This is why girls are lame
Am I the only one who can’t make any sense out of this? Apparently the team that won this game wasn’t supposed to win so much? And it was, in fact, a violation of some weird, abstract "golden rule" that they did? And they apologised for it? And then the other team’s defense was lauded for their excellent work during the fourth quarter, which was after the winners stopped trying to score any more points?
I just can’t figure it out. I cannot wrap my head around the concept of playing a competitive sport and attempting not to win by too much. What the hell does that even mean?
It’s one of those weird sportsmanship things. If the outcome is not in doubt, “running up the score” is considered unsporting. I’m not sure I buy it myself, although I know how it feels to be on either end of that deal.
We have an unwritten rule in the baseball league I play in that once you’re up by ten runs or more (the mercy rule margin–in our league if one team is up by 10 or more at the end of 7 innings, the game is called) you stop taking extra bases. If you hit a double you hit a double, but if you hit a single you don’t steal second, and you don’t take second on a passed ball or wild pitch. You don’t hit and run, you don’t bunt, you just swing away. It’s basically about respecting your opponents and lowering the frustration factor for them a bit in a game they have no hope of winning. I’ve been on both ends of that rule, and I’ve been in games where a team didn’t honor the “rule”, and especially in baseball, it’s frustrating as hell to have a team you have no prayer of beating prolong the agony by continuing to make it harder to finish an inning by stealing bases and taking off force plays and such. Of course, in a timed sport like basketball, you can’t really prolong things unnecessarily, so that particular reason for easing off isn’t valid.
Sounds like these girls were not only running up the score, they were also specifically trying to keep the other team at 0 points. Earning a shutout against a worthy opponent is one thing, but specifically trying to get a 100-0 game against a team that really has no business even playing you just seems like a dick move to me. But honestly, it’s one of those personal choice things. I would not choose to run up the score on another team like that (unless, you know, I hated them for some reason!) but there’s sure no rule against it, and a lot of people feel like *not* running up the score and playing the game to the best of your ability at all times is more of an affront to the game.
Of course, if you’re getting paid to win the game, all this goes out the window as far as I’m concerned. There are still people in pro sports who talk about this kind of thing (like when the Patriots last year were beating people by 40 points every week early in the season) but once you’re getting paid to play the game, *not* giving it your all would be wrong imvo.
Comment by Dave | 23 January 2009
I have a real problem with "unwritten rules," personally. Nothing pisses me off quite as quickly as people getting all up my ass for breaking "rules" which, to a first approximation, do not actually exist.
That notwithstanding, I personally look on it as disrespectful if my opponent plays down to me (in a non-tutorial situation, anyhow; if you’re teaching me how to play the game, it’s probably not very helpful if you just whip the hell out of me). I played varsity tennis when I was in high school, and we went to the state tournament my senior year, wherein we played a team that was a whole lot better than we were. We got slaughtered. I went down 6-0 6-1, I think, and nobody else fared much better (I think our #1 singles guy pulled up for 6-1 6-3). I don’t recall any pointless whining about how they should have "gone easy" on us so we wouldn’t lose so badly, and I probably wouldn’t have been very symapthetic to the proposition.
Comment by Darien | 23 January 2009
Yeah, but it’s not actually possible to “run up the score” in tennis. If you win in straight sets, you just win. You don’t get the opportunity to just sit there and continue to whale on your opponent while they flail around helplessly. So it’s not really a similar situation at all. In fact, a tennis match that ends in a straight set slaughter-fest is actually over quicker than a competitive match. The “sporting” thing there would absolutely be to just finish it as quickly as possible. Nobody is talking about letting you win a game or two or even a set just to make you feel better. It would be the same in boxing. It would be far better to knock your opponent out in the first round than to carry him for four rounds and then knocking him out in the fifth.
Like I said, I’m not sure I buy it either, but it comes down to respecting your opponent and not showing them up needlessly. By the time you’re up by ten runs in rec-league baseball, you’ve proved you’re the better team. Continuing to pile on runs and prolong the agony is considered disrespectful. Again, none of this really applies to pro sports either, since once you start being paid to win, not doing everything you can to win would be the wrong thing.
It’s not about making the other team feel good and making them feel like they have a chance. It’s just about not being a dick and rubbing their noses in it. There’s a big difference.
Comment by Dave | 23 January 2009
Which I suppose I can understand in baseball, since, as you say, it does drag the game out even longer. But going back to the original example, the basketball game lasts exactly the same amount of time whether they’re scoring a zillion baskets or not. So I’m totally failing to see how it’s disrespectful for them to do so.
Comment by Darien | 23 January 2009
In that particular example, the team was clearly not out to just win the game, they were looking pretty specifically for 100 points, and they kept taking 3-point shots even after the game was ridiculously out of hand, and played full-court press defense even though the other team apparently had precisely zero chance to actually sink a shot even if they were allowed to bring the ball to half court unmolested. Even in professional basketball a team wont play full-court press if they’re up by like 25 or something. It’s just needless. It goes beyond just trying to win the game and into the realm of trying to show up your opponent.
Like I said, I’m not convinced I buy it either. But that’s the argument, and I can tell you from experience that it’s aggravating beyond belief to not just lose a game, not just lose it big, but to also have your opponent seemingly rub your nose in it too. It’s seen as a form of taunting to run the score up on somebody.
I think it’s ridiculous, though, that these girls are seeking to vacate the win. I doubt they really intended to show up their opponents–it seems like they just got caught up in the idea of scoring 100 points in a game and decided to go for it. But asking for the game to be changed to a forfeit? That’s just silly. Apologize if you feel you need to, but seeking a forfeit in place of the win is even more disrespectful I think. So now you’re saying you not only beat them up bad, but you feel so sorry for how bad they are that you want them to have a “feel good” win to make up for it? Bah. Just say you’re sorry for running up the score and move on.
Comment by Dave | 24 January 2009
That’s pretty much what I’m saying. I’ve lost shit too, and I’ve had my face rubbed it in, but I’ve never expected the other team’s win to be overturned as a result. That’s wack.
As for the full-court press thing, I must confess an ignorance of basketball here. I do not know what that is, exactly.
Comment by Darien | 24 January 2009
Ooh ooh, I know this one!
So usually, after the other team scores a basket, you get the ball under their net and start heading over to your side of the court with it. Usually the defending team stays on the opposite half of the court from where you start, to give you a chance to get somewhat within scoring range before they try to take the ball from you.
On a full-court press, they start their defenders right up next to you, under their own basket, making it much harder for you to get to your basket and much easier for them to score again more quickly if they get control of the ball.
Comment by Ama | 24 January 2009
Gotta say, I’m not really clear on why they wouldn’t do that… all the time. But I think this hearkens back to my original inability to understand why the one team should have stopped trying to score after a certain point. :-)
Comment by Darien | 24 January 2009
You don’t use the full-court press all the time because it’s dangerous. If you’re all up in the other team’s grille, and just one of their guys sneaks behind your dudes, they lob him the ball and it’s an easy layup. Usually a team will run back down the court and let the other team inbounds the ball and set up and wait for them. This makes it safer, as they can’t just lob the ball down to a guy running free and get easy points, they have to come through your set and ready defense to score.
The only time a team usually *does* use the full-court press is when they’re down late in a game and desperately need to score a bunch of points quickly. They’ll take the chance that the other team will score on a fast break in order to pick up the chance that *they* will take the ball away faster and score themselves.
So, yeah, playing full-court press on a team you’re beating the shit out of is pretty much a dick move. Might as well call them all losers and pansies while you’re at it! But you wouldn’t know that, Mr Lacks Empathy!
Fucking Libertarians, you’re all the same.
Comment by Dave | 24 January 2009
You’re the laughingstock of the political world, you nazi.
I didn’t call you a nazi, by the way.
Comment by Darien | 25 January 2009