Come on if the starters stayed after that kind of half the coach would be endangering his players. Losing team deserves some retribution outside the rules if that's allowed to continue.Un-suspend the coach, and next year move the under performing team down a tier. I cannot believe anyone feels sorry for the team that performed terribly. The starters should have stayed, well unless the winning coach wanted his bench players to get some much deserved game time too.
Having been on the losing side of this conundrum far more often than the winning, I much prefer a team to bury me than to ease up on me. The latter is no less embarassing and has the added negative of making anything I DO manage to accomplish against them meaningless.
Totally. If the losing team wouldn't accept mercy, then Bloomington, for all their apprarent skill should have toned it down and they probably could have done it compentently enough to make it subtle, that way they didn't completely humilitate the other team both ways.The final score is irrelevant in my opinion. What matters is how the score was achieved. It sounds like he ran a hard full-court press throughout the entire first half, ending it with a 103 point lead. That's just shitty. You stop pressing when you've won the game, which his team probably did within the first quarter. You don't have to coddle the other team just because your team is more skilled, but it's unethical to walk all over them. Keep playing the game, but soften up on defense. If they turn the ball over, capitalize on it, but don't attempt to create turnovers. Stop pressing, give their offense some room to breathe. Slow down and run a play for a few seconds before scoring, give their defense a chance to set up. You will humiliate a team by obliterating them and you'll humiliate them all the same by coddling, but a skilled coach can direct his players to ease up a bit without making it painful for the other team.
The final score is irrelevant in my opinion. What matters is how the score was achieved. It sounds like he ran a hard full-court press throughout the entire first half, ending it with a 103 point lead. That's just shitty. You stop pressing when you've won the game, which his team probably did within the first quarter. You don't have to coddle the other team just because your team is more skilled, but it's unethical to walk all over them. Keep playing the game, but soften up on defense. If they turn the ball over, capitalize on it, but don't attempt to create turnovers. Stop pressing, give their offense some room to breathe. Slow down and run a play for a few seconds before scoring, give their defense a chance to set up. You will humiliate a team by obliterating them and you'll humiliate them all the same by coddling, but a skilled coach can direct his players to ease up a bit without making it painful for the other team.
Totally. If the losing team wouldn't accept mercy, then Bloomington, for all their apprarent skill should have toned it down and they probably could have done it compentently enough to make it subtle, that way they didn't completely humilitate the other team both ways.
Good lord, Mr. Chung is a loser.
The final score is irrelevant in my opinion. What matters is how the score was achieved. It sounds like he ran a hard full-court press throughout the entire first half, ending it with a 103 point lead. That's just shitty. You stop pressing when you've won the game, which his team probably did within the first quarter. You don't have to coddle the other team just because your team is more skilled, but it's unethical to walk all over them. Keep playing the game, but soften up on defense. If they turn the ball over, capitalize on it, but don't attempt to create turnovers. Stop pressing, give their offense some room to breathe. Slow down and run a play for a few seconds before scoring, give their defense a chance to set up. You will humiliate a team by obliterating them and you'll humiliate them all the same by coddling, but a skilled coach can direct his players to ease up a bit without making it painful for the other team.
I know I'm in the minority, but I agree with the suspension. Children's sports should be focused on teamwork and positive sum competition at all times.
Punishing someone for doing their job too good? Is this real life?
Come on if the starters stayed after that kind of half the coach would be endangering his players. Losing team deserves some retribution outside the rules if that's allowed to continue.
A lot of people in this thread ok with the winning team not going out of their way to apply sportsmanship in such a beatdown. Sure they don't have to let up, but if they don't show sportsmanship then the other team will teach them what happens when it's not applied. Real world lessons would go both ways here.
Although for all we know they could've been dribbling out the clock and taking long jumpers while tokenly contesting shots and they truly just were that bad. 2 points with no FG's... that's pretty hard to manage even for the most incompetent.
These definitely weren't children. Teenagers playing Varsity is closer to adult than anything.
The Bloomington coach shouldn't have accepted the match (since it seems it was out of league play?) if the team was that good and they were concerned with getting beat like that. But it's probably less the coach and more the parents that complained after hearing the score.
Chung still wasn't pleased with the lack of sportsmanship, though. He made his feeling crystal clear in a report from Pete Marshall of The San Bernardino County Sun.
"People shouldn't feel sorry for my team. They should feel sorry for his team, which isn't learning the game the right way," he said.
He also questioned Anderson's approach.
"I've known him for about seven years... He's a great X's and O's coach. Ethically? Not so much," he said. "He knows what he did was wrong."
"People shouldn't feel sorry for my team," Chung said. "They should feel sorry for his team, which isn't learning the game the right way."
So your argument here is that two wrongs make a right?
It's definitely the coach of the losing team. The parents may have had a hand in it as well but that coach clearly doesn't know how to match his team appropriately nor does he know how to accept a lose gracefully after being outmatched.
I was referring to the suspension in that instance.
Women's basketball can be a struggle for particiaption. It is entirely possible for varsity players to be virtual neophytes to the game.
A huge imbalance between teams like this makes it hard to learn the game. The winning team is not being challenged and probably would learn more from scrimmaging itself while the losing team cannot get a chance to apply what they are being taught.
A friend of mine was a women's intramural basketball coach/ref. The majority of games would be 20+ scores. There was a game which was over at half where one of the losing team's players was clearly new to the game. She would travel everytime she got the ball and it was called until the game was obviously out of reach. The coach of the winning team kept ragging on my friend to call the travel after this point.
At a timeout my friend went over to the coach and told him that if he called every travel she committed she would simply quit playing the game. Common sense prevailed. I guess my point is people play sports for different reasons and it may be helpful to keep that in mind. Hopefully in the future both teams can have better suited opponents.
Isn't that the point - especially if you're in a sport at a high school level? I can understand not making all the right calls on a team of kids (5 - 10), but these are teenagers that are most likely playing because they enjoy the sport and take pride in their abilities. They absolutely should be called on the things they're doing wrong to prevent mistakes in the future.
Making someone quit the game does not seem like a good goal for a sport. I was not advocating for the high school teams to have special expections to the rules. The example I used was a women's league which was always hungry for more participants. With that being said it is not uncommon for HS programs to need to recruit players who have never played before.
The real problem here is two radically disparate teams in seperate leagues being scheduled like this.
You'll have trouble convincing everyone here that a wrong was commited in the first place. Sportsmanship and respect will be returned in kind in competitive sports. Or the lack thereof.So your argument here is that two wrongs make a right?
If someone is moving their feet illegally, they should be blown down for it. What if this was soccer and every time a ball entered the box near a player and they "instinctively" put their hands up? Would you not call that either? If they're six year olds running around, okay, but if they're playing at an organised level in an intramural? If I was on the opposing team and a player was allowed to "cheat" just because they weren't very good I'd be pissed. Maybe the opposing player is trying to get a scholarship.
Hey, math is hard, we should let the kids that don't study open their books on tests to encourage them to take math classes.
Once again, my example was from women's intramurals. As in grown women. It is hard to win games when a league folds because you cannot recruit and retain new players.
My point was that not everyone is playing for winning and scholarships even at the high school level and it could be helpful not to get caught in that assumption when discussing this.
You'll have trouble convincing everyone here that a wrong was commited in the first place. Sportsmanship and respect will be returned in kind in competitive sports. Or the lack thereof.
So we're just assuming that when girls play sports it's all about feelings and we shouldn't expect them to know what traveling is? Excuse me for assuming grown women should be competent athletes in their own right.
Once again, my example was from women's intramurals. As in grown women. It is hard to win games when a league folds because you cannot recruit and retain new players.
My point was that not everyone is playing for winning and scholarships even at the high school level and it could be helpful not to get caught in that assumption when discussing this.
I wouldnt see it as a bigger wrong if the team was a very poor winner when running up the score. Driving the lane, full court press when up by a hundred... one team has all the power in the world and if they show poor sportsmanship while doing it then the opposing team has no other option if being disrespected by the opposing team.I agree with them. What I'm pointing out is that the logic that you are employing is that you feel the winning coach/team were wrong and that because they were wrong, the losing team would be justified in taking physical action in retribution.
Responding to a loss, no matter how bad, by trying to hurt your opponents is not only wrong, and not only a bigger wrong, it's one of the worst things that a player or team can do. It's the epitome of poor sportsmanship and a pretty good sign of a poor attitude in general.
Once again, my example was from women's intramurals. As in grown women. It is hard to win games when a league folds because you cannot recruit and retain new players.
My point was that not everyone is playing for winning and scholarships even at the high school level and it could be helpful not to get caught in that assumption when discussing this.