Keep reading.
Bullshit. Once the ball goes over the wall, running the bases is a formality. And only an ass hole would cite some obscure rule about a player having to touch all of the bases under their own power.
Shame you’re a Vikings fan, then.
Look, 100 points (by one team) in a prep basketball game is a ridiculous score. I presume none of these girls can dunk, even on a lowered rim.
To all the people who are saying “why did the school with the shitty team schedule this game?”, both teams are members of the Texas Association of Private and Parochial Schools. There probably isn’t anyone else to schedule games against.
Cited by Cuckoorex.
Please, enlighten me. What am I missing?
I disagree. Touching all the bases while rounding for a home run is a pretty important part of the game. If a player misses a base, the offense can make an appeal throw once the ball is live again, and the player who missed touching a base can be called out.
A lot of people seem to be asking:
“What did you expect them to do? Sit on their hands? Not shoot, stand around, give them the ball? Let the score be close? Tell them not to play anymore?”
You wouldn’t have to be so blatant about it.
If I were the coach I probably would have taken this approach:
You’re up 64-0 at the half. You know you’re assured a W in the win column and the game is pretty much over at this point. (Emphasis on “the game is over at this point”.) So instruct your players to let the unskilled team get the ball up court, give them some space to take a shot, grab the rebound, return up court and let them catch up with you to get in their defensive position, play your game and take a shot (3-pointer, layup, whatever), let the other team rebound and take it back up court, repeat.
You don’t have to go from playing aggressively to passively not playing. There’s a point inbetween where you can play a relaxed style and let the other team get some shots in and keep up with you on the floor. You already have the win so who cares.
Sheesh, how do you people play sports with your kids? Either sit on the sidelines or play them full on? No, you slow up and play them at their level so they can enjoy the experience.
So, technically, the ball should have been declared dead, and a substitute player allowed to complete the home run trot for the injured player. In which case her run still would have counted. The rule does not say that her run shouldn’t have counted, which is what you argued.
Further, the rule indicates that the dead ball and automatic substitution take place “If an injury to a batter-runner or runner prevents her from proceeding to an awarded base.” There is no caveat indicating that the runner must proceed to the awarded base without assistance, although assistance from players on her own team or from nonplayers is forbidden.
Thus, the way the game in question played out adhered to the letter of the rule (the injury did NOT prevent her from proceeding to an awarded base, because her opponents assisted her) and to its spirit (the run would have counted anyway, because an automatic substitute would have been inserted to run the bases).
Conclusion: you’re spectacularly wrong about this one. No rules were broken, the run should have counted. Care to admit it?
If the two coaches had a clue between them, they would have mixed the two teams so as to provide a fun game for all.
Wait, you were being serious about the “mercy” bit? I just assumed you misunderstood my position and were being facetious because it was such a silly thing to say.
I was responding to somebody who said they couldn’t understand what running up the score could possibly mean in this context.
The point is that no, they didn’t need to run any plays or press to get to 100 (although the 25 points in three minutes of pressing didn’t hurt). But if they had run a few plays – if they had simply failed to play a running game – they couldn’t have scored 100, because they wouldn’t have had enough possessions. You HAVE to speed up the game to get that many shots off.
Yes, they could have scored 200. They shouldn’t have, because that would be fucked up. And yes, 200 vs. 100 was purely “mercy” on their part. 29 points in an eight-minute third quarter which you began up 59-0 is nothing but fucked up. You have to TRY to score that many points in a quarter; it’s not just an incidental of the disparity between the teams. Why would you do that? Why is it so absurd to suggest that you not play such an uptempo offense in that context?
By the way, yes, I’ve seen the video of the girls practicing. They certainly can dribble, and they know how to shoot. It’s nothing like you’re making it out to be.
When you can’t even score one single, solitary basket, does it really matter how many more the other team scores??
It’s not like other sports, where shutouts are common. This is the only shutout I have EVER HEARD OF in basketball. This team should never have been on the court, and it’s coach should be all kinds of fired. You’d think they would have gotton one by accident, fercrissakes.
Bah. All this crap about how they’re just kids, you wouldn’t play sports with your kids the same way, etc. The kids on both sides were of equal age. One team sucks and the other doesn’t. The scenario of waiting for the other team to catch up and establish defensive position is condescending. You might as well inbound the ball to your opponents the entire second half on purpose and just stand there waiting for them to get the ball into the basket. Assuming they can get there without traveling, double dribbling, or otherwise turning the ball over. From what I saw, my nephew’s third grade basketball team could have beaten those girls, and those kids run around behind the person they’re supposed to guard, because the numbers on the jerseys are on their backs and otherwise they wouldn’t know who to guard.
Without a shot clock, they could have taken some air out of the ball starting in the 2nd quarter when the outcome was already known. Take your time getting up the court, take time getting off a shot, and if the other team gets the rebound hustle back on defense without pressing. Full court press- no. Three point shots- no. That’s just rubbing their face in it. They could have called the dogs off.
The video I saw started out with two girls trying to dribble, and one failing miserably to even keep a dribble going standing still. I saw one girl who knows the mechanics of how to shoot, but she was missing most of her shots anyway. What video did you see?
I’ve been in the same situation. My indoor team outscored their opponents 8-0 in the first half. Every player had scored at least one goal each. I instructed them at halftime that the entire team should stay in the opponents half of the field except one player (my best offensive player) was to stay back on defense.
When the ball came across the half field line each player had to touch it once before anybody could shoot and each player couldn’t shoot again until everybody had taken a shot. I made them do it in the order of their Jersey numbers.
When the other team stole the ball my team wasn’t allowed to fall back.
We scored 2 more goals and the other team scored 3. My star player was a little bit worn out from defending against an entire team and my goalie got a great workout.
The opposing coach thanked me over and over after the game. His team had yet to score a goal in three games and it felt good for them to finally work some offense even though it was a handicapped system.
I think that my entire squad got more of a benefit from being forced to do some ball control moves before shooting than they had if they just pushed the ball down the court and effortlessly scored. My star player got a big ego boost from the teamates shouting encouragements up court and a greater appreciation of playing defense.
Of course, I guess I’m a putz for not seeing how high we could push the score. :rolleyes:
Has it been established anywhere that the winning team in this game played their starters up to the end, or let substitutes in when it was clear the game was won? If bench-sitters got a chance to play, they deserve to be able to go all out.
This is what strikes me as stupid about “running up the score” claims in sports, including top-level college and pro contests. Most often on the collegiate level or lower, there seems to be an expectation among the news media and coaches that the team winning big should lay down, regardless of whether subs are in the game who may never have another chance to score or make other big plays. You get the feeling that the people most aggrieved by these lopsided contests are the losing coaches and alumni - as if their embarrassment is the most important factor involved, instead of the feelings of the kids.
Case in point - Ohio State football coach Jim Tressel, who reportedly bawled out a substitute player for scoring a touchdown late in a game with his team comfortably (but not hugely) ahead. What a jerk.
Well, I don’t know how many different ways I can make the point. It’s not normal basketball behavior to take that many shots and score that many points. It’s only possible when there’s basically no opposition. All they had to do was not take the ball on the rebound or off a steal and go straight to the basket every time. Christ, it’s not like in a normal basketball game the point guard just makes a beeline for the rack every possession (the one team’s point guard had 48 points in this game). All you have to do to avoid making a “Look at this score! We fucked them good!” statement is get the rebound, wait for the traffic to clear, get the ball to a guard, walk it up, move the ball around and take an open shot. If you do that for the majority of the game after you’re up 25 to zip, you don’t score 100 points.
You only score 100 points if you continue to exploit your advantage and make a show out of it. It is exactly the same as a football game where the bigger, stronger, faster team throws long on every possession. Sure, it’s your right, and it’s not against the rules, but you have a choice, and you’re choosing the route that humiliates the opponents because HA HA, you can score whenever you want! There’s an incredible amount of gray territory between on the one hand condescending to the other team and letting them get layups or intentionally turning the ball over and, on the other, running a 3-on-2 drill for 3 quarters so you can take 2 shots a minute (which, given that they didn’t take many threes, and given the 32 minute regulation time, they would have had to do and shoot about 80% to score 100).
Yes. Not just okay, but expected. IMO, there’s no such thing as “running up the score”, and this is the first time I’ve ever heard of such a concept.
Thank you BubbaDog for this.
Their coach could have done the exact same thing to benefit everyone and encourage sportsmanship but chose to take advantage of the situation instead.
Hats off to you.
Apparently both teams have only 8 players on their roster. It’s impossible to pull all the starters. If someone has a cite to dispute this, please post it.