What the hell? Ashamed and embarrased for WINNING?? That's a load of [cabbage].

 

Covenant, a private Christian school

 

They're Christians.

 

Exactly, Now I don't need to say anything. :D

What the hell? Ashamed and embarrased for WINNING?? That's a load of [cabbage].

 

Covenant, a private Christian school

 

They're Christians.

 

Exactly, Now I don't need to say anything. :D

 

 

 

I think you should because bashing just like that isn't do anything much. Sure 100-0 is kind of shameful but sometimes these incidents can be beneficial to the other team. They get owned, go back home and practice their hearts out, come back and play better. They might still come back and lose but not by 100.

:| Something tells me that most people here don't play team sports, and are gonna try to compare this to either war, or gaming (In both scenarios, you try and gain as much as possible). In a team sport you don't try to show off this much. Sure you want to be noticed just in case there is a scout or anything, but this shows poor sportsmanship of both the team and the coach. I know in waterpolo, when we had a large lead (like 6-8 points, which was rare), we would pass around the ball, and score once in a quarter.

 

Agreed. Even in soccer games, where the score differences generally never get that big (except in indoor), there is expected some level of curtosy when the game is ridiculously one sided. This generally manifests as an unspoken, and hidden (so as not to be insulting), rule among the winning team, such as a "only one-touch" rule, or maybe something like "only shoot from outside the box". If it takes breaking these rules every once in a while to make sure the other team doesn't know they're in place, then it's okay, but generally the unspoken rules created by the coach are to be followed at all times. These unspoken rules create both the kind of challenge that is necessary for a real match and a sense of sportsmanship towards the other team. It's like when the NBA player has some fun with the middle school kids- is he really going to be a jerk and go all out, or is he going to restrict himself (without saying so) to make it more fun for both teams?

 

 

 

So, ya, I don't think any of you play sports. This IS shameful, just not enough to fire a coach under normal circumstances.

Strange, when I heard it on the radio this morning I seem to recall hearing how the coach was bragging about the victory. The mercy rules are broken, a few more points at halftime and the game would have been called.

 

 

 

At a school that endeavors to teach kids Christ-like attitudes, having a coach who brags about running up the score is an embarrassment. I see no problem with them firing him for unsportsmanlike conduct. I'd be written up in an instant back when I was coaching if I did either of those acts. Coaches are supposed to teach their athletes the fundamentals of sportsmanship. If they can't do that, then they do not deserve to coach.

They took getting owned to the media, of course we should all turn the other check.

 

Here some advice, PLAY BETTER @ other team.

The only way I would disagree with the coach on this is if he didn't put JV in. If he put in his second string players and they still hit 100, then there's nothing to be said, but if he kept his starters in the whole time, then he deserves to be fired. If it was 59-0 at the half, then obviously they let up because they only scored 50 points in the second half.

Huh, something like that would never happen where I live. We're all about equality, in fact, our midterms and finals are ridiculously easy because everyone is supposed to get an A so they feel good about themselves.

 

Anyway...It's hard to tell what should've been done. If you play easy, it's condescending to the other team, but it might give them a break. If you keep playing normally, it might humiliate the other team, but it might also give them motivation. (When I play soccer and my team is at a big disadvantage, I play harder)

 

A mercy rule probably should've been used though. It's not as condescending as lightening up, but it still gives the losing team a break and saves their dignity.

 

 

 

Strange, when I heard it on the radio this morning I seem to recall hearing how the coach was bragging about the victory. The mercy rules are broken, a few more points at halftime and the game would have been called.

 

 

 

At a school that endeavors to teach kids Christ-like attitudes, having a coach who brags about running up the score is an embarrassment. I see no problem with them firing him for unsportsmanlike conduct. I'd be written up in an instant back when I was coaching if I did either of those acts. Coaches are supposed to teach their athletes the fundamentals of sportsmanship. If they can't do that, then they do not deserve to coach.

 

If it is true that he bragged, which I don't doubt, then he deserved it. Winning (despite a huge margin of victory) is not unsportsmanlike conduct, bragging is. If I get a good grade on a test, it wouldn't be unsportsmanlike unless I bragged and ridiculed people who got lousy grades, would it?

This is why you don't let fundamentalist Christians run schools, apparently you're supposed to be ashamed of the fact you're better at sports than other people.

 

 

 

If it was my call, I'd fire the principal for being such a [kitty] and firing a staff member for correctly doing his job, technically speaking couldn't the coach sue for being unfairly dismissed since he did his job? To get results and make the team perform?

 

 

 

Lionheart, in the many different team sports I've played (Rugby, Soccer, Gaelic Football, Hurling, Cricket) I've always encouraged myself and the team to create the biggest lead possible as once your get overly confident it's easy to slip up. Sportsmanship isn't laying off on the other team, it's observing the rules and not playing unfairly or dirty.

 

 

 

Your 'fundamentalist Christan' comment was very uncalled for, there is no need to bring religion into this.

 

 

 

 

 

As for all the teams you played on, thats very nice that you try and place a 'lets give 110%' kinda of attitude, but there is a point at which you look like an elitist [wagon], and thats what happened in this situation. I would say nothing is wrong if it was say a 20-100 game, as at least the other team tried, and it just shows that the winners are better. There is winning, then there is trying to demoralize another team.

Why is school sport this serious anyway?

This is why you don't let fundamentalist Christians run schools, apparently you're supposed to be ashamed of the fact you're better at sports than other people.

 

 

 

If it was my call, I'd fire the principal for being such a [kitty] and firing a staff member for correctly doing his job, technically speaking couldn't the coach sue for being unfairly dismissed since he did his job? To get results and make the team perform?

 

 

 

Lionheart, in the many different team sports I've played (Rugby, Soccer, Gaelic Football, Hurling, Cricket) I've always encouraged myself and the team to create the biggest lead possible as once your get overly confident it's easy to slip up. Sportsmanship isn't laying off on the other team, it's observing the rules and not playing unfairly or dirty.

 

 

 

Your 'fundamentalist Christan' comment was very uncalled for, there is no need to bring religion into this.

 

 

 

 

 

As for all the teams you played on, thats very nice that you try and place a 'lets give 110%' kinda of attitude, but there is a point at which you look like an elitist [wagon], and thats what happened in this situation. I would say nothing is wrong if it was say a 20-100 game, as at least the other team tried, and it just shows that the winners are better. There is winning, then there is trying to demoralize another team.

 

 

 

Well, we don't know exactly what happened during the game. For all we know, the other team stopped trying once the other team took a 10 point lead.

 

 

 

Another thing is why did the coach get fired. Obviously he could have done something, but does it not tell you something about the team, too?

 

 

 

I say the game should have ended once the team got a 30 point lead. Obviously if it was 0-30, the winners are clear.

So if the game is supposed to stop if it became too one-sided, Why didn't anyone stop it?

 

I don't know Basketball though, so I can't really be a judge on that.

 

 

 

I can say that all of that intolerance to religion crap is why I'm very close to leaving Tip.It though. Seriously guys... -.-

well 30 is still within the possibility of a come back (for high school) Id say 50 is better, but I agree on the actual point. My main problem here was that there is no reason or need to get a 100 point margin. Since they scored by half 59-41 it means they let up, but shouldnt they have realized when they had say a 30 point margin in the first half it was time to go third string and try to keep it in reason? Ive played in american soccer games where the other team was much better then us, after they got their 5 goal margin they would start putting in their jv players until it was an even field which is what this basketball team should have done.

well 30 is still within the possibility of a come back (for high school) Id say 50 is better, but I agree on the actual point. My main problem here was that there is no reason or need to get a 100 point margin. Since they scored by half 59-41 it means they let up, but shouldnt they have realized when they had say a 30 point margin in the first half it was time to go third string and try to keep it in reason? Ive played in american soccer games where the other team was much better then us, after they got their 5 goal margin they would start putting in their jv players until it was an even field which is what this basketball team should have done.

 

 

 

The thing is, its 30-0. If one team can't get any points while the other team gets 30, they're going to lose. If it was 50-80, then yeah, keep going.

This is why you don't let fundamentalist Christians run schools, apparently you're supposed to be ashamed of the fact you're better at sports than other people.

 

 

 

If it was my call, I'd fire the principal for being such a [kitty] and firing a staff member for correctly doing his job, technically speaking couldn't the coach sue for being unfairly dismissed since he did his job? To get results and make the team perform?

 

 

 

Lionheart, in the many different team sports I've played (Rugby, Soccer, Gaelic Football, Hurling, Cricket) I've always encouraged myself and the team to create the biggest lead possible as once your get overly confident it's easy to slip up. Sportsmanship isn't laying off on the other team, it's observing the rules and not playing unfairly or dirty.

 

 

 

Your 'fundamentalist Christan' comment was very uncalled for, there is no need to bring religion into this.

 

 

 

 

 

As for all the teams you played on, thats very nice that you try and place a 'lets give 110%' kinda of attitude, but there is a point at which you look like an elitist [wagon], and thats what happened in this situation. I would say nothing is wrong if it was say a 20-100 game, as at least the other team tried, and it just shows that the winners are better. There is winning, then there is trying to demoralize another team.

 

 

 

Just because I use fundamentalist along with Christians mean I disrespect all christians, but many fundamentalists I'll never see eye to eye with. The main reason they fired him was due to the school's religious ethics so eyes, I should be able to bring religion into the topic of a person fired due to the schools ethics.

 

 

 

Frankly, we just see on two different levels. I think it makes you look very elitist and arrogant when you start screwing around and essentially showing off to the other team by just passing the ball around treating them like kids. I have my opinion and you have yours on what is unsporting and elitist, we'll get nowhere arguing about it.

 

 

 

In my view, whoever organized the league fixture or what teams are in what league is more to blame than the coach, there is simply no point putting an extremely weak team into the same league as a much further superior team(s), it's just a [cabbage] time for the weak team. If it turns out the winning team is far superior to every other team within the league, then they need to be paired with teams on an equal level.

In my view, whoever organized the league fixture or what teams are in what league is more to blame than the coach, there is simply no point putting an extremely weak team into the same league as a much further superior team(s), it's just a [cabbage] time for the weak team. If it turns out the winning team is far superior to every other team within the league, then they need to be paired with teams on an equal level.

 

agreed

 

 

 

I dont see what leads you to believe the school is led by fundamentalist christians, if it is a private school that is supposed to be teaching ethical behavior I think firing a coach who allows that to happen(he would have known in advance the advantage he was going to have) falls within a reasonable action for the school staff to make.

In my view, whoever organized the league fixture or what teams are in what league is more to blame than the coach, there is simply no point putting an extremely weak team into the same league as a much further superior team(s), it's just a [cabbage] time for the weak team. If it turns out the winning team is far superior to every other team within the league, then they need to be paired with teams on an equal level.

 

agreed

 

 

 

I dont see what leads you to believe the school is led by fundamentalist christians, if it is a private school that is supposed to be teaching ethical behavior I think firing a coach who allows that to happen(he would have known in advance the advantage he was going to have) falls within a reasonable action for the school staff to make.

 

 

 

He's a coach, his job is to get results and further improve the team. He most likely broke school sporting records, gave the team a serious confidence boost and definitely showed he's achieving something with the team, if anything I'd give this guy a handshake and a "well done" at least.

 

 

 

If you can't take a beating don't play sports, honestly I hate the attitude that everyone in school sports needs to be babied, you're either good enough or not, step up or step down.

 

 

 

Question to those who do actually play sports. You play a game to the full of your potential, two situations

 

 

 

(a), you lose by a lot but leave the field knowing you played the best you could but the better team won in the end.

 

 

 

(B) you lose by a more acceptable score but full well know the team started screwing around and took it easy on you yet you still couldn't beat them.

 

 

 

What one makes you feel worse? Everytime I'd choose B, I'm not sure if that's just my general attitude or what, but when you play your best that's all you can do, lose or win. Losing to screw abouts, that's inexcusable.

theres a point where b is better then a

 

 

 

Im fine with the coach making sure the team looks good and winning by a substantial margin, 50-0 would be fine in my opinion the problem is he won by 100-0. I guarentee noone cared about that game at the end, have you ever turned on a soccer game with a score of 12-0 and decided to watch it for the thrill of two teams playing their hardest? The problem here is the level of excess he went to with that victory, if he told his players to keep going at 50-0 its fine but when you let it get that out of hand I find it disgraceful. I'm fine with blowouts and the better team has the right to win by blowout, but there is a level where it is unsporting.

 

 

 

sorry if I seem a little angry in that paragraph, I dont want to but I got the sense that I sound angry while writing it.

Well I don't take an interest in sports, but I generally assume that having a higher score is better? Unless there has been some big shake-ups in the rules of basketball, the goal of the game is to score and not be score upon. It would have been far more humiliating for the losing team if the opposing team spent the entire second half passing the ball around. Firing the coach for not babying the other team is not the way to go. If someone needs to lose their job it's whomever set up this match.

theres a point where b is better then a

 

 

 

Im fine with the coach making sure the team looks good and winning by a substantial margin, 50-0 would be fine in my opinion the problem is he won by 100-0. I guarentee noone cared about that game at the end, have you ever turned on a soccer game with a score of 12-0 and decided to watch it for the thrill of two teams playing their hardest? The problem here is the level of excess he went to with that victory, if he told his players to keep going at 50-0 its fine but when you let it get that out of hand I find it disgraceful. I'm fine with blowouts and the better team has the right to win by blowout, but there is a level where it is unsporting.

 

 

 

sorry if I seem a little angry in that paragraph, I dont want to but I got the sense that I sound angry while writing it.

 

 

 

You didn't come across angry at all so nothing to worry about. My view on it is, as long as you played your best you should have nothing to be angry about. The only time I've ever walked off in the middle of a game was when my players (me being captain) weren't playing to their fullest and I heard the opposite coach saying "take it easy on them guys, we've already won it". I find it unsporting and infuriating when a team will start treating you like kids simply because they're the better team and you can't match them. The only person to blame is the [developmentally delayed] who organized such an unfair game.

 

 

 

As I've said with Lionheart, we've differing opinions. You feel there's a point to leave it and I feel when a team stops trying just to make it easier for you infuriating. We'll get nowhere debating over the same stuff again and again, we just see things on a different level.

I agree to disagree then

 

 

 

to mooky--yeah higher score is better the argument was about the insane margin of victory, most points in one basket in basketball is 3 so they were at least 34 scores up.

I'm one of those people who don't like giving in, but I can also see the ridiculousness of the situation. I would prefer to keep playing the team at their best, because, as they said, I would feel bad if they started just tossing the ball around. Just keep playing, I mean, you can know that not every shot matters, so maybe I would let up and not concentrate as much on each shot, but it seems ridiculous not to take as many shots as I would normally, unless it was already excessive, like I'm trying as hard as possible to take as many shots as possible.

I don't see any problem with winning 100-0. Now, if he was a jerk after the game and was bragging about it, that's a different story. He should respect the other team no matter how badly they played. But, during the actual game, I don't see any reason not to ALWAYS play the best that you can.

When your 13 coaches mean less and less. Not saying thats a right move but the next coach will be 90-10 or something.

What the hell? Ashamed and embarrased for WINNING?? That's a load of [cabbage].

 

Covenant, a private Christian school

 

They're Christians.

 

So true.

I heard this story (at first I thought it was a win streak, but it was just one game). My friend's dad was there, and he explained it to me (he's sportsy).

 

 

 

The team that the winners were playing was a slightly autistic team. They were slower (in the autistic sense) than the winning team, and the coach was fired because he didn't hold back on a team that was of much less skill (therefore being unsportsmanllike, therefore being a douche (sorry)).

 

 

 

No one knew? That's pretty critical info... :shock: (I didn't read the whole thread)