What quarter is a team to stop trying in, subby, who either never played an actual competitive sport or was so bad that this kind of video brings back memories that you try to keep buried

The real question is this:

Why the hell are you fouling with one second left and a double digit lead?

40 points? I cant watch the video but I hope this was at the end of the first half. And if that is the case then it is fair game

Subby's a moron, the score isn't 40-5, it's 40-5X. The other digit is obstructed.

TheSpaceAdmiral: I've never really understood the idea that teams have a moral obligation to take it easier on weaker opponents. Sure, in some sports it may make sense to start playing more defensively to protect your lead once you have it, but completely missing opportunities to score seems silly.

I play in a squash league and I'd much rather have someone beat me 15-0 in a fair game than have them beat me 15-10 because they were intentionally giving me easy returns. The latter would be much more insulting.

When someone takes it easy on you like that, you end up way more embarrassed than if you sacked up and took your whipping like a man. For example, look at what LSU (new window) did to Ole Miss this year. They went victory formation with 5 minutes left in the game. Ole Miss ended up more embarrassed because of that, than if LSU went in for another touchdown.

PowerSlacker: The real question is this:

Why the hell are you fouling with one second left and a double digit lead?

So that you can practice your last second full court pass dunk.

This score must have been at the half since as someone else mentioned, the final was 54-40.

Basic rule - you go all out in the first half, even if you're killing a team. If you go up 40-5 in the first half, there's nothing saying you can't go 5-40 in the second half. Once the 3rd starts and you're still up after a couple minutes, then you empty the bench and rest all your starters. Which is clearly what happened here, since they only scored 14 in the second half.

Now, if they did this at the end of the game, then yeah, they'd be assholes.

TheSpaceAdmiral: I've never really understood the idea that teams have a moral obligation to take it easier on weaker opponents. Sure, in some sports it may make sense to start playing more defensively to protect your lead once you have it, but completely missing opportunities to score seems silly.


I used to think shaking hands at the end of the competition was silly. For the many games, I hated a number of opponents by the end of it (usually, dirty players). Sometime after 30, when I started playing for fun instead of wins, my brain figured out why it was important.

Because it's just a game.

I think the "don't blow-out the score" people are trying to balance out the "win-no-matter-what-the-cost" so things don't get un-fun for everyone involved.

mysticcat: The final score was 54-40, subs.

And, regardless of the score, if you're pressing, I'm playing.

Exactly. If you're still going to try to score, so am I.

TheSpaceAdmiral: I've never really understood the idea that teams have a moral obligation to take it easier on weaker opponents. Sure, in some sports it may make sense to start playing more defensively to protect your lead once you have it, but completely missing opportunities to score seems silly.

I play in a squash league and I'd much rather have someone beat me 15-0 in a fair game than have them beat me 15-10 because they were intentionally giving me easy returns. The latter would be much more insulting.

You sound surprised. This is a liberal construct my friend. Both in sports and in life. Whether you choose to believe it or not, some people truly and honestly believe that skills, hard work, intelligence, etc. should not be rewarded if it means others will fall behind. Because it's not fair. Nope, we have to level the playing field so they everyone can get theirs. Because it's the compassionate thing to do. The caring thing to do, when in reality it is the exact opposite of that.

Giving away points, like giving away welfare, does absolutely nothing to make the weaker want to become stronger. On the contrary, it makes them be content with their level of performance whatever their lot in life. And that does far more harm than good in the long run.

My high-school team was beating someone 100-33 and, with seconds to go, a third-string scrub pulled up and shot a three. Final, 103-33.

Unnecessary except for the scrub's little ego.

HS team down 12 with less than 3 seconds to play presses, gets pwned.

/FTFY Douchemitter

JohnAnnArbor: My high-school team was beating someone 100-33... i>

Man, I'm amazed he was able to put up any points, let alone 33

JohnAnnArbor: My high-school team was beating someone 100-33 and, with seconds to go, a third-string scrub pulled up and shot a three. Final, 103-33.

Unnecessary except for the scrub's little ego.

Sorry, but I would never ask, nor expect, a "third-string scrub" to ever play less than 100 percent for every moment he is in an actual game. Kid's playing to move up the bench, if not this year, then the next. Can't take that from 'em.

/When the score is certain, your enemy is not the other team, it is the clock
//HS basketball needs a shot clock

Mudcloth: PowerSlacker: The real question is this:

Why the hell are you fouling with one second left and a double digit lead?

So that you can practice your last second full court pass dunk.

Of course.


/well played

Subby sounds like he/she has a room full of participation ribbons.

mysticcat: And, regardless of the score, if you're pressing, I'm playing.

Is that you, Roy?

So far we have:

1) Fark you subby, it was 54-40, not 40-5.
2) Fark you subby, why should I not go 100%

I'm gonna risk it and say something that does not include a Fark you subby. In high school basketball, if you're up big, you should throw in the backups and have them go 100%. Not so you don't blow out the other team, who cares about them. As the coach, I think you should take the opportunity to reward your own players.

And yes, when I played tennis with my ex-gf, I used beat her 6-0, 6-0, 6-0. I was all diving around the court and shiat, fark that, if I'm playin I'm goin 100%. The rare times she ever scored a point, man did she feel good.

Amdam: mysticcat: The final score was 54-40, subs.

And, regardless of the score, if you're pressing, I'm playing.

Exactly. If you're still going to try to score, so am I.

Agreed. That's why we keep score, so we know who the WINNER is. Why complicate something that works?

TheSpaceAdmiral: I've never really understood the idea that teams have a moral obligation to take it easier on weaker opponents. Sure, in some sports it may make sense to start playing more defensively to protect your lead once you have it, but completely missing opportunities to score seems silly.

I agree to an extent. For professional sports, they should never let up. People pay a lot of money to come to your stadium and see your stars play. The athletes are presumably at a similar level of skill, and even if one team is clearly better, they're all professionals.

But for amateur/high school athletics, the mismatches can be horrifying. I'm talking about 300-pound defensive linemen at a prep school plowing through kids half their weight and forcing a turnover every time the other team has the ball. If the game was basically decided in the first quarter, it's just cruel to keep twisting the knife. I'm not saying to play badly intentionally just to let them score, I'm saying put in your third string and give the kids an incentive to not quit. Or at least invoke a mercy rule at halftime. I'm definitely not fond of the "Participation Trophy" attitude and I don't think I'm encouraging it, but you're not teaching a good lesson if you're up 63-0 in the 4th quarter and still calling deep play-action passes.

chewielouie: You sound surprised. This is a liberal construct my friend.

Seriously? WTF is wrong with you? Although I guess that makes "poor sportsmanship" and "rubbing it in someone's face" a conservative construct. No wonder the primary season has been so brutal.

Last time I played indoor soccer, we lost the first game by. . . don't remember. It wasn't too bad, though.
Got crushed the next game 9-1.
Lost the next game 6-2.
Lost the next game 5-4.
Won the last game 8-3.

Yeah, we sucked, but we didn't stay that way. If the guys that crushed us showed any mercy, I doubt we would've improved enough to even win our last game.

I'm GRATEFUL they kicked our asses. Showed us where all our weaknesses were.

STFU subby. Come to play.

Blink: I used to think shaking hands at the end of the competition was silly. For the many games, I hated a number of opponents by the end of it (usually, dirty players). Sometime after 30, when I started playing for fun instead of wins, my brain figured out why it was important. Because it's just a game.

OK, but I'm kinda glad the fist bump became prominent. I'll all for good sportsmanship in amateur games and good gesture is one thing, but clasping a sweaty palm with god knows what on it is disgusting. Sure, you can wash your hands later, but usually the first thing you do after a game is grab your stuff and GTFO. I'd rather not precede that with a dozen handshakes.

"In today's America, no child ever loses. There are no losers anymore. Everyone's a winner. No matter what the game or sport or competition, everybody wins. Everybody wins, everybody gets a trophy, no one is a loser. No child these days ever gets to hear those all-important, character building words: 'You lost, Bobby! You lost, you're a loser, Bobby!' They miss out on that. You know what they tell a kid who lost these days? "You were the last winner." A lot of these kids never get to hear the truth about themselves until they're in their twenties. When their boss calls them in and says "Bobby, clean the shiat out of your desk and get the fark out of here, you're a loser." ~ George Carlin

TheSpaceAdmiral: I've never really understood the idea that teams have a moral obligation to take it easier on weaker opponents. Sure, in some sports it may make sense to start playing more defensively to protect your lead once you have it, but completely missing opportunities to score seems silly.

I play in a squash league and I'd much rather have someone beat me 15-0 in a fair game than have them beat me 15-10 because they were intentionally giving me easy returns. The latter would be much more insulting.

Squash is one thing - the winner scores 15 points and its over. In football, basketball, water polo (my sport), you keep playing regardless of the score. If my team is winning 30-3, what's the point in making the score 50-3, even with the 3rd string. I was on a team that would routinely blow out other teams and our coach has us ease up at specific increments - once we were up by 10, then we had to make 4 clean passes before shooting, if we were up by 15, we had to intentionally miss our shots to reset the shot clock and try to get the rebound. (A normal score in water polo is 11-8, so a 10 point lead is practically insurmountable)

Nobody needs to run a full court press for the whole game, unless it is a close game and that's how you play every team. If you are blowing a team out, use the game as practice for your alternate defenses (man-to-man, zone, half court press). You don't need to let a team score to make them feel better, but there's no reason to score as many points as possible as fast as possible either.

four95: "In today's America, no child ever loses. There are no losers anymore. Everyone's a winner. No matter what the game or sport or competition, everybody wins. Everybody wins, everybody gets a trophy, no one is a loser. No child these days ever gets to hear those all-important, character building words: 'You lost, Bobby! You lost, you're a loser, Bobby!' They miss out on that. You know what they tell a kid who lost these days? "You were the last winner." A lot of these kids never get to hear the truth about themselves until they're in their twenties. When their boss calls them in and says "Bobby, clean the shiat out of your desk and get the fark out of here, you're a loser." ~ George Carlin

QFT - can't argue with the truth. We could be showing a bit more class when it comes to winners and losers, mind you, but the truth is still the truth.

I think all games should end in a tie so that nobody's feelings get hurt. That is most like the real world anyway. Teach those kids some life lessons.

chewielouie: You sound surprised. This is a liberal construct my friend. Both in sports and in life. Whether you choose to believe it or not, some people truly and honestly believe that skills, hard work, intelligence, etc. should not be rewarded if it means others will fall behind. Because it's not fair. Nope, we have to level the playing field so they everyone can get theirs. Because it's the compassionate thing to do. The caring thing to do, when in reality it is the exact opposite of that.

Giving away points, like giving away welfare, does absolutely nothing to make the weaker want to become stronger. On the contrary, it makes them be content with their level of performance whatever their lot in life. And that does far more harm than good in the long run.

9.5/10

Coelacanth Filet: If the game was basically decided in the first quarter, it's just cruel to keep twisting the knife. I'm not saying to play badly intentionally just to let them score, I'm saying put in your third string and give the kids an incentive to not quit.

My son's 8 year-old football team did not have a great season, but in one of the last games, they were up against a team who had it worse. My boy ran the opening kick-off, the punt on the opponents next possession, and a hand-off on his team's first offensive possession in for TDs. 21 points as the quarter ended.

His coach pulled him from offense at that point and then arranged for every single kid on the team to carry the ball at some point in the game. Sometimes he'd call time out and teach the plays to the kids on the field. It was the most amazing rush to see how happy those kids were. The tiniest kid got 2 carries, about 5 yards, and huge cheers from his teammates. One of the kids who had never carried the ball before became the QB for his team the next season. It was a beautiful thing to watch. Great coach.

lennavan:
And yes, when I played tennis with my ex-gf, I used beat her 6-0, 6-0, 6-0.

Are you bragging about beating a girl in straight sets in a best of 5 match? And you actually kept score? You must be very proud.

JohnAnnArbor: My high-school team was beating someone 100-33 and, with seconds to go, a third-string scrub pulled up and shot a three. Final, 103-33.

Unnecessary except for the scrub's little ego.

I remember when Tom Osborne was getting ridiculed for running up the score on teams even when he had his third string in the game. He said he didn't care how much he was up, any player that he put in, even a third stringer, is expected to give 100% and if they didn't they wouldn't be playing for him any longer.

I personally would find it insulting if someone eased up on me in a competitive environment where I expect to compete at the same level as my opponent. But by no means do I think others should also abide by this mentality. So my compromise is to secretly handicap myself and continue to compete at the limits of my abilities under the constrains of a secret handicap. This fulfills my desire to learn and better myself while protecting the ego of my opponent.

On the flip side, if I being outperformed, I feel the experience can provide an opportunity to better myself that would be robbed or lessened if my opponent were to give me the false impression I was more competitive than I actually was.

How I would go about handling the situation depends on what social clues I pick up from the other individual.

Even if subtard had gotten it right, the only people bothered by that are people who take sports way too seriously.

I was on a football team once in middle school that was playing a team so bad that we literally could score on every play. The REF told our coach to PLEASE take it easy on the team because someone was going to get hurt. The coach agreed and took everyone out. We had lineman playing QB and RB for fun, I got to carry the ball once. The only thing the starters were still playing was special teams because why would you practice a whole 2nd special team unit? Anyways, i ended up scoring my only TD ever on a blocked punt but instead of getting excited everyone was just kinda staring at me awkwardly and i wasn't allowed to go back in the game. Fark this whole sportsmanship thing, it ruined my only TD i ever scored in 10+ years of playing football!

/end rant

This is high school, not youth league. Just playing for fun is pretty much done for when some of those kids may be playing for their future. Seriously even if the score was correct, that kid has a highlight to put on his resume for colleges if he chooses to keep going and could help get him a scholarship or at the very least a play that can be used to lobby for a little more playing time if he doesn't get into the game very much.

hate to be clique but it is so true. Everyone handles winning well. When everything is going good and the most unstable person will take it well. It is good for you to have troubles to overcome in both life and sports and it is the ones who know how to lose and learn from it that will go furthest in life.