<p>n00bt3m need r us h4x</p>
<p>If you don't like getting beat 100-0, then you either play better next time, or you don't play at all. Simple as that.</p>
<p>Did you read the article wraider? No one on the losing team complained, and they were even commended for playing hard the whole game despite losing by so much.</p>
<p>The team that lost wasn't bad because the kids had dyslexia, that has nothing to do with basketball. They are a god-awful team because it's a school with only 20 girls in it - when you have such a tiny pool of students, you will have very little talent on the team.
[quote=<a href="http://cbs11tv.com/sports/micah.grimes.the.2.917557.html">http://cbs11tv.com/sports/micah.grimes.the.2.917557.html</a>]
Dallas Academy has eight girls on its varsity team and about 20 girls in its high school. The team remains winless during the last four seasons. The academy boasts of its small class sizes and specializes in teaching students struggling with "learning differences," such as short attention spans or dyslexia.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>The winning coach should have played backups and laid off after halftime, it's pretty bad sportsmanship, especially coming from a Christian school.</p>
<p>The problem was that it wasn't "christian"ly of the school to completely destroy the other team. Lol. The thing I don't understand is this: the losing team hadn't won a game in, like, 3 years or something (lol, read this article a few days ago soooo), so it's not like they expected to win, right? And they said somewhere that the losing team never gave up, never acted upset at the winners, etc. I think the whole thing is hilarious.</p>
<p>Oh please. A Christian school? They take sports the most serious of all.</p>
<p>But it shouldn't make any difference. It has nothing to do with sportsmanship. It sounds like the team that always loses shouldn't be playing. If the kids want to play, have a city league team for them. That way they can meet other, new people and maybe be on a team that doesn't suck.</p>
<p>I've been on a terrible team before. I would be outraged if people were arguing over whether other teams should take it easy on us. Let me say that again. I (the dyslexic girls) would be outraged at you (the people who can't just let it go).</p>
<p>Why press against a terrible team? Just put in the bench and tell them to take the air out of the ball.</p>
<p>A win should always be celebrated, to denounce a win is to void the entire sport. </p>
<p>Win at all cost.</p>
<p>Well Auburn, I don't know how much you trust Wikipedia, but:</p>
<p>"In most circumstances (exceptions are listed below), it is considered poor sportsmanship to "run up the score""</p>
<p>Remember that you said: "It has nothing to do with sportsmanship."</p>
<p>How sad a world we live in where a coach is fired for not apologizing for winning. If they didn't want to get beaten they shouldn't have played. I don't care if they have disablities or whatever. It's the same silly attitude that keeps people from saying what they really feel or what keeps professors handing out easy As to students in classrooms. the whole "everyone's a winner" attitude. The winning team should be commended for playing at their full potential and not backing off because a team sucked. If you want to win, you have to try hard. If you can't win, you lose. The end. That's how it works. If you don't do good in school you get an F because you didn't try hard or you're stupid. That's what the letters and numbers are there for.</p>
<p>"If you want to win, you have to try hard. If you can't win, you lose. The end. That's how it works."</p>
<p>And if you read the article you'd know that both teams tried hard. A coach went out of his way to humiliate a group of disabled students. This has nothing to do with winning, losing, or your "everyone's a winner" strawman.</p>
<p>
[quote]
How sad a world we live in where a coach is fired for not apologizing for winning.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I don't think he was fired for not apologizing as much as his vociferous and public refusal to apologize.</p>
<p>
[quote]
If you want to win, you have to try hard.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Apparently not if you're beating teams 100-0.</p>
<p>LogicWarrior, please change your screenname because it's misleading. How exactly was the coach going out of his way to humiliate the other team? Because he didn't order his players to feel sorry for the other team and "go easy"? Since when has sports ever been about that? How patronizing would that have been. My god. For that matter, they should have just let the other team win from the get go.</p>
<p>"In the Web posting, one unidentified student said: 'I have ADD and ADHD. There is nothing that separates me from anyone on the Dallas Academy girls team, so there is nothing that should separate the value of our sides. What we did that night is what we are on this team for: to play basketball and win. As for the media calling our actions "unchristian", that is very sad. For this team, and our coach are a living testimony. I am not sorry for how we played that night because I know that no harm was intended and I also know no harm occurred.'"</p>
<p>Exactly. It's a game. A game where you play to win. There's no rule that says "once you're winning you should just give up and maybe throw a bone to the other team". And what does dyslexia have to do with hindering basketball anyway?</p>
<p>its not about sportsmanship or winning or losing. Its just that a hundred zero is ...just indecent. I am not saying the othe team or their coach was at fault. i am not arguing whether their disabilities affected their play or not. I am just saying a hundered-zero kind of defeat just shouldn't be anybody's fate. the people who scheduled the match were perhaps at fault. You don't play a clubside against the national side. Obviously one side found itself powerless in front of the other far superior team. That is what leagues are for. to separate. To classify. Someone should have to apologize for this.</p>
<p>
LogicWarrior, please change your screenname because it's misleading.
I cannot remember disagreeing with this idea, but regardless of a particular persona's inadequacies in debate, do be aware that this is an extremely civil forum even where it is not necessarily serious (cafe), and it it would be rather inappropriate to suggest that the person in question has a facetious handle etc.
The entity is here and that is a good thing; it has proved capable of making good contributions if not necessarily presenting arguments. The remark is borderline ad hominem, and is not nice.
Just as all morals are relative, our arguments are rarely absolute; the standards of real-world logic are in subjective hands.</p>
<p>Oh, my, God.</p>
<p>First, I don't think that something the statement on Wikipedia is a statement of "fact". It's just saying that many people feel that way... which, obviously, they do. That doesn't mean it's right to feel that way and it doesn't mean I have to like it. "Running up the score" may get them further in the playoffs, for all I know. When I have extra credit work on a test and the test was easy, do I just skip the extra credit because I don't want to humiliate the professor?</p>
<p>The idea is that, if you step up to the plate in sports, you know that you may suffer a humiliating defeat. That just goes with the territory. If you can't handle it, don't put yourself in that situation. I agree that it's a shame, but on the other hand, it's not the coach's fault. It's the fault of whoever decided those teams would play each other. Once the teams are on the court, the coach's job is to score as many points as possible. That's what both coaches did; so what's the problem with any of this?</p>
<p>^indeed</p>
<p>...</p>
<p>Agree with the last point made. It's whoever situated the match that was at fault.</p>
<p>And Geek Nerd, go **** yourself.</p>
<p>Disgraceful. No need for this. Especially because they beat a Catholic school for disabled students.</p>
<p>The firing was definitely just.</p>