One thing I think is interesting about the comments is that a lot of former h.s. athletes are saying their coaches encouraged them to win, and win hard. I am pretty sure that almost all of us had coaches who wanted us to win. (I still remember the way our volleyball coach screamed at us after we basically gave the last three points of the game to the other team.) I also hated to lose. I had times when I was on the team that lost badly and it was painful and bruising to the ego.
Like I said, I don't think any coach out there hates winning and loves to lose. If they did they wouldn't be in sports.
But the other thing we were taught was that sports was about a hell of a lot more than winning and physicality. It was also about teamwork, self-confidence, pride and respect, not only for yourself and your teammates but also for the other team. I have to say, I am really glad I never played for a coach that would have encouraged running the score up like this, because for me, winning was only icing on the cake of sports. The real prize was the respect I had for myself and others. Playing a game like the one mentioned in the OP is about as far from having respect for others as it gets.
I have to agree with the "poor sportsmanship" camp on this one. I mean, if I were on that winning team, I wouldn't feel any sense of accomplishment for having beaten them 100-0. I'd be wondering if I was playing for the Globetrotters.
On the one hand, I think that if you're on the winning team and you're in the kind of situation where you know you're going to obliterate the other team no matter what, it's a tough spot.
The other team knows you're pulling punches, and that's even more embarrassing than losing 100-1.
I'd rather get completely destroyed by a team playing their hardest, than get sorta beat by a team who put their subs and third string in to make it not such a blowout.
The real thing that pisses me off is: How was this game even allowed to happen in the first place? This is why teams have different levels of play, like AA or B or C, or in high school, Varsity or JV or whatever. The two teams here had no business being in the same league with each other at all. This game should never have happened. I think that both teams should just strike it from their records, as if it never did happen. It was a mistake made by the administration of the league and the coaches to put those 2 teams against each other. The players shouldn't have to suffer.
@DeeJayQueue: We used to play an inner-city school in soccer that had no field to practice on, and was just generally horrible and inexperienced. I came from a suburb of soccer moms where everyone started playing soccer when they were in kindergarten. However, we had to meet because they were in our league, and league is determined (in my area) solely by school size. And really, they were gracious losers and had fun I hope, but our coach looked at it as an opportunity to throw in players who didn't get a lot of time (ha, me), and have her players practice new skills. She would have KILLED us if we ran up the score. Of course, it's easier to "miss the goal" in soccer than in basketball, while still playing a somewhat decent game. I will say, that school got better every year we played against them, and who knows, maybe they eventually developed a decent program. They had to start somewhere and play someone, ya know?
Running up the score is considered poor sportsmanship for players of both sexes in every sport from little league to NFL football. It's not new; it has nothing to do with having a lame "everyone's a winner" attitude; and people get mad when boys do it, too. In fact, we complained about our varsity football team doing this just a few months ago.
Once it's clear that your opponent is horribly outmatched, you take out your starters and send in the B team to play a good game.
Actually, a lot of places have a mercy rule where if a team is ahead by a certain number of points they call the game.
And ladies it's not just for girl sports. There's a Mercy Rule in football (you know, a sport which is mostly played be men)where if a team is ahead by 35 points in the second half, the clock runs continuously to lesson the humiliation of the other team.In Connecticut in high school football a coach can be fined if he keeps running up the point count after a 50 point lead.
So, those who are claiming that this is sexiest, obviously have no idea what they're talking about because other male dominated sports have LONG taken this into consideration.
So...if one team clearly out plays the other. Is leaps and bounds ahead of them in talent. They are expected to "pull back" and stop scoring? They should play to the worst of their ability rather than the best? So the other team doesn't get their feelings hurt?
I'm sorry. Fuck that. In the real world, when you are the best, you ARE THE BEST. You don't hold back and be all "Ohh, I'm just so good at my job, and Katie is terrible. I think I'll just stop working hard for the rest of the week so she doesn't feel bad."
Win. Win HARD. You don't gotta dunk on the losers, but keep scoring and if the other team doesn't like it then they should learn how to play BETTER and maybe get a new fucking coach.
I hate this "everybody is a winner" crap. Everybody is NOT a winner. Sometimes you lose and you lose baaaad! Call me mean and old fashioned, but this is not how we played the game back in my day.
@lawschoolmakesmecrazy: That's exactly how the world works, that's why I'm blown away by a mercy rule. There was no mercy rule for me to get my degrees, my job, or anything I've ever acquired in the world....and as far as what I encounter in day-to-day life, I know the "ruthless rule" is the one that's going on out here in the world.
@oh.geez.: Exactly. It does kids absolutely no good to teach them not to work to the best of their ability. That's not sportsmanship, it's ridiculous and way too touchy-feely-kumbaya. When I was growing up, back in the 80s and 90s, I played sports and cheered and did theater and dance and we were taught to work our hardest, to go full out on game day/performances.
@lawschoolmakesmecrazy: Part of the problem with that idea is that those girls (on the losing team) very well may have been playing to their absolute best. Unless you attend the practices, you never know hard a team is working. The winning team could have put in their second and third string girls and STILL have won by 50. And seriously, no one would say losing by ONLY 50 teaches kids that it's ok not to work hard.
I played sports all through the 90's, and we definitely had a mercy rule.... losing by more than 10 in softball is a hard blow and rubbing it in isn't doing anyone a great favor. Any team down by a huge margin will KNOW they have played poorly and that the other team is better. The other team doesn't have to give up entirely, but can change its game tactics to be more experimental, or use the time to let non-starters play or have people try new positions. I for one don't think everyone is a winner, and was taught to work my ass of to succeed, but sportsmanship requires a bit of perspective, respect and class.
@lawschoolmakesmecrazy: Well let's see. Life and sports in general are not the same exact thing. When life is an individual event, like, say, ranking at law school, rip the pages out of the books that your peers/(competition) need, give them fake notes if they miss class, try to convince them they should be drinking when they are studying, because ranking is an individual thing for sure. And wow, you'll make sooo many friends! The same with a track meet, slip some rat poison in the competitor's drink, trip her if she tries to pass you, etc., because all that matters is your time, and finishing first, like law school rankings!
But basketball, now this is a team sport. Kind of like countries fighting each other! Now, when you know for sure that one country, say, America, has officially won the war, there is no way its enemy, say, Canada can win, the US should probably stop bombing the shit out of Canadian cities. There is no reason to keep bombing! Because the win/loss column is all that matters, not the number of casualties! So, it is kind of similar with basketball, no need to keep the full court press on after you've determined you've won the game!
@goldengirl11 (is way too earnest): That's exactly it. Don't compare "TEH REAL WORLD" to high school sports. Playing against a team that is WAY worse than you is NOT "working to the best of your abilities." More than likely, you're playing MUCH worse than you would be against a team that was your equal, or was better than you.
Should they have stopped scoring all together after 30 points? No, that would have been dumb and condescending. But 100-0? Unnecessary, and unless you've been on a team that has the misfortune to play against a coach (and it's almost always the coach) who urges his girls to keep working despite the margin, it seems, from these comments, that you won't understand how much damage this does.
If this was a pro league, who gives a fuck. But it's high school. Or it's middle school. Or it's community rec league. Either way, it's embarrassing - for both teams.
@f-words: I kind of don't believe you. It sounds like poor coaching, that the team just "let up" and didn't get back with it when their lead was diminishing. That is an entirely different thing. In high school football, the mercy rule means letting the clock run continuously, to get the game over faster. An incomplete pass, for example, won't stop the clock if the score is more than 35. If the score differential drops below this, then the clock runs regularly again. It is hard to imagine how football's "mercy rule" caused your team to lose.
Also, I am sure this fear was really on the mind of the coach that was still using full-court press when the game ws 98-0.
@goldengirl11 (is way too earnest): And I am definitely NOT a winner at using the computer. This was a response to f-words, ack! And the second time I've done this tonight. And I'm not even drunk. Christ.
@lawschoolmakesmecrazy: I gotta say, the main real-life application I took away from playing sports wasn't working hard (that I got from my actual school work and my actual job) as much as it was how to work well with others so you can accomplish a goal together. So I can't say I am seeing your parallel there.
And frankly, if it was like real life, I'd think it was bad form to treat people like that in the workplace as well. Just because you are better than other people at a particular skill does not mean you get to be an ass about it, you know?
I tell story to acquaintance, I mention the beaten team had disorders like dyslexia, acquaintance says, "so they read the scoreboard and thought they were up by 100." I laughed. We're terrible people.
Many people are saying that the girls from Dallas Academy were from a special needs school, which is correct, but I think it's being misinterpreted. Dallas Academy apparently teaches students with specific learning difficulties, like dyslexia. As a teacher with several students with learning difficulties like dyslexia, I can confidently say that they are no less capable at sports than any other child. In fact, for many of them sports are a source of pride and accomplishment, when school can otherwise be the cause of frustration and embarrassment.
The reason this school's girls' basketball team has not been successful is that it is a very small school, with only 20 girls in the high school. Such a small pool of athletes almost certainly ensures that they will not be able to compete against bigger schools.
Regardless of the specifics of the game, I think it's more important that these young women learn to embrace their talents, whilst also learning to be gracious and considerate of others. It doesn't mean that girls should self-sabotage, just that a win of 100-0 is unnecessary.
It's almost certain that the girls from Dallas Academy will read media coverage of this story. Please don't insult them by saying that the issue is that they are from a special needs school, and therefore somehow deserving of pity.
@R-Star: Thanks. I just looked them up and I agree. This isn't a school for physically or mentally handicapped children. It's for kids who learn differently. It shouldn't impact their ability to compete.
The school is so small it plays 6 man football. I'm surprised they have varsity and JV squads.
Interestingly, the winning team's school athletic web page does not explicitly list "sportsmanship" as a program goal (although one could interpret no. 8 that way). [www.covenantdallas.com]
@Jamie Sommers: Yeah, in the article I read about this, the coach specifically said that the players did not behave in a Christ-like way by running up the score. I guess the answer to the popular question of what would Jesus do is not run up the score and humiliate the other team.
Can someone please clarify something for me? I keep reading comments that they were playing disabled kids but one person said the school specializes in dyslexic and other learning disabled children.
I wouldn't think a learning disability would affect athletic ability. There are several famous athletes with learning disabilities like Bruce Jenner, Nolan Ryan and Greg Louganis.
@Jamie Sommers: i don't know the facts about it, but other articles i've read have given me the sense that they're glossing over the extent of the kid's disabilities.
@Jamie Sommers: I just made a comment about this a few posts up. I agree; the only thing I can surmise is that the girls may have had a difficult time earlier on in school and not participated in sports and developed the skills? Or, they did and they just weren't very good. But I agree, it doesn't seem that the players had physical or developmental disabilities.
@jollydolly: It's more -- imagine you work in a lab with 19 other women, all of you with PhDs in molecular biology. Across the street is a large corporate office with 100 women working there in a great variety of jobs. They challenge you to a game of basketball: your best 5 players against their best 5 players. Which office has the better chance of putting a talented basketball team together?
@Erinthebitch: Because they are kids. Because life does not require a person to be a jerk every minute of every day to get ahead. Because being gracious in victory is a great attribute.
@nwporn: Are you automatically assuming these kids were some head-butting, obnoxious assholes? I've seen that kind of athlete (and coach), but you can win without the bully behavior along with it. I never paid attention to opponents, except to try to beat them. Your remarks sound like you've seen teams that TRY to hurt other people's feelings when they won. To me, it's not personal. You win. You lose. You walk up to the net, shake hands, say they played well- and go on about your business. I understand the comments about a mercy rule, but "be a jerk every minute of the day". Where did that come from?
Ummm . . . I read an article about this, and the reason that the team who won is seeking to apologize . . . is because the team they were playing against was from a school that teaches learning deficient kids. Their team hasn't won a game in 4 seasons. So the team seeking to apologize, is seeking to apologize because they took advantage of a somewhat unfair situation. It was a given they were going to win. They went overyboard.
Holy shit, 100-0 in a basketball game? How did that even happen? I would think if nothing else, there would be a few foul shots in a game with that much action. Wow.
If the score was 59-0 at halftime, they obviously did slow down in the second half, but...it's basketball! There is a shot clock, and you have to shoot and I don't think throwing up airballs is the answer. If they were hotdogging it, that's deplorable, but if you have to shoot, it's fair to take your best shot.
If the league didn't have a mercy rule, and the coach was already playing the scrubs, I don't know what else the winning team could do. Even if I was down by 100, I would not want pity points. I'd want to earn them.
@o português é muito sexy is now a 20-something: The Dallas Academy website says it "a structured multisensory program for students with diagnosed learning differences in grades 3-12."
I am not an educator, so I'm unsure if there's a difference between "special needs" and "learning differences," but it seems if they were girls who were just dyslexic and dysgraphic.
And if they really weren't mentally capable of competing against Covenant, then the DA coach should not have scheduled that game, and should take some of the blame.
@o português é muito sexy is now a 20-something: Not necessarily. If a parent can afford to send a student with specific learning difficulties to a specialized school, they'll do it. I teach at a private school which has a special programme for students with dyslexia. Parents who already pay full tuition costs pay extra for their children to be part of that programme. Students with dyslexia often get lost in a system that isn't equipped to deal with their specific learning styles, so if the parent has the means, I can understand why they would want to give their child the opportunity to learn in an understanding environment. Additionally, I think it's insensitive to refer to these students as having "disabilities" without solid information to back up that assertion. Many of my dyslexic students are some of the most creative, hard-working, and able students in the class. But both they and I have learned techniques to help them.
Well now, I just read some of the other comments. Why exactly, is it considered bad sportsmanship to beat the crap out of an opponent? I played sports in school (tennis, volleyball)- but we were taught to go for the win like a bullet. "Sportsmanship" wasn't put to us on these terms. But, it seems like a lot of you learned it another way. But, maybe it's different depending on when you came of age(?).
@oh.geez.: the bad sportsmanship in this case is because the losing team was comprised entirely of special needs kids. the winning team was going to win anyway, but the girls went way overboard.
@oh.geez.: I can't speak to why your coach allowed you to do that in volleyball, but tennis is a little different because it is an individualized sport, and you are ranked within your team. You can measure each individual's accomplishment through how well she does in her matches, and unlike even track, there is an obvious ranking and hierarchy (first/second singles, doubles, etc.). So there is actually a point to playing for blood, at least most of the time.
01/24/09
Like I said, I don't think any coach out there hates winning and loves to lose. If they did they wouldn't be in sports.
But the other thing we were taught was that sports was about a hell of a lot more than winning and physicality. It was also about teamwork, self-confidence, pride and respect, not only for yourself and your teammates but also for the other team. I have to say, I am really glad I never played for a coach that would have encouraged running the score up like this, because for me, winning was only icing on the cake of sports. The real prize was the respect I had for myself and others. Playing a game like the one mentioned in the OP is about as far from having respect for others as it gets.
01/23/09
01/23/09
On the one hand, I think that if you're on the winning team and you're in the kind of situation where you know you're going to obliterate the other team no matter what, it's a tough spot.
The other team knows you're pulling punches, and that's even more embarrassing than losing 100-1.
I'd rather get completely destroyed by a team playing their hardest, than get sorta beat by a team who put their subs and third string in to make it not such a blowout.
The real thing that pisses me off is: How was this game even allowed to happen in the first place? This is why teams have different levels of play, like AA or B or C, or in high school, Varsity or JV or whatever. The two teams here had no business being in the same league with each other at all. This game should never have happened. I think that both teams should just strike it from their records, as if it never did happen. It was a mistake made by the administration of the league and the coaches to put those 2 teams against each other. The players shouldn't have to suffer.
01/23/09
01/23/09
Once it's clear that your opponent is horribly outmatched, you take out your starters and send in the B team to play a good game.
It's called not being an asshole.
01/24/09
01/23/09
And ladies it's not just for girl sports. There's a Mercy Rule in football (you know, a sport which is mostly played be men)where if a team is ahead by 35 points in the second half, the clock runs continuously to lesson the humiliation of the other team.In Connecticut in high school football a coach can be fined if he keeps running up the point count after a 50 point lead.
So, those who are claiming that this is sexiest, obviously have no idea what they're talking about because other male dominated sports have LONG taken this into consideration.
01/23/09
I'm sorry. Fuck that. In the real world, when you are the best, you ARE THE BEST. You don't hold back and be all "Ohh, I'm just so good at my job, and Katie is terrible. I think I'll just stop working hard for the rest of the week so she doesn't feel bad."
Win. Win HARD. You don't gotta dunk on the losers, but keep scoring and if the other team doesn't like it then they should learn how to play BETTER and maybe get a new fucking coach.
I hate this "everybody is a winner" crap. Everybody is NOT a winner. Sometimes you lose and you lose baaaad! Call me mean and old fashioned, but this is not how we played the game back in my day.
01/23/09
01/23/09
01/23/09
I played sports all through the 90's, and we definitely had a mercy rule.... losing by more than 10 in softball is a hard blow and rubbing it in isn't doing anyone a great favor. Any team down by a huge margin will KNOW they have played poorly and that the other team is better. The other team doesn't have to give up entirely, but can change its game tactics to be more experimental, or use the time to let non-starters play or have people try new positions. I for one don't think everyone is a winner, and was taught to work my ass of to succeed, but sportsmanship requires a bit of perspective, respect and class.
01/23/09
But basketball, now this is a team sport. Kind of like countries fighting each other! Now, when you know for sure that one country, say, America, has officially won the war, there is no way its enemy, say, Canada can win, the US should probably stop bombing the shit out of Canadian cities. There is no reason to keep bombing! Because the win/loss column is all that matters, not the number of casualties! So, it is kind of similar with basketball, no need to keep the full court press on after you've determined you've won the game!
01/23/09
Should they have stopped scoring all together after 30 points? No, that would have been dumb and condescending. But 100-0? Unnecessary, and unless you've been on a team that has the misfortune to play against a coach (and it's almost always the coach) who urges his girls to keep working despite the margin, it seems, from these comments, that you won't understand how much damage this does.
If this was a pro league, who gives a fuck. But it's high school. Or it's middle school. Or it's community rec league. Either way, it's embarrassing - for both teams.
01/23/09
Also, I am sure this fear was really on the mind of the coach that was still using full-court press when the game ws 98-0.
01/23/09
01/24/09
And frankly, if it was like real life, I'd think it was bad form to treat people like that in the workplace as well. Just because you are better than other people at a particular skill does not mean you get to be an ass about it, you know?
01/23/09
01/23/09
The reason this school's girls' basketball team has not been successful is that it is a very small school, with only 20 girls in the high school. Such a small pool of athletes almost certainly ensures that they will not be able to compete against bigger schools.
Regardless of the specifics of the game, I think it's more important that these young women learn to embrace their talents, whilst also learning to be gracious and considerate of others. It doesn't mean that girls should self-sabotage, just that a win of 100-0 is unnecessary.
It's almost certain that the girls from Dallas Academy will read media coverage of this story. Please don't insult them by saying that the issue is that they are from a special needs school, and therefore somehow deserving of pity.
01/23/09
[www.dallas-academy.com]
The school is so small it plays 6 man football. I'm surprised they have varsity and JV squads.
Interestingly, the winning team's school athletic web page does not explicitly list "sportsmanship" as a program goal (although one could interpret no. 8 that way). [www.covenantdallas.com]
01/23/09
01/23/09
I wouldn't think a learning disability would affect athletic ability. There are several famous athletes with learning disabilities like Bruce Jenner, Nolan Ryan and Greg Louganis.
01/23/09
01/23/09
01/24/09
01/23/09
01/23/09
01/23/09
01/23/09
01/23/09
01/23/09
01/23/09
If the score was 59-0 at halftime, they obviously did slow down in the second half, but...it's basketball! There is a shot clock, and you have to shoot and I don't think throwing up airballs is the answer. If they were hotdogging it, that's deplorable, but if you have to shoot, it's fair to take your best shot.
If the league didn't have a mercy rule, and the coach was already playing the scrubs, I don't know what else the winning team could do. Even if I was down by 100, I would not want pity points. I'd want to earn them.
01/23/09
01/23/09
01/23/09
I am not an educator, so I'm unsure if there's a difference between "special needs" and "learning differences," but it seems if they were girls who were just dyslexic and dysgraphic.
And if they really weren't mentally capable of competing against Covenant, then the DA coach should not have scheduled that game, and should take some of the blame.
01/23/09
01/23/09
01/23/09
01/23/09
01/23/09
01/23/09