was merely trying to be helpful to our audience to show how you are able to infer other things that might have happened that are consistent with the coach being an asshole.
No. Doing one jerky thing does not mean that you are a jerk.

The only thing anyone ‘knows’about this situation is what is reported. Everything else is informed by people’s individual perspectives and experiences.
 

laughing dog

Contributor
Joined
Dec 29, 2004
Messages
21,331
Location
Minnesota
Gender
IT
Basic Beliefs
Dogs rule
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.
I was humiliated to have my bottom of the barrel athletic ability put on such public display.
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.
The 'goal' of team sports is to win, and you win by playing to your utmost and scoring as many points as it is possible for you to score. Sometimes, all the points you can get isn't enough and you'll lose.
Nope - the goal of team sports is to win within the rules and spirit of the game which includes good sportsmanship.

You keep repeating the false premise that one wins by playing to your utmost and scoring as many points as possible for you to score.


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.
I didn't try to give my "permission". I'm discussing something on a message board.
Continue to do you - defend asshole 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
No. Doing one jerky thing does not mean that you are a jerk.
I apologise. I misremembered who was essentialist about the coach. It was not you, but laughing dog:

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.
 

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 keep repeating the false premise that one wins by playing to your utmost and scoring as many points as possible for you to score.
That is how one wins.
Discussion requires recognition of other points of view - something lacking in your responses.
Are you talking about yourself? When I say individuals in individual races who lose by a lot can be humiliated by that, you did not acknowledge that as valid. Why not?
 

Jarhyn

Wizard
Joined
Mar 29, 2010
Messages
10,617
Gender
Androgyne; they/them
Basic Beliefs
Natural Philosophy, Game Theoretic Ethicist
Defending and scoring against a player playing at 50% is learning from 50% of what's offered. Its like saying you learn as much from a punching bag as you do from a boxer in the ring.
The player isn't playing at 50% when a coach is doing his job right.

Every player always plays 100% in a world where the teams are representative of their populations.

It just means your coach plays different players, whose 100% is closer, but still better than, the opposing team. Score stops going up so fast and if he has to, he plays entirely equal players.

That way the better players get to "yah we're better!" And then more of the 'rents of the bigger high school have a reason to warm seats, since their kid isn't just.
 

laughing dog

Contributor
Joined
Dec 29, 2004
Messages
21,331
Location
Minnesota
Gender
IT
Basic Beliefs
Dogs rule
You keep repeating the false premise that one wins by playing to your utmost and scoring as many points as possible for you to score.
That is how one wins.
No, one wins by outscoring the opponent. It is a win by one point of 90 points.
Discussion requires recognition of other points of view - something lacking in your responses.
Are you talking about yourself?
Sigh, as your response proves, I am referring to you.
When I say individuals in individual races who lose by a lot can be humiliated by that, you did not acknowledge that as valid. Why not?
I did not. The point of racing is to run as fast as you can. Winning is the hopeful byproduct of that goal. Runners understand that. Of course there are people who get embarrassed or humiliated about things that cannot be helped. A runner might be humiliated by losing by one second. That doesn't mean the winner should have tried to run slower to lose the race.
Really, if you thought about your argument, you'd realize how silly it truly is.
 

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
I did not. The point of racing is to run as fast as you can. Winning is the hopeful byproduct of that goal. Runners understand that. Of course there are people who get embarrassed or humiliated about things that cannot be helped. A runner might be humiliated by losing by one second. That doesn't mean the winner should have tried to run slower to lose the race.
Really, if you thought about your argument, you'd realize how silly it truly is.
I have thought about it a lot. It is you who has not thought about it. Your only response to the humiliation runners feel is 'you are irrational to feel that'.

I find you fundamentally lacking in empathy on that point.
 

Jarhyn

Wizard
Joined
Mar 29, 2010
Messages
10,617
Gender
Androgyne; they/them
Basic Beliefs
Natural Philosophy, Game Theoretic Ethicist
I did not. The point of racing is to run as fast as you can. Winning is the hopeful byproduct of that goal. Runners understand that. Of course there are people who get embarrassed or humiliated about things that cannot be helped. A runner might be humiliated by losing by one second. That doesn't mean the winner should have tried to run slower to lose the race.
Really, if you thought about your argument, you'd realize how silly it truly is.
I have thought about it a lot. It is you who has not thought about it. Your only response to the humiliation runners feel is 'you are irrational to feel that'.

I find you fundamentally lacking in empathy on that point.
No. This is pointedly YOUR response, or am I missing something? Or is your point that they SHOULD feel humiliation?

My thought is that they feel what they feel, and the proper response is to recognize that and help them feel some other way if it is within our power.

I have no power over how runners feel as the coach of a running team (edit: other than to communicate good philosophies for handling and controlling unproductive emotions).

I have immense power over how players feel as the coach of a basketball team.

I recognize that it is within my power, as the coach of a basketball team, to have every player player play their best and gain skill and win, if my team is good enough and/or my coaching does not suck, even without embarrassing others.

As the coach of a track team, best I can do is keep everyone doing their best and make sure they understand that racing is a sport you compete in against yourself, first and foremost, and to help all the runners come to peace with what winning in that arena looks like.
 

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
No. This is pointedly YOUR response, or am I missing something? Or is your point that they SHOULD feel humiliation?
My point is that runners could feel the same intensity of humiliation from losing by a large margin that the losing basketball team allegedly feels from a drubbing.

laughing dog singularly refuses to acknowledge that any runner could feel such a thing, or if they do, they are irrational to do so. No runner is required to alter her performance because of the feelings of the less athletic. Not altering her performance does not make her an asshole, despite the side effect of humiliation for others.

Yet, the humiliation a basketball team feels from a drubbing does require a mid-stream change in performance. The side effect of humiliation is now important enough that if you don't change what you are doing, you are a 'first class' asshole.

laughing dog proposes that one behaviour is assholish when done in a basketball context, but the same behaviour is not assholish in a running context, despite the same side effect of humiliation in the losers.

I find his selective empathy incoherent.
 

Jarhyn

Wizard
Joined
Mar 29, 2010
Messages
10,617
Gender
Androgyne; they/them
Basic Beliefs
Natural Philosophy, Game Theoretic Ethicist
No. This is pointedly YOUR response, or am I missing something? Or is your point that they SHOULD feel humiliation?
My point is that runners could feel the same intensity of humiliation from losing by a large margin that the losing basketball team allegedly feels from a drubbing.

laughing dog singularly refuses to acknowledge that any runner could feel such a thing, or if they do, they are irrational to do so. No runner is required to alter her performance because of the feelings of the less athletic. Not altering her performance does not make her an asshole, despite the side effect of humiliation for others.

Yet, the humiliation a basketball team feels from a drubbing does require a mid-stream change in performance. The side effect of humiliation is now important enough that if you don't change what you are doing, you are a 'first class' asshole.

laughing dog proposes that one behaviour is assholish when done in a basketball context, but the same behaviour is not assholish in a running context, despite the same side effect of humiliation in the losers.

I find his selective empathy incoherent.
Not a midstream change in performance. A midstream change in performers.

You are not changing what you are doing as players. You are being rearranged by the coach and asked to warm a bench.

It is the coach doing the selection.

At track, every runner is selected.

At basketball a subset is selected.

Having an appropriate range of subsets, and selecting from them appropriately to the game is part of coaching.

The correct course of action is to select of your team the players who will give the other team a good game and your school a good win, not select of your team the players who will give the other team a miserable, uneducational game and your team a gross win.

The sports even have different competitive philosophies around them!
 

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 a midstream change in performance. A midstream change in performers.
The coach did that.
You are not changing what you are doing as players. You are being rearranged by the coach and asked to warm a bench.
laughing dog proposed several performance changes from the players as well.
 

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
The sports even have different competitive philosophies around them!
So...the humiliation runners feel is not, in fact, important, and you agree with laughing dog?
 

Rhea

Cyborg with a Tiara
Staff member
Joined
Feb 1, 2001
Messages
13,347
Location
Recluse
Basic Beliefs
Humanist
Nope - the goal of team sports is to win within the rules and spirit of the game which includes good sportsmanship.

You keep repeating the false premise that one wins by playing to your utmost and scoring as many points as possible for you to score.
Indeed, a good example of this is the team that wins by always being as intensely aggressive and physical as possible.. They go right up to the limits. They shove, they shoulder, they crowd. They do it on every move. They are playing to their utmost. Playing to win. Playing to score as much as possible. And everyone in the league thinks they are assholes and that is no way to win.

The teams in the league know that they are technically legal in everything they do. But their sportsmanship is poor and they do not advance the sport.

In the case in this news item, recall that the coach was suspended for only ONE game. This is not a severe punishment, it’s not a career-ending decision. It is ONE game. It’s a message. A strong reminder. When, in a high school situation, the coach won in an unsportsmanlike manner a high-point margin.

It’s pointed out several times in the article quoted in the OP, pasted below for a reminder.

The team didn’t just win. They went for steals; they changed their strategy from press to man-on-man when they saw how bad the team was and played to embarass them. The article states several times that it was not just the score. It was the manner in which they did it.

There are more articles from Connecticut (where the schools are) and NYT on the issue, including the coach’s regret at his decisions that night to play full press and maximising turrnovers.



article from OP said:
Kirck was suspended after his team defeated another school by a huge margin, embarrassing them in the process, The Hill reported.

The win, a drubbing by all means, was deemed to be unsportsmanlike by the school and coach Kirck was suspended for one match.

Sacred Heart Academy suspended coach Jason Kirck after the 92-4 victory over Lyman Hall on January 3 in US' Connecticut and issued an apology, the Associated Press reported.

“Sacred Heart Academy values the lessons taught and cultivated through athletic participation including ethical and responsible behavior, leadership and strength of character and respect for one’s opponents,” Sister Sheila O’Neill, the school's president, wrote.

“Sacred Heart Academy Administration and Athletics are deeply remorseful for the manner through with the outcome of the game was achieved," she added.

Tom Lipka, the coach of Lyman Hall, told the Hartford Courant that the Kirck’s team “showed no mercy throughout.”

“Sacred Heart pressed for most of the first half then called it off and went into a tight man-to-man defense trying to get steals,” Lipka said.
“They fast-breaked the entire game right to the end. They never went into a zone and continued to push the ball up the court and shoot threes whenever they could,” he continued. “They showed no mercy throughout.”
 

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
The team didn’t just win. They went for steals; they changed their strategy from press to man-on-man when they saw how bad the team was and played to embarass them.
How do you know that that is why they did what they did?
 

Toni

Contributor
Joined
Aug 11, 2011
Messages
15,557
Location
NOT laying back and thinking of England
Basic Beliefs
Peace on Earth, goodwill towards all
The team didn’t just win. They went for steals; they changed their strategy from press to man-on-man when they saw how bad the team was and played to embarass them.
How do you know that that is why they did what they did?
She probably read the article above. I did.
 

laughing dog

Contributor
Joined
Dec 29, 2004
Messages
21,331
Location
Minnesota
Gender
IT
Basic Beliefs
Dogs rule
No. This is pointedly YOUR response, or am I missing something? Or is your point that they SHOULD feel humiliation?
My point is that runners could feel the same intensity of humiliation from losing by a large margin that the losing basketball team allegedly feels from a drubbing.
So?
laughing dog singularly refuses to acknowledge that any runner could feel such a thing, or if they do, they are irrational to do so. No runner is required to alter her performance because of the feelings of the less athletic. Not altering her performance does not make her an asshole, despite the side effect of humiliation for others.
More of another straw man. Runners are supposed to run as fast as they can. If that causes a wide margin of victory, that is a consequence of their goal.

To goal of a basketball game is to win within the rules and good sportsmanship. Winning by the largest possible margin is a necessary outcome of that goal.
Yet, the humiliation a basketball team feels from a drubbing does require a mid-stream change in performance. The side effect of humiliation is now important enough that if you don't change what you are doing, you are a 'first class' asshole.

laughing dog proposes that one behaviour is assholish when done in a basketball context, but the same behaviour is not assholish in a running context, despite the same side effect of humiliation in the losers.

I find his selective empathy incoherent.
I do not propose anything. I am stating a well and widely recognized view of sportsmanship in the context of team sports. One that has been institutionalized in the competition rules in some sport in some places.
I
Please continue to do as you do - defend assholish behavior.
 

laughing dog

Contributor
Joined
Dec 29, 2004
Messages
21,331
Location
Minnesota
Gender
IT
Basic Beliefs
Dogs rule
The team didn’t just win. They went for steals; they changed their strategy from press to man-on-man when they saw how bad the team was and played to embarass them.
How do you know that that is why they did what they did?
She probably read the article above. I did.
Yeah, facts do get in the way of positions.

Anyone who knows about basketball, knows that presses and tight man to man defense is used to create pressure and steals while zone defenses typically do not. When you have a 30 to 40 point lead, you don't need to fast break.
 

Rhea

Cyborg with a Tiara
Staff member
Joined
Feb 1, 2001
Messages
13,347
Location
Recluse
Basic Beliefs
Humanist
When you have a 30 to 40 point lead, you don't need to fast break
And at the time the coach called for this strategy change, they were up fifty to zero. 50. To. 0. And he told them to start playing man to man, get the steals, rack up the points.
 

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
She probably read the article above. I did.
The article said the team did it in order to embarrass the other side?

Or did the article actually describe some actions that were taken, and you and Rhea made an assumption that the coach did it to embarrass the other side? I think you'll find it was the latter.
 

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
And at the time the coach called for this strategy change, they were up fifty to zero. 50. To. 0. And he told them to start playing man to man, get the steals, rack up the points.
And at that time, you had a psychic connection with the coach, and you discovered he was doing it in order to embarrass the other team?
 

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
The team didn’t just win. They went for steals; they changed their strategy from press to man-on-man when they saw how bad the team was and played to embarass them.
How do you know that that is why they did what they did?
She probably read the article above. I did.
Yeah, facts do get in the way of positions.

Anyone who knows about basketball, knows that presses and tight man to man defense is used to create pressure and steals while zone defenses typically do not. When you have a 30 to 40 point lead, you don't need to fast break.
Do people who follow basketball also have psychic connections with the coaches? I am curious, as the coach's behaviour is consistent with a number of hypotheses, but Rhea seems to think she knows he took the actions he took in order to embarrass the other team.
 

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
No. This is pointedly YOUR response, or am I missing something? Or is your point that they SHOULD feel humiliation?
My point is that runners could feel the same intensity of humiliation from losing by a large margin that the losing basketball team allegedly feels from a drubbing.
So?
So, your moral sphere of concern does not seem to extend to all victims of sporting humiliation, even in cases where that humiliation is both a foreseeable side-effect and could have been prevented.

laughing dog singularly refuses to acknowledge that any runner could feel such a thing, or if they do, they are irrational to do so. No runner is required to alter her performance because of the feelings of the less athletic. Not altering her performance does not make her an asshole, despite the side effect of humiliation for others.
More of another straw man. Runners are supposed to run as fast as they can. If that causes a wide margin of victory, that is a consequence of their goal.

To goal of a basketball game is to win within the rules and good sportsmanship. Winning by the largest possible margin is a necessary outcome of that goal.
I think you meant 'not a necessary outcome'.

You have decided that playing to your utmost is not good sportsmanship. I disagree.

Yet, the humiliation a basketball team feels from a drubbing does require a mid-stream change in performance. The side effect of humiliation is now important enough that if you don't change what you are doing, you are a 'first class' asshole.

laughing dog proposes that one behaviour is assholish when done in a basketball context, but the same behaviour is not assholish in a running context, despite the same side effect of humiliation in the losers.

I find his selective empathy incoherent.
I do not propose anything. I am stating a well and widely recognized view of sportsmanship in the context of team sports. One that has been institutionalized in the competition rules in some sport in some places.
I
Please continue to do as you do - defend assholish behavior.

Yes, you were saying before.

Of course, everyone can note I did not even defend the coach. I asked questions about why there was an empathy gap for other athletes, and why you essentialised the coach as a 'first class' asshole, from one example of one behaviour.
 

Toni

Contributor
Joined
Aug 11, 2011
Messages
15,557
Location
NOT laying back and thinking of England
Basic Beliefs
Peace on Earth, goodwill towards all
The team didn’t just win. They went for steals; they changed their strategy from press to man-on-man when they saw how bad the team was and played to embarass them.
How do you know that that is why they did what they did?
She probably read the article above. I did.
Yeah, facts do get in the way of positions.

Anyone who knows about basketball, knows that presses and tight man to man defense is used to create pressure and steals while zone defenses typically do not. When you have a 30 to 40 point lead, you don't need to fast break.
Do people who follow basketball also have psychic connections with the coaches? I am curious, as the coach's behaviour is consistent with a number of hypotheses, but Rhea seems to think she knows he took the actions he took in order to embarrass the other team.
People who watch basketball frequently tend to learn and recognize strategies and the circumstances under which they are employed.

It doesn’t require a psychic connection. Just a little common sense. It helps if one reads the above articles which give direct quotes from the coach, expressing remorse and also from the school’s leadership.

The coach was suspended for one game.
 

laughing dog

Contributor
Joined
Dec 29, 2004
Messages
21,331
Location
Minnesota
Gender
IT
Basic Beliefs
Dogs rule
No. This is pointedly YOUR response, or am I missing something? Or is your point that they SHOULD feel humiliation?
My point is that runners could feel the same intensity of humiliation from losing by a large margin that the losing basketball team allegedly feels from a drubbing.
So?
So, your moral sphere of concern does not seem to extend to all victims of sporting humiliation, even in cases where that humiliation is both a foreseeable side-effect and could have been prevented.
Runners could feel the same level of humiliation from losing by one second.

Runners
laughing dog singularly refuses to acknowledge that any runner could feel such a thing, or if they do, they are irrational to do so. No runner is required to alter her performance because of the feelings of the less athletic. Not altering her performance does not make her an asshole, despite the side effect of humiliation for others.
More of another straw man. Runners are supposed to run as fast as they can. If that causes a wide margin of victory, that is a consequence of their goal.

To goal of a basketball game is to win within the rules and good sportsmanship. Winning by the largest possible margin is a necessary outcome of that goal.
I think you meant 'not a necessary outcome'.

You have decided that playing to your utmost is not good sportsmanship. I disagree.
Another straw man. "Utmost" includes sportsmanship. Again, something is widely recognized. Even the high school conference that to which Sacred Heart belongs recognizes it.
Yet, the humiliation a basketball team feels from a drubbing does require a mid-stream change in performance. The side effect of humiliation is now important enough that if you don't change what you are doing, you are a 'first class' asshole.

laughing dog proposes that one behaviour is assholish when done in a basketball context, but the same behaviour is not assholish in a running context, despite the same side effect of humiliation in the losers.

I find his selective empathy incoherent.
I do not propose anything. I am stating a well and widely recognized view of sportsmanship in the context of team sports. One that has been institutionalized in the competition rules in some sport in some places.
I
Please continue to do as you do - defend assholish behavior.

Yes, you were saying before.

Of course, everyone can note I did not even defend the coach. I asked questions about why there was an empathy gap for other athletes, and why you essentialised the coach as a 'first class' asshole, from one example of one behaviour.
More straw men, The only empathy gap here is yours for the losing team in this situation,

You do you - defend that assholish 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
It doesn’t require a psychic connection. Just a little common sense. It helps if one reads the above articles which give direct quotes from the coach, expressing remorse and also from the school’s leadership.
Did the coach who expressed remorse say he did what he did in order to embarrass the other team?
 

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
Runners could feel the same level of humiliation from losing by one second.
You are all over the shop. I could just as easily say the humiliation of the team losing to Sacred Heart would have been the same at 1 point as at 80 points.
Another straw man. "Utmost" includes sportsmanship. Again, something is widely recognized. Even the high school conference that to which Sacred Heart belongs recognizes it.
You are the one defining 'pulling back on doing your best' as a necessary component of sportsmanship, not me.
More straw men, The only empathy gap here is yours for the losing team in this situation,

You do you - defend that assholish behavior.
You do you, laughing dog. Essentialising an entire human being from one second-hand observed behaviour, and then accuse me of blathering about 'morality' when you are clearly making a moral judgment against me for 'defending' 'assholish' behaviour.
 

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
I've just read the coach's statement of regret. He did not anywhere accuse himself of doing what he did in order to 'embarrass' the other team.

But Rhea can see into people's hearts and she knows the coach did what he did in order to embarrass the other team.
 

Toni

Contributor
Joined
Aug 11, 2011
Messages
15,557
Location
NOT laying back and thinking of England
Basic Beliefs
Peace on Earth, goodwill towards all
It doesn’t require a psychic connection. Just a little common sense. It helps if one reads the above articles which give direct quotes from the coach, expressing remorse and also from the school’s leadership.
Did the coach who expressed remorse say he did what he did in order to embarrass the other team?
Did you read the link?

Whether he expressly intended to embarrass or humiliate the other team, that was a pretty obvious probable outcome of running up the score to a more than 80 point lead.

Most people would realize that.
 

ZiprHead

Loony Running The Asylum
Staff member
Joined
Oct 23, 2002
Messages
31,202
Location
Frozen in Michigan
Gender
Old Fart
Basic Beliefs
Democratic Socialist Atheist
It doesn’t require a psychic connection. Just a little common sense. It helps if one reads the above articles which give direct quotes from the coach, expressing remorse and also from the school’s leadership.
Did the coach who expressed remorse say he did what he did in order to embarrass the other team?
He'd have to be a moron to not understand that would be the result. Do you think he's a moron?
 

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
Most people would realize that.
No, Toni. No.

You and everyone who thinks like you accept that pronouncement. The people who had the exact same prejudiced impulse that you did think that.

But not everyone thinks like you, as much as you like to think so. You see, I can think of other reasons, plausible reasons, why the coach did what he did that do not include 'in order to embarrass the other team'.
 

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
It doesn’t require a psychic connection. Just a little common sense. It helps if one reads the above articles which give direct quotes from the coach, expressing remorse and also from the school’s leadership.
Did the coach who expressed remorse say he did what he did in order to embarrass the other team?
He'd have to be a moron to not understand that would be the result. Do you think he's a moron?
Non. You are not answering the question. You are sidestepping and you have buried two implicit assumptions in your response.

First, I disagree that the coach is a moron even if he did not think that a 92-4 loss is more humiliating than a 50-nil loss. He may have been swept up in the energy of the victory and not even thought about anything other than how best to keep up the energy.

Second, even if he recognised the possibility that the actions would embarass the other players, that does not mean he did what he did in order to embarrass the other players.

A runner can recognise that the magnitude of her victory might embarrass the other runners, but that does not mean she won by a large margin in order to embarrass the other runners.

At best, at best, you might say the coach played as he played in order to embarrass the other team or he was recklessly indifferent to the humilation he caused.
 

Gospel

Unify Africa
Joined
Oct 22, 2007
Messages
3,312
Location
Florida
Gender
B====D
Basic Beliefs
Agnostic
Defending and scoring against a player playing at 50% is learning from 50% of what's offered. Its like saying you learn as much from a punching bag as you do from a boxer in the ring.
Why do you assume that refraining from scoring is playing at 50%?
It was an number I admittedly pulled out of my ass but holding back is not 100%.100% is what got the coach suspended.
 

Toni

Contributor
Joined
Aug 11, 2011
Messages
15,557
Location
NOT laying back and thinking of England
Basic Beliefs
Peace on Earth, goodwill towards all
Most people would realize that.
No, Toni. No.

You and everyone who thinks like you accept that pronouncement. The people who had the exact same prejudiced impulse that you did think that.

But not everyone thinks like you, as much as you like to think so. You see, I can think of other reasons, plausible reasons, why the coach did what he did that do not include 'in order to embarrass the other team'.
I think a pretty quick reading of this thread would demonstrate that most of those posting in this thread think that running up a score in a high school game is unsportsmanlike, increases the potential for harm to come to some of the players and would cause the losing team to feel embarrassed or humiliated.

I understand that you are not most people. You certainly are entitled to your opinions. You are capable of understanding to a certain extent that it is not helpful for a superior player to play at full ability against much less skilled opponents. You do not beat your nieces and nephews at board games when you clearly could do so if you chose. Apparently you realize that by beating them every time, they would feel discouraged, possibly feel bad about themselves and possibly not like you. Why you are unable to extrapolate to a bunch of hormonal teenagers playing basketball is something that I cannot explain.
 

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
I think a pretty quick reading of this thread would demonstrate that most of those posting in this thread think that running up a score in a high school game is unsportsmanlike, increases the potential for harm to come to some of the players and would cause the losing team to feel embarrassed or humiliated.
That is tangential to Rhea's and your claim: that the coach did what he did in order to embarrass the other team.

That most people in this thread may agree to the claims you listed does not mean most people in the world do. It is an extremely insular worldview to think so.

I often ask people who I know have generally different political views to myself about their views on particular issues. It sounds like you do not.
Why you are unable to extrapolate to a bunch of hormonal teenagers playing basketball is something that I cannot explain.
You also appear unable to understand my actual questions. I've already noted the empathy gap that you and others have for humiliated individual athletes.
 

laughing dog

Contributor
Joined
Dec 29, 2004
Messages
21,331
Location
Minnesota
Gender
IT
Basic Beliefs
Dogs rule
Runners could feel the same level of humiliation from losing by one second.
You are all over the shop. I could just as easily say the humiliation of the team losing to Sacred Heart would have been the same at 1 point as at 80 points.
Given your position, I am surprised you haven't. I am not at all surprised that you, as usual, missed the point that has been repeated many times.

BTW, I have witnessed and known runners who deliberately to increase the winning margin because in their view, that would be unsporting in that specific context.

Another straw man. "Utmost" includes sportsmanship. Again, something is widely recognized. Even the high school conference that to which Sacred Heart belongs recognizes it.
You are the one defining 'pulling back on doing your best' as a necessary component of sportsmanship, not me.
I am among many who understand that "doing your best" in a team sport is narrowly defined as "scoring as many points as possible".

You are the one making the assertion that "doing your best" means scoring as many points as possible. You appear to be incapable of understanding that for many people, that is not true. And those same people do not think it is necessarily unsporting to win a race by a wide margin by running as fast as one can. You find that position "incoherent". Good for you. I find your lack of understanding pitiable.

More straw men, The only empathy gap here is yours for the losing team in this situation,

You do you - defend that assholish behavior.
You do you, laughing dog. Essentialising an entire human being from one second-hand observed behaviour, and then accuse me of blathering about 'morality' when you are clearly making a moral judgment against me for 'defending' 'assholish' behaviour.
You are one who interjected morality. I am simply engaging with you on terms you appear to comprehend. Your defense of assholish behavior is coherent and completely unsurprising.
 

laughing dog

Contributor
Joined
Dec 29, 2004
Messages
21,331
Location
Minnesota
Gender
IT
Basic Beliefs
Dogs rule
Most people would realize that.
No, Toni. No.

You and everyone who thinks like you accept that pronouncement. The people who had the exact same prejudiced impulse that you did think that.

But not everyone thinks like you, as much as you like to think so. You see, I can think of other reasons, plausible reasons, why the coach did what he did that do not include 'in order to embarrass the other team'.
You really need to learn to read more carefully. "Most people" is not everyone.
 

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
BTW, I have witnessed and known runners who deliberately to increase the winning margin because in their view, that would be unsporting in that specific context.
I don't know what you mean here. I think you meant to say 'runners who deliberately did not increase their winning margin'.

Are the runners who increased their margin assholes?
I am among many who understand that "doing your best" in a team sport is narrowly defined as "scoring as many points as possible".

You are the one making the assertion that "doing your best" means scoring as many points as possible. You appear to be incapable of understanding that for many people, that is not true. And those same people do not think it is necessarily unsporting to win a race by a wide margin by running as fast as one can. You find that position "incoherent". Good for you. I find your lack of understanding pitiable.
No. I said playing to your utmost will result in higher points.
Your defense of assholish behavior is coherent and completely unsurprising.
I will point out again I did not even defend the coach or the behaviour.

But your concession that acting like an asshole is indeed a morally undesirable behaviour is noted.
 

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
Most people would realize that.
No, Toni. No.

You and everyone who thinks like you accept that pronouncement. The people who had the exact same prejudiced impulse that you did think that.

But not everyone thinks like you, as much as you like to think so. You see, I can think of other reasons, plausible reasons, why the coach did what he did that do not include 'in order to embarrass the other team'.
You really need to learn to read more carefully. "Most people" is not everyone.
You really need to learn to read more carefully. "Most people" is most people. I did not say 'everyone'.

Toni, and apparently also yourself, think that your opinions are majority opinions, even as you ensconce yourself in a straitjacketed coterie of people who already think exactly like you do.
 

Toni

Contributor
Joined
Aug 11, 2011
Messages
15,557
Location
NOT laying back and thinking of England
Basic Beliefs
Peace on Earth, goodwill towards all
I think a pretty quick reading of this thread would demonstrate that most of those posting in this thread think that running up a score in a high school game is unsportsmanlike, increases the potential for harm to come to some of the players and would cause the losing team to feel embarrassed or humiliated.
That is tangential to Rhea's and your claim: that the coach did what he did in order to embarrass the other team.

That most people in this thread may agree to the claims you listed does not mean most people in the world do. It is an extremely insular worldview to think so.

I often ask people who I know have generally different political views to myself about their views on particular issues. It sounds like you do not.
Why you are unable to extrapolate to a bunch of hormonal teenagers playing basketball is something that I cannot explain.
You also appear unable to understand my actual questions. I've already noted the empathy gap that you and others have for humiliated individual athletes.
I am sorry that you do not understand or differentiate the differences between individual competitions such as track events compared with team events such as basketball.

In a race, there is almost always only one winner. But there is a second and a third place as well as a fourth and so on. Running races is individuals competing as individuals, with individual points according to placement accruing to each team per event and then totaled together with all of the events. Virtually no female one on earth--and not that many males would have felt bad at coming in second to Florence Griffith Joyner in her prime, even if she lapped them several times.

In basketball, team effort counts to help the person scoring to score points and to keep the other team from scoring. Yes, individual stats are kept but they don't matter at all to the team's final score and are not positively correlated with how well the team performed. The win is to the team.
 
Top Bottom