Saw a story on Yahoo! about a small middle-school in eastern Kentucky that beat an even smaller school 100-2 in the county pre-season basketball tournament. (The story caught my eye because Thing 1 plays middle-school basketball and I’m originally from eastern Kentucky.)
Pikeville Independent, which is considered one of the best middle-school teams in the country, was up 25-0 only 1:48 into the game and led Kimper Elementary and Middle School (total enrollment: 180) by 70-0 at the half.
ScoutFocus.com quoted the Pikeville coach as saying there were rumors the superintendent and school board were on the verge of cancelling the rest of the season because of the team’s supposed bad sportsmanship, but a blogger at Forbes.com talked to the superintendent, who said there were no plans to punish the team or fire the coach.
Superintendent Jerry Green said school officials were satisfied that the Pikeville coach hadn’t intentionally run up the score. Coach Bryan Johnson told ScoutFocus he pulled his starters at the 1:48 mark and told the players to stop playing defense and to try to let Kimper score, but Kimper couldn’t sink a basket.
Pikeville and Kimper are scheduled to play again in the regular season. Coach Johnson says he’ll bench his 8th graders and play his 6th and 7th graders instead.
In the end, I believe that winning or losing doesn’t matter, that what matters is how you play the game, that what matters is that you did the best you could do.
Some teams are better than others, and some are worse, and when they’re in the same region, they end up playing each other, but, still, should there be an exception when the teams are so obviously mismatched?
I appreciate the Pikeville coach telling his team to give Kimper a chance to score, but should Pikeville have stopped trying to score, too? What’s the most graceful way to win such a lopsided?
If you were the Kimper coach, would you have stopped the game? Should there the rules be changed to stop a game if one team is ahead by, say, 70 points at halftime? Should the team that’s down always be given a chance to make a comeback?
As a parent, I’ve been on both sides of some pretty lopsided games, and win or lose, it’s never comfortable, but if you’re child’s team is down by 70, could you accept the decision to stop the game, or would you want your child to be given the chance to play to the end and maybe score a basket?
I have mixed feelings about this, Todd. Nobody wants to be down 70 points, but we all need to be reminded now and then that life isn’t fair. We don’t all get here equal. We do our kids a disservice by trying to even the playing field. The quicker they learn that life isn’t always fair, the better able they’ll be to cope in the real world. That said, perhaps the school district needs to realign things here — Pikeville obviously needs to be in a tougher conference! And perhaps at the middle school level, games should be “called” if there’s such an obvious disparity. But what do I know? I’m an Ole Miss alum, and we haven’t won in SEC football play in ages, ha!
I think you’re right. Kids (and adults) need to understand that life isn’t fair and that sometimes you lose and lose big, but I’m torn about what’s best when you’re so unevenly matched. I’m inclined to finish the game, but I think a better approach would be to avoid those mismatches altogether.
I don’t think there’s ever a “best” resolution in these cases. Seems like you should do what seems kindest in each case — but you’re still going to have some people who would have decided the other way.
I know. In Thing 1′s countywide softball league, there’s a 5-run rule. Your turn at bat is over once you’ve scored 5 runs. That isn’t really how the game is supposed to be played, but maybe that’s how it should be played when you’re talking about elementary and middle schoolers.
From what you say I think this was handled well. As long as the team doing the dominating isn’t obnoxious or insulting I don’t think games should be called or that teams should be penalized for winning heavily. I bet if you polled the losing players they wouldn’t have wanted the came to be called.
When I played little league ball (and even not so little league) the teams I was on fairly often lost by the ten run rule. It was still fun, gave us motivation and defused the win at any cost mentality. One time an umpire said “How can you guys play like this and laugh?” It’s just a game.
“How can you guys play like this and laugh?” Great line! So far, Thing 1 has played only in the county recreational league. Two years ago, I don’t think her team won any games. Last year, they won the championship. Either way, she had a great time. As a parent, though, I’m a little worried now that’s she’s on the school team. I like her coach, but the older she gets, the more competitive it gets. I’ve told her, and I’ll tell her again, that all I ask is that she do her best, and if she reaches the point where it stops being fun, she can quit (after we talk it through).
At some point it seems someone has to think about ending the madness. Yes, kids need to know sometimes you win, sometimes not. But in this case both teams were denied the chance to learn to be gracious winners or losers.
Maybe you give every school one pass per season, one chance to say, “You know what? We’re just not gonna play that game.” Maybe you use it when you’re insanely mismatched. Maybe you use it there’s a Kentucky game on and you want to stay home and watch.
Yeah, I can see both sides of this. If anything, the losing team could try to use the game as some sort of practice, get something out of the experience. It does sound like Pikeville tried everything they could (aside from just throwing the game) to try to even things out. That was kinda cool of them. Did anyone interview the Kimper coach? It would be interesting to get his perspective on this.
I haven’t seen any interviews with the losing coach. I imagine he knew going in that it was gonna be ugly, but still.
I think stopping the game is the worst thing. First of all, the winning side players that normally ride the bench get to play! My senior year was spent on a great basketball team, best in school history. We destroyed opponents. I was the backup center. Coach pulled first team early and we were up by 40 points at halftime. I never got so much playing time.
But also, cancelling the game is like telling the losing squad “you guys are so awful that we’re not even going to have a second half. That’s how bad you failed.” It’s an opportunity for them to respond to adversity. The goal changed for them, and they got that basket by the end. We have to learn how lose in life as well. If there’s any change to be made, then the league should instituted a mercy rule like we used to have in softball. If you’re losing by X amount of points by X point in the game then it gets cancelled.
And before the inevitable criticism comes from somewhere (even though I’m late to this post), yes I’ve raised kids and yes, I’ve failed spectacularly in my life. Kids who are never allowed to face failure are crippled later in life.
Good points, Clay.