Blowouts: Shows of bad sportsmanship?

[archeryguy1701]

It seems like over the past year, there have been more and more incidents like this 67-0 win where a team or coach gets in trouble for the blowout score. There was even this basketball game where the head coach ended up fired because he refused to apologize and didn't want his school to forfeit his team's 100-0 victory. For professional examples, we need only go back to the 2007 patriots when they were absolutely dominating everyone and faced accusations of running up the score. What is your perspective? Do you feel that continuing to play after the game has been decided is a show of poor sportsmanship?

Personally, I don't feel that it is a show of bad sportsmanship. What's the winning team supposed to do when the score is all but decided? Forfeit? It remains an opportunity for both teams to get better. Also, in my opinion, it is much more humiliating to have a the opposing team quit playing because you can't catch them than it is to have the score ran up on you. If the scores going up, at least you're still playing against them playing their best. I think society is becoming too much a victim of the "Everyone is a winner and must feel good about themselves after a competition" mentality. Let them play the game. If one team is vastly better than the other, then bummer. It gives them something to work on.

 

[Roger Wilco]

It depends on the sport and the level of play.
Generally, I would say that it's a sign of respect to go on giving your best no matter what until the game is over. But I guess in a sport like American Football where you can substitute an unlimited number of players, it's not really fair to your own team to let the first-tier players on the field after the game is already decided.

 

[SmoothieX]

I think at a pro level there's no problem with it. Don't want to be blown out of the building by 50 points - play better.

I think with college and high school, where there is such a disparity between schools, and the players are amateurs, it's not as acceptable.

Once you're up big, there's ways to keep playing competitively so you don't pity your opponent without running up the score. Run the ball and kill the clock, don't steal that extra base when you're up 10 runs, etc.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

Why does it make a difference what the score is, as long as it's a winning one?

If one team's scoring a lot more than the other, then surely it only means that the other team just sucked that day. So why should the winning team be penalized? What are they supposed to do, stop playing?

 

[Garak]

In pro sports, there's no such thing as running up the score. I call it practice.

You'd hope though in sports involving kids that coaches would use their common sense and not utterly humiliate someone.

 

[AdmiralGarak]

It depends on the sport and the level of play.
Generally, I would say that it's a sign of respect to go on giving your best no matter what until the game is over. But I guess in a sport like American Football where you can substitute an unlimited number of players, it's not really fair to your own team to let the first-tier players on the field after the game is already decided.

It's not terribly bright, either. The last thing you want is for some disgruntled player to intentionally injure your star quarterback in the final minutes of a blowout.

 

[Iasius]

If you in a team of adults ... deal with it (a possible exception: a "benefit game" against amateurs ... not sure if that's the correct term here).
Among children, I don't think you should really try hard for the record score if your opponent has a history of not playing well. If they are just having an exceptionally bad night, then go for it.

 

[Aragorn]

If your bench players are in the game and still kicking the other team's ass, what can you really do?

There is one annoying Notre Dame worshiper that calls my local sports talk radio station who complains that the other team ran up the score when Notre Dame gets blown out, yet when Notre Dame runs up the score it's because you have to let the kids play.

 

[AdmiralGarak]

This thread reminds me of the 82-0 womens' hockey game from last year.

I would think even being on the winning team would be boring as hell in a game like that.

 

[Thespeckledkiwi]

If your bench players are in the game and still kicking the other team's ass, what can you really do?

Get the fans??? Then that would really be bad...

"Seriously...SERIOUSLY you threw an interception to that guy? Fuck this, I quit."

 

[Maestro]

The girls basketball team at the school I teach at has been quite good for a very long time. They were accused of running up the score in the WIAA D3 State Basketball Championship Game a few years ago. When questioned about it, the coach said he emptied his bench at the start of the fourth quarter. The other team and the media continued then claimed that he should have pulled his starters sooner.

Excuse me? This is the State Championship. There's a real problem here if one team is being accused of running up the score.

As the coach and I are good friends, when I talked to him, I suggested that some night next season, he actually run up the score. Then, in the papers the next day, tell everyone that he ran up the score on purpose. That's what it actually looks like.

This guy doesn't run up the score. His kids are just that good from top to bottom. Other teams are typically just that bad.

 

[Alidar Jarok]

I think that, if a win counts for something, the only reason you shouldn't run up the score is if you have an agreement from the other team not to win. Strange, improbably comebacks do happen, so you should only avoid running up the score if the game is literally decided (using football as an example, if you have the ball and can run out the clock, don't go for more points. Otherwise, go for more points).

 

[pookha]

i dont know.
for a long time people have been predicting if myer kept on leaving tebow in a game just to run up the score by 40 points that some frustrated kid was going to take it out on him.
if a team is down by that much it dosnt matter if they are bothered with coverage in the secondary.
they can just blitz and blitz in the fourth quater.

 

[Smiley]

In pro or college sports, there is no such thing as running up the score in my book. The job of the offense is to score, and the job of the defense is to stop them. Yes, the coaches should recognize when they have an opportunity to give their starters a rest and reduce their potential for injuries, but the players on the field/court/rink/pitch should always give their best.

 

[BenRoethig]

I look at this way, its only running up the score if you leave your starters in. If you put in your reserves and go to basic no thrills play and you're still running the score up, you're doing nothing wrong. What are you supposed to do, run through the motions?

 

[Gil T.Azell]

In the bad sportsmanship dept.
Kyle Bush anytime he doesn't win, just pouts and walks off with out an interview.
Whaa, whaa....

 

[Starbreaker]

I've never understood what that poor basketball coach was supposed to do. Have the girls score on their own girl? Travel every five seconds? If they couldn't even score a single basket against a team then they probably don't need to be playing basketball anyway.

I remember a few years ago when the Lady Vols beat Puerto Rico 102-2. Now that was ridiculous.

 

[wew]

My school had a football team and we beat the other team 81 to 0. We ran into the same accusations. The coaches literally emptied the bench very early. But it is hard to tell the benchriders and 3rd/4th stringers not to try.

Furthermore in this case, we only sent half our players anyway, because the other half was playing another team on the same day. The other schools happened to be smaller, so the game went to 8 men on the field. We sent 22 players to one game and the other 22 to the other game.

Running up the score can have a serious drawback, not necessarily in regards to point, but due to potential injuries. Tebow's concussion the other day was a good example. You shouldn't keep key players in the game after the event is pretty well decided.

 

[Random_Spock]

It depends on the sport and the level of play.
Generally, I would say that it's a sign of respect to go on giving your best no matter what until the game is over. But I guess in a sport like American Football where you can substitute an unlimited number of players, it's not really fair to your own team to let the first-tier players on the field after the game is already decided.

Agreed on both counts.

It generally depends on those things. If someone or a team isn't as good as the other team, then of course they won't do as well. In the end, all that matters is that they try their best.

It shouldn't be viewed as bad sportsmanship if a team wins by a landslide. Unless they got the win, via cheating. Then it's bad sportsmanship in my book.

 

[gblews]

I daresay that for most coaches "running up the score" is not the real problem. It's not the blowout that's the problem, it is how the blowout is achieved. Coaches know that even if you pull your starters and put in the reserves, those reserves are probably still going to get a few scores.

The problem for most coaches is the perception that the other team is attempting to embarrass or humiliate them (the coaches) and their team.

In football for example, if in the 4th quarter a team with a monstrous lead is still attempting to throw he ball behind the DB's at mid-field, or throwing the ball inside the 20, that is likely to be perceived by the opposing coach as an attempt to not just beat a team, but to embarass that team. But if in a blowout, the team with the big lead breaks some 3rd string running back loose for a 60 yard touchdown run, most coaches would only be mad (madder) at their own defense. The difference here is that the score still gets "run up", but there is no perception of intent to embarrass.

Any team that takes the field, court, rink, is obligated to attempt to win, but no team is obligated to humiliate their opponent. That a team is losing 65-7 is not necessarily the problem (that is humiliating enough), the problem is the team with 65 points going out of it's way to score more. THAT is usually perceived by coaches as an attempt to go out your way to inflict more damage on the losing team than a 65-7 (or whatever) loss would inflict. Again, you're expected to win, but deliberately attempting to embarrass the other team is not necessary.

One other thing; every team eventually finds itself on the wrong end of a bad loss, I don't care who the team is. So it behooves every coach to show some restraint when you are the team that is up because, "there but for the grace of god go I".