“What score would have been acceptable to you? 50-0? 25-0? 1-0? “ I would have had my players let them shoot, no pressure on the ball, pass 20 times before shooting. My worst players would have played the majority of the game, I would have asked the opposing coach if we could let the clock run. Then whatever score it ended up would be OK with me.
2. “What circumstances need to exist to justify failing to play competitively?” I dunno, maybe a 50 point lead against a team with disabled kids.
3. “Who, exactly, has been victimized by the actual result? What responsibility does any other party have to eliminate this “victimization”?” The victimized were the players on the winning team who should have been taught sportsmanship.
4. “ I understand that the losing team has never won a game. Should all of the other teams have refused to play them? Is there no value whatever to playing and losing?”
Your best question, this game should not have been scheduled, there is no value for anyone when the discrepancy in talent is too great.
5. “Do you support banning the losing team from playing any more? If not, what guidance do you supply for their opposition? Certainly you owe the coaches of the other teams proper notice of what constitutes cause for them to be fired.” Not worthy of a response.
Your comments remind me of why I quit coaching, too many ass****s. What in the hell has happended to this site?
I sense a twisted form of “Darwinism” where the strongest survive and the weak are allowed to be pummeled until they drop. How the linkage of capitalism and intramural sports is achieved, I am not quite sure.
So, 50-0 is okay? That's really all I wanted to know. It's handy to have a rule of thumb like this when one's job is on the line.