See, this is my issue. There's running up the score. And then there's intentionally sucking, which is always very obvious and would make the other kids feel like shit.
They were up 59-0 at half time. So in half the game the other team hadn't scored a single basket. They went back and nearly doubled their score. That doesn't sound like they backed off at all. Isn't there a middle ground between running up the score and giving up?
Based on what I've heard they scored 12 points in the fourth quarter. That's not exactly running it up. Not sure about the press.
The coach got fired only after he spoke out against the apology. It wasn't the action but his opinion he got fired for. The real person at fault is the person responsible for scheduling this game.
12 points in the 4th quarter means it was 88-0 after three and from the versions of the story i read, they didn't back off until they reached 100. It was running up the score pure and simple.
--
Ok, seriously I'm out.
....12 points in 8 minutes is really rather low, especially the last 8 minutes of a basketball game.
Yes, it's called putting in your third stringers, and if his third stringers were still scoring like that, well, there's not anything you can really do.
FyreWulff on
0
Options
Nova_CI have the needThe need for speedRegistered Userregular
That's correct - the school was for learning disabilities, not physical (As far as I know).
However, the total pool of female students was 20. Many of the players were playing in their first (And now only) game.
If you quite something just because you lose one game, no matter how badly, you probably shouldn't be playing in the first place.
They didn't quit - they were pulled from the league.
I didn't see that in the OP?
There are other sources of information than the OP. I didn't see the OP saying any of the girls quit either, but you were happy to leap to that assumption.
See, this is my issue. There's running up the score. And then there's intentionally sucking, which is always very obvious and would make the other kids feel like shit.
They were up 59-0 at half time. So in half the game the other team hadn't scored a single basket. They went back and nearly doubled their score. That doesn't sound like they backed off at all. Isn't there a middle ground between running up the score and giving up?
Typically it's aggression level. I'd agree that if they were doing the intentionally fouls if another player got near the basket and all that clock management shit it's a bit much.
However you seem to be assuming that the gross mismatch in skills wasn't apparent very early on. 59 points might have been 2 minutes of hard play followed by 14 of "What the fuck are we doing here?"
In response to the OP: Eh. Game shouldn't have happened. I personally don't believe that my opponents should play easier just to make me feel better, that's more humiliating than just running up the score
We are talking about a man who, instead of just politely and inconspicuously exorcizing a demon, has to show off by sending it into a bunch of pigs and then sending the pigs over a fucking cliff.
Jesus Christ ran up the pig-off-the-cliff score in his battle against Legion. Why shouldn't these girls run up the score against some retarded basketball players?
That's correct - the school was for learning disabilities, not physical (As far as I know).
However, the total pool of female students was 20. Many of the players were playing in their first (And now only) game.
If you quite something just because you lose one game, no matter how badly, you probably shouldn't be playing in the first place.
They didn't quit - they were pulled from the league.
I didn't see that in the OP?
There are other sources of information than the OP. I didn't see the OP saying any of the girls quit either, but you were happy to leap to that assumption.
It seemed like the logical implication of your statement.
Sports aren't really my thing. I don't even know how leagues work.
HamHamJ on
While racing light mechs, your Urbanmech comes in second place, but only because it ran out of ammo.
Well it's basically a no win situation, and we're missing information. Was he playing first stringers til the end of the game, or did he let everyone on the team play?
If he had asked to end the game early, you can bet that people would have seen it as an insult, too. "Oh, you just want to end it because you feel the special kids should just go home"
No, the bench was emptied. And they did call off the dogs, they only scored 12 points in the 4th quarter.
As someone who's been on the wrong end of some blowouts before (losing a basketball 72-12) - as long as you're on the floor, you compete. The idea that an opponent's going to start dogging out of pity is insulting to the game and the losing team, just as much as if the winning team were showboating.
It's basically the winning team saying "Hey, you losers aren't worth our full effort. We don't even have to try in order to beat you, so we won't."
Yes, it's called putting in your third stringers, and if his third stringers were still scoring like that, well, there's not anything you can really do.
I've seen it elsewhere that this guy was running a press nearly the entire game.
If that's at all accurate, he's a dick beyond my level of comprehension.
See, this is my issue. There's running up the score. And then there's intentionally sucking, which is always very obvious and would make the other kids feel like shit.
They were up 59-0 at half time. So in half the game the other team hadn't scored a single basket. They went back and nearly doubled their score. That doesn't sound like they backed off at all. Isn't there a middle ground between running up the score and giving up?
Like, for instance, not going for any more 3-pointers? Hasn't anybody heard of point-shaving? It's perfectly possible to subtly reduce the margin of victory without "throwing" the game or intentionally "sucking." Sure, it'd still be a blowout but perhaps not 100-0.
This reminds me of my high school's first season playing football (it was a new school)...for whatever reason we were playing 5A varsity football despite having something like 100 seniors, and not that many more juniors (students who had begun at another school in the district were given the option to remain...our freshman class was more like 500).
So we had sophomores and maybe some freshmen composing a lot of our team.
It was ugly.
Most of our losses were of the 50+ to <10 variety, and after a few games half our team was on crutches. They dropped us to JV. The cool part? The school that had chosen us for an easy homecoming win was all pissed off that now they didn't get to play a varsity game, so they found some way to drop half their varsity players down for homecoming or some shit. That wasn't pretty either.
Then there was a friend's brother, who basically told us before his school played ours that he was going to see how many of our players he could hurt in a single game. High school sports can be pretty fucked up.
I've heard about this but I honestly want more information on how the game was played. It makes a difference if the players were playing aggresively the whole game or not, if all his players played in the game, what type of shots his players were taking during the game. You can just completely outclass the team you are playing against and end up with a lopsided score. If they were playing respectful and ended up with that score, fair enough, if they weren't then I don't feel bad about the guy being let go for it.
Lots of three pointers, apparently.
I'm rather confused what you would have the team do. Do the absolute minimum required to avoid the time based penalties then pass the ball to the other team? That's more disrespectful to the other team than simply treating them like real opposition.
I don't understand why the game happened in the first place but if it was going to happen treating your opponent with kid gloves is a fuck ton more discriminatory than engaging them like real competition.
It's possible to go at 80% or 50% of your normal aggressiveness on offense and how hard you are playing defense without just standing aside and letting them shoot layups. I think it's pretty disrespectful to run up the score and act like you're doing something amazing when you're really just obviously outclassing the other side.
Medopine on
0
Options
Nova_CI have the needThe need for speedRegistered Userregular
See, this is my issue. There's running up the score. And then there's intentionally sucking, which is always very obvious and would make the other kids feel like shit.
They were up 59-0 at half time. So in half the game the other team hadn't scored a single basket. They went back and nearly doubled their score. That doesn't sound like they backed off at all. Isn't there a middle ground between running up the score and giving up?
Typically it's aggression level. I'd agree that if they were doing the intentionally fouls if another player got near the basket and all that clock management shit it's a bit much.
However you seem to be assuming that the gross mismatch in skills wasn't apparent very early on. 59 points might have been 2 minutes of hard play followed by 14 of "What the fuck are we doing here?"
Is it just me, or are people not reading this thread?
The crowd and the assistant coach were driving them to score 100 points in a single game. That doesn't sound at all like what you suggest.
Yes, it's called putting in your third stringers, and if his third stringers were still scoring like that, well, there's not anything you can really do.
I've seen it elsewhere that this guy was running a press nearly the entire game.
If that's at all accurate, he's a dick beyond my level of comprehension.
I've heard about this but I honestly want more information on how the game was played. It makes a difference if the players were playing aggresively the whole game or not, if all his players played in the game, what type of shots his players were taking during the game. You can just completely outclass the team you are playing against and end up with a lopsided score. If they were playing respectful and ended up with that score, fair enough, if they weren't then I don't feel bad about the guy being let go for it.
Lots of three pointers, apparently.
I'm rather confused what you would have the team do. Do the absolute minimum required to avoid the time based penalties then pass the ball to the other team? That's more disrespectful to the other team than simply treating them like real opposition.
I don't understand why the game happened in the first place but if it was going to happen treating your opponent with kid gloves is a fuck ton more discriminatory than engaging them like real competition.
Well they were playing a full court press for most of the game, which is #1 indication that this was a major dick move. Playing half court D (which is what most teams do for most of most games) would have been nice. Also, raining down trey balls like an angry god when you're up by 60 might be in poor taste. Slow down the fast break, run some plays and get some layups. It's hard not to score when you're playing people that bad, but it's also hard to be any MORE of a dick than this team was.
matisyahu on
i dont even like matisyahu and i dont know why i picked this username
Well it's basically a no win situation, and we're missing information. Was he playing first stringers til the end of the game, or did he let everyone on the team play?
If he had asked to end the game early, you can bet that people would have seen it as an insult, too. "Oh, you just want to end it because you feel the special kids should just go home"
No, the bench was emptied. And they did call off the dogs, they only scored 12 points in the 4th quarter.
As someone who's been on the wrong end of some blowouts before (losing a basketball 72-12) - as long as you're on the floor, you compete. The idea that an opponent's going to start dogging out of pity is insulting to the game and the losing team, just as much as if the winning team were showboating.
It's basically the winning team saying "Hey, you losers aren't worth our full effort. We don't even have to try in order to beat you, so we won't."
Or saying "hey this might be more fun for your side if the competition level was a bit less inequitable. maybe we won't run our full court press on every possession"
It's possible to go at 80% or 50% of your normal aggressiveness on offense and how hard you are playing defense without just standing aside and letting them shoot layups. I think it's pretty disrespectful to run up the score and act like you're doing something amazing when you're really just obviously outclassing the other side.
I agree with you on the "Amazing" part but you run a fine line with not giving your all between being polite and being patronizing. Assuming these other kids are stupid (unperceptive of others emotional states) because they're handicapped is pretty insulting.
Well it's basically a no win situation, and we're missing information. Was he playing first stringers til the end of the game, or did he let everyone on the team play?
If he had asked to end the game early, you can bet that people would have seen it as an insult, too. "Oh, you just want to end it because you feel the special kids should just go home"
No, the bench was emptied. And they did call off the dogs, they only scored 12 points in the 4th quarter.
As someone who's been on the wrong end of some blowouts before (losing a basketball 72-12) - as long as you're on the floor, you compete. The idea that an opponent's going to start dogging out of pity is insulting to the game and the losing team, just as much as if the winning team were showboating.
It's basically the winning team saying "Hey, you losers aren't worth our full effort. We don't even have to try in order to beat you, so we won't."
They called off the dogs, as you say, after reaching the goal of scoring 100 points in a single game. I'd call that showboating, but whatever. It seems like there isn't a middle ground between continuing to demolish an already beaten opponent and giving up altogether.
On the actual issue, if they were running up the score, that's horrible. They should be teaching hard work, fair play and sportsmanship stuff to the players as well as basketball skills.
I would've thought at a Christian school there would be even more emphasis on the sportsmanship stuff, but apparently that's not the case.
saint2e on
0
Options
VariableMouth CongressStroke Me Lady FameRegistered Userregular
since the matchup did happen, the point where it becomes wrong wrong wrong wrong is the running up of the score, which they did. you play to win, but it's not like this is a professional...
Usually when there are blowouts in NHL games, you can see the winning team back off and stop pressing for scoring chances, only scoring when they'd have to deliberately not score. And that's professional sports.
hockey you can hold the puck and be winning by not letting the other team score. in basketball you can onlu hold the ball for so long (assuming regular rules)
We are talking about a man who, instead of just politely and inconspicuously exorcizing a demon, has to show off by sending it into a bunch of pigs and then sending the pigs over a fucking cliff.
Jesus Christ ran up the pig-off-the-cliff score in his battle against Legion. Why shouldn't these girls run up the score against some retarded basketball players?
I literally laughed out loud at this post because this is so Qingu.
BTW, the demons asked Jesus to have mercy on them and put them into the pigs. Also, Jesus asked his disciples, folks he healed, etc. to not spread it around that he was the "S-O-N" of "G-O-D" *wink wink, nudge nudge*
Thanks for the laugh, though.
He tricked the fucking demons though! You think the demons WANTED to get their pig-possessing asses ran off the cliff? The whole point of the story is how badass Jesus is for totally fucking over this annoying multidemon.
Qingu on
0
Options
RentI'm always rightFuckin' deal with itRegistered Userregular
He tricked the fucking demons though! You think the demons WANTED to get their pig-possessing asses ran off the cliff? The whole point of the story is how badass Jesus is for totally fucking over this annoying multidemon.
The winning school didn't even pull their starters unil they were like, 88 points ahead.
So, like 3/4ths of the way through the game. This seemed incredibly deliberate. They were clearly stat running.
Sentry on
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
wrote:
When I was a little kid, I always pretended I was the hero,' Skip said.
'Fuck yeah, me too. What little kid ever pretended to be part of the lynch-mob?'
They called off the dogs, as you say, after reaching the goal of scoring 100 points in a single game. I'd call that showboating, but whatever. It seems like there isn't a middle ground between continuing to demolish an already beaten opponent and giving up altogether.
Seriously, think about it for a second...what are the odds that they'd manage to score exactly 100 points (I presume that was the actual score, from the OP) if they weren't intentionally running the score to that point?
mcdermott on
0
Options
RentI'm always rightFuckin' deal with itRegistered Userregular
Don't teams with huge leads in professional sports generally back off just to avoid the risk of pointless injuries, though? Doesn't seem like it'd be an issue here.
I hadn't thought of that.
Part of it's also because pro players have idiotic notions of machismo that somehow equate losing by 30 to insulting each other's manhood, which leads to fights and cheap shots.
It's possible to go at 80% or 50% of your normal aggressiveness on offense and how hard you are playing defense without just standing aside and letting them shoot layups. I think it's pretty disrespectful to run up the score and act like you're doing something amazing when you're really just obviously outclassing the other side.
I agree with you on the "Amazing" part but you run a fine line with not giving your all between being polite and being patronizing. Assuming these other kids are stupid (unperceptive of others emotional states) because they're handicapped is pretty insulting.
What? Who said that?
I'm talking about basketball ability here. The fact that the other side had learning disabilities probably doesn't have much to do with why they weren't a very good basketball team, and it's kinda irrelevant to me.
It's possible to go at 80% or 50% of your normal aggressiveness on offense and how hard you are playing defense without just standing aside and letting them shoot layups. I think it's pretty disrespectful to run up the score and act like you're doing something amazing when you're really just obviously outclassing the other side.
I agree with you on the "Amazing" part but you run a fine line with not giving your all between being polite and being patronizing. Assuming these other kids are stupid (unperceptive of others emotional states) because they're handicapped is pretty insulting.
What? Who said that?
I'm talking about basketball ability here. The fact that the other side had learning disabilities probably doesn't have much to do with why they weren't a very good basketball team, and it's kinda irrelevant to me.
He's saying that you're implying that the other team wouldn't realize that the winning team was going easy on them.
You can still play the game when you are up that much, you just don't play it like you are rubbing it in and have something to prove. Blowouts will always happen, but you can play respectfully when blowing out another team.
since the matchup did happen, the point where it becomes wrong wrong wrong wrong is the running up of the score, which they did. you play to win, but it's not like this is a professional...
Usually when there are blowouts in NHL games, you can see the winning team back off and stop pressing for scoring chances, only scoring when they'd have to deliberately not score. And that's professional sports.
hockey you can hold the puck and be winning by not letting the other team score. in basketball you can onlu hold the ball for so long (assuming regular rules)
Delay of Game is actually a penalty in Hockey. And IIRC High School and under don't have shot clocks.
You can still play the game when you are up that much, you just don't play it like you are rubbing it in and have something to prove. Blowouts will always happen, but you can play respectfully when blowing out another team.
Well, the winning coach could have given his second and third stringers some game time. Seriously, keeping your first string in for that long is unconscionable.
Sentry on
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
wrote:
When I was a little kid, I always pretended I was the hero,' Skip said.
'Fuck yeah, me too. What little kid ever pretended to be part of the lynch-mob?'
since the matchup did happen, the point where it becomes wrong wrong wrong wrong is the running up of the score, which they did. you play to win, but it's not like this is a professional...
Usually when there are blowouts in NHL games, you can see the winning team back off and stop pressing for scoring chances, only scoring when they'd have to deliberately not score. And that's professional sports.
hockey you can hold the puck and be winning by not letting the other team score. in basketball you can onlu hold the ball for so long (assuming regular rules)
Delay of Game is actually a penalty in Hockey. And IIRC High School and under don't have shot clocks.
Side note: Delay of Game in hockey is if you shoot the puck over the glass into the stands, without there being some sort of deflection or a shot on goal involved.
</Canadian>
But I agree, there are ways to play the game without scoring all the time.
since the matchup did happen, the point where it becomes wrong wrong wrong wrong is the running up of the score, which they did. you play to win, but it's not like this is a professional...
Usually when there are blowouts in NHL games, you can see the winning team back off and stop pressing for scoring chances, only scoring when they'd have to deliberately not score. And that's professional sports.
hockey you can hold the puck and be winning by not letting the other team score. in basketball you can onlu hold the ball for so long (assuming regular rules)
Delay of Game is actually a penalty in Hockey. And IIRC High School and under don't have shot clocks.
Side note: Delay of Game in hockey is if you shoot the puck over the glass into the stands, without there being some sort of deflection or a shot on goal involved.
</Canadian>
But I agree, there are ways to play the game without scoring all the time.
You can also get a delay of game from other things. Falling on a puck in the crease as a non-goaliee. Playing the puck outside of the crease/behind the crease area as a goaliee. And the one I was referencing in that post, not moving the puck if an official tells you to move the puck.
Posts
I want to know how long this team's quarters are though, so I can use math to see how often they were scoring points.
They were up 59-0 at half time. So in half the game the other team hadn't scored a single basket. They went back and nearly doubled their score. That doesn't sound like they backed off at all. Isn't there a middle ground between running up the score and giving up?
I didn't see that in the OP?
....12 points in 8 minutes is really rather low, especially the last 8 minutes of a basketball game.
There are other sources of information than the OP. I didn't see the OP saying any of the girls quit either, but you were happy to leap to that assumption.
Typically it's aggression level. I'd agree that if they were doing the intentionally fouls if another player got near the basket and all that clock management shit it's a bit much.
However you seem to be assuming that the gross mismatch in skills wasn't apparent very early on. 59 points might have been 2 minutes of hard play followed by 14 of "What the fuck are we doing here?"
This made me laugh and laugh and laugh
In response to the OP: Eh. Game shouldn't have happened. I personally don't believe that my opponents should play easier just to make me feel better, that's more humiliating than just running up the score
But that's just me
I should be offended but goddamn this is funny
It seemed like the logical implication of your statement.
Sports aren't really my thing. I don't even know how leagues work.
No, the bench was emptied. And they did call off the dogs, they only scored 12 points in the 4th quarter.
As someone who's been on the wrong end of some blowouts before (losing a basketball 72-12) - as long as you're on the floor, you compete. The idea that an opponent's going to start dogging out of pity is insulting to the game and the losing team, just as much as if the winning team were showboating.
It's basically the winning team saying "Hey, you losers aren't worth our full effort. We don't even have to try in order to beat you, so we won't."
If that's at all accurate, he's a dick beyond my level of comprehension.
They tried to bury us. They didn't know that we were seeds. 2018 Midterms. Get your shit together.
Like, for instance, not going for any more 3-pointers? Hasn't anybody heard of point-shaving? It's perfectly possible to subtly reduce the margin of victory without "throwing" the game or intentionally "sucking." Sure, it'd still be a blowout but perhaps not 100-0.
This reminds me of my high school's first season playing football (it was a new school)...for whatever reason we were playing 5A varsity football despite having something like 100 seniors, and not that many more juniors (students who had begun at another school in the district were given the option to remain...our freshman class was more like 500).
So we had sophomores and maybe some freshmen composing a lot of our team.
It was ugly.
Most of our losses were of the 50+ to <10 variety, and after a few games half our team was on crutches. They dropped us to JV. The cool part? The school that had chosen us for an easy homecoming win was all pissed off that now they didn't get to play a varsity game, so they found some way to drop half their varsity players down for homecoming or some shit. That wasn't pretty either.
Then there was a friend's brother, who basically told us before his school played ours that he was going to see how many of our players he could hurt in a single game. High school sports can be pretty fucked up.
Is it just me, or are people not reading this thread?
The crowd and the assistant coach were driving them to score 100 points in a single game. That doesn't sound at all like what you suggest.
Wow, that's fucking terrible.
Well they were playing a full court press for most of the game, which is #1 indication that this was a major dick move. Playing half court D (which is what most teams do for most of most games) would have been nice. Also, raining down trey balls like an angry god when you're up by 60 might be in poor taste. Slow down the fast break, run some plays and get some layups. It's hard not to score when you're playing people that bad, but it's also hard to be any MORE of a dick than this team was.
Or saying "hey this might be more fun for your side if the competition level was a bit less inequitable. maybe we won't run our full court press on every possession"
I agree with you on the "Amazing" part but you run a fine line with not giving your all between being polite and being patronizing. Assuming these other kids are stupid (unperceptive of others emotional states) because they're handicapped is pretty insulting.
Groups of people are stupid assholes. I'd be kinda shocked if the crowd didn't.
They called off the dogs, as you say, after reaching the goal of scoring 100 points in a single game. I'd call that showboating, but whatever. It seems like there isn't a middle ground between continuing to demolish an already beaten opponent and giving up altogether.
I would've thought at a Christian school there would be even more emphasis on the sportsmanship stuff, but apparently that's not the case.
hockey you can hold the puck and be winning by not letting the other team score. in basketball you can onlu hold the ball for so long (assuming regular rules)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EWuji6TADXM
So, like 3/4ths of the way through the game. This seemed incredibly deliberate. They were clearly stat running.
Shit was, not exaggerating, the most disappointing movie I've ever seen in my entire life.
Seriously, think about it for a second...what are the odds that they'd manage to score exactly 100 points (I presume that was the actual score, from the OP) if they weren't intentionally running the score to that point?
It's the Passion of the Christ 2
You should watch it dude it's pretty friggin' hilarious
Let he who is without sin kick the first ass
Part of it's also because pro players have idiotic notions of machismo that somehow equate losing by 30 to insulting each other's manhood, which leads to fights and cheap shots.
What? Who said that?
I'm talking about basketball ability here. The fact that the other side had learning disabilities probably doesn't have much to do with why they weren't a very good basketball team, and it's kinda irrelevant to me.
He's saying that you're implying that the other team wouldn't realize that the winning team was going easy on them.
Delay of Game is actually a penalty in Hockey. And IIRC High School and under don't have shot clocks.
Well, the winning coach could have given his second and third stringers some game time. Seriously, keeping your first string in for that long is unconscionable.
Side note: Delay of Game in hockey is if you shoot the puck over the glass into the stands, without there being some sort of deflection or a shot on goal involved.
</Canadian>
But I agree, there are ways to play the game without scoring all the time.
I'd be more upset that somebody pulled their punches so to speak than ended up whooping my ass.
You can also get a delay of game from other things. Falling on a puck in the crease as a non-goaliee. Playing the puck outside of the crease/behind the crease area as a goaliee. And the one I was referencing in that post, not moving the puck if an official tells you to move the puck.
</Michigander>